References and Appendices.
The Sea Of Energy
In Which The Earth Floats
by
T. Henry Moray
Chapter 12 – References and Appendices
REFERENCES
1.
Pollard and Davidson, Applied Nuclear Physics, page 70
2.
Dr. Robert Baker, Astronomy, page 303
3.
Dr. Gustave LeBon, Evolution of Matter
4.
Dr. Gustave LeBon, Evolution of Forces
5.
Dr. Nikola Tesla, Experiments with A.C. Currents of High Potential and High
Frequency Experiments
6.
Dr. Edgar L. Larkin, Radiant Energy, page 17
7.
“Element formation in the Stars is also energy transformation in the
Stars,” Sky and Telescope, July 1956, August 1956, March 1959, pages
241-243
8.
Scientific American, May 1958, page 44
9.
Scientific American, February 1960, page 53
10.
Scientific American, June 1960, page 64
11.
Dr. M. Luckiesh, Foundations of the Universe, pages 5, 14, 43
12.
Progress in Elementary Particle and Cosmic Ray Physics, Vol. 7,
North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam
13.
J.A. Eldridge, The Physical Basis of Things, chapters 3-6, McGraw-Hill Book
Co., New York, 1934.
14.
G.F. Hull, An Elementary Survey of Modern Physics, Macmillan, New York,1936
15.
L.B. Loeb, Kinetic Theory of Gases, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York 1934
16.
G.E.M. Jauncey, Modern Physics, D. Van Nostrand Co., New York
17.
J. Perrin, Taylor & Francis, Brownian Movements and Molecular Reality,
1910
18.
J.A. Crowther, Ions, Electrons and Ionising Radiations, Longmans, Gree
& Co., New York, 1924
19.
C.G. Darwin, The New Conception of Matter, Macmillan, New York, 1931
20.
J.A. Eldridge, The Physical Basis of Things, chapters 9 & 10,
McGraw-Hill Co., New York, 1934
21.
W. Gerlach & F.J. Fuchs, Matter, Electricity and Energy, D. Van
Nostrand Co., New York, 1928
22.
A.E. Haas, The World of Atoms, D. Van Nostrand Co., New York, 1928 22. A.E.
Haas, The World of Atoms, D. Van Nostrand Co., New York, 1928
23.
G.E.M. Jauncey, An Elementary Survey of Modern Physics, D. Van Nostrand
Co., Inc., New York, 1932
24.
O.J. Lodge, Atoms and Rays, Doran, Inc., New York, 1929
25.
R.A. Millikan, The Electron, Ginn & Co., Boston, 1924
26.
B.A. Russell, The A B C of Atoms, E.P. Dutton Co., New York, 1921
27.
S.G. Starling, Electricity & Magnetism, Longmans, Green & Co., New
York,1929
28.
A.E. Haas, Atomic Theory, D. Van Nostrand & Co., New York
29.
H.A. Kramers & H. Holst, translated by R.B. and R.T. Lindsay, The Atom
and the Bohr Theory of Its Structure, Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1924
30.
A. Sommerfeld, translated by Brose, from third German edition, Atomic
Structure and Spectral Lines, Methuen & Co., Ltd, London, 1923
31.
J.a. Eldridge, The Physical Basis of Things, chapters 14-16, McGraw-Hill
Book Co., New York, 1934
32.
G.E.M. Jauncey, Modern Physics, D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., New York, 1932
33.
The Advance of Science, Watson Davis, 1934
34.
Scientific American, 1930, pages 230-231
35.
Physics Staff at the University of Pittsburgh, Atomic Physics, 2nd edition,
John Wiley & Sons
36.
J.J. Thompson, Electricity and Matter, 1904
37.
Janet, Lecons d’ Electricite, 2nd edition, pages 2 & 5
38.
M. Ruderfer, “Neutrino Structure of Ether,” Lettere II Nuovo
Cimento Vol. 13, N. 1 & 9,1975
39.
H.C. Dudley, The Morality of Nuclear Planning, Kronos Press, 1976
40.
G. Gamow, Thirty Years that Shook Physics, Doubleday, N.Y.,1966
41.
J.A. Wheeler, et.al., Gravitation, W.H. Freeman and Co., 1970
42.
J.A. Wheeler, Geometrodynamics, Academic Press Inc., 1962
43.
T.H. Boyer, “Random Electrodynamics: The Theory of Classical
Electromagnetic Zero-point Radiation”, Phys. Rev., D11, No. 4,
790,1975
44.
M.O. Scully, M. Sargent, “The Concept of the Photon”, Physics
Today, 38, March 1972
45.
E.G. Harris, A Pedestrian Approach to Quantum Field Theory, Wiley
Interscience, chapter 10, 1972
46.
S.L. Adler, “Some Simple Vacuum, Polarization Phenomenology… “,
Phys. Rev., D10, No. 11, 1974
47.
Procaccia and J. Ross, Science, 198, 716, Nov. 18, 1977
48.
P. Glansdorff & I. Prigogine, Thermodynamic Theory of structure,
Stability, and Fluctuations, Wiley Interscience, N.Y.,1971
49.
International Journal of Fusion Energy, Fusion Energy Foundation, Vol. 1,
No. 1,1977; No. 3-4,1978
50.
W.H. Bostick, “Experimental Study of Plasmoids”, Phys. Rev., 106,
No. 3, 404, 1957
51.
D.R. Wells, “Dynamic Stability of Closed Plasma Configurations”,
J. Plasma Phys., Vol. 4, 654, 1970
52.
J.P. Walters, Science, 198, No. 4319,787, Nov. 1977
53.
P.O. Johnson, “Ball Lightning and Self Containing Electromagnetic
Fields”, Am. J. Phys., 33, 119, 1964 .
54.
Moray B. King, “Energy Source Implications of a Helicon Toroid Model
for Ball Lightning”, QPR, No. 18, Valley. Forge Res. Center, Moore
School, University of Pennsylvania, 1976
55.
P.A. Silberg, “Ball Lightning and Plasmoids”, J. Geophys. Res.,
67, No. 12, 4941,1962
56.
S. Singer, The Nature of Ball Lightning, Plenum Press, N.Y.,1971
57.
A.C. Scott, et. al., “The Soliton: A New Concept in Applied
Science”, Proc. IEEE, Vol. 61, No. 10, 1443, Oct. 1973
58.
S. Bardwell, “The Implications of Non-Linearity”, Fusion Energy
Foundation Newsletter, reprint
59.
G.L. Lamb, “Solitons and the Motion of Helical Curves”, Phys.
Rev., D14, No. ,235,1976
60.
F. Lund & T. Regge, “Unified Approach for Strings and Vortices
with Soliton Solutions”, Phys. Rev., D14, No. 6, 1524, 1976
61.
R.S. Knox, Theory of Excitons, Solid State Physics, Academic Press, N.Y.
1963
62.
D.J. Bohm & BA. Hiley,
On
the Intuitive Understanding of Nonlocality as Implied by Quantum
Theory”, Found. Phys., Vol. 5, No. 1, 93, 1975
63.
H.P. Stapp, “Are Superluminal Connections Necessary?” 11 Nuovo
Cimento, Vol. 40B, No. 1, 1977
64.
H. Evertt, The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Princeton
University Press, 1973
65.
H. Evertt, “Relative State Formulation of Quantum Mechanics”,
Rev. Mod. Phys., 29, No. 3, 454, 1957
66.
B. Toben, Space-Time and Beyond, E.P. Dutton and Co., Inc., N.Y.,1975
67.
“Tapping the Earth’s Electric Field”, Machine Design, April 15,
1971
68.
“Background Cosmic Count Increase Associated with Thunderstorms”,
Journal of Geophysical Research, reprint, Vol. 72, No. 18, September 15,
1967
LIST
OF APPENDICES
Appendix I:
Deletions from original chapter 1, now chapter 7
Appendix II:
Deletions from original chapter 4, now chapter 10
APPENDIX
I
Deletions from original chapter 1, now chapter 7
Salt
Lake Tribune, June 14, 1960-Preliminary analysis of Explorer VI data just
published shows the (radiation) belts shrunken in size and in intensity-at
least this was the state of affairs during August and September of last
year.
Another
surprise comes in the discovery of a third belt lying between the outer and
inner belts found by Van Allen. Perhaps this new belt should be called the
Arnoldy, Hoffman, and Winckler belt in honor of the three University of
Minnesota cosmic ray scientists responsible for its discovery.
The
three physicists from the Land of Lakes masterminded the construction of
the radiation detection equipment which formed part of the payload of
Explorer VI and analyzed the data it accumulated.
The
new shape in radiation belts found by the Minnesotans confirmed a growing
suspicion that the belts are not the stable pair of doughnuts once
visualized, but a shimmering set of tenuous rings which may change markedly
from day to day.
Radiation
levels measured by Pioneer III, Pioneer IV, the Russian Mechta, and
Explorer VI have shown significant variations.
Fortuitously,
Explorer VI was in orbit and busily taking radiation measurements during a
strong magnetic storm created by unusual activity on the face of the sun.
As
a result, the step-by-step reaction of the belts to such a storm and a
rather complete history of their return to normalcy was obtained for the
first time.
The
orbit of Explorer VI was ideal in several respects for the probing of the
intensity and extent of the Van Allen belts.
Its
orbit was highly elliptical, extending from about 4,100 miles from the
earth’s center at its near point to some 30,000 miles at its far point.
Moreover,
the inclination of the orbit was such that the rocket passed from rather
high northern magnetic latitudes to high southern magnetic latitudes.
Because of these two orbital characteristics, a large portion of the region
of the belts was scanned in several days time.
That
portion of the new data which has been processed to date indicates that the
maximum normal radiation dosages in the belts during the period of Aug. 7
to Oct. 6 of last year was down significantly compared to that found
earlier with payloads aboard Pioneers III and IV, and the Soviet Mechta.
On
the night of August 16-17, a strong geomagnetic storm occured which brought
a new surprise. During the first 24 hours of the storm, about two-thirds
other radiation in the outer zone was “dumped” on the earth.
Available
evidence suggests that the lost radiation consisted largely of low energy
electrons.
The
outer belt soon recovered, in fact over-recovered, and near the end of the
storm, on August 18, the outer belt was found to contain about five times
the total radiation found there before the storm.
This
abnormally high radiation “fever” persisted for ten days and was
followed by a slow return to normal.
As
yet, a satisfactory explanation of the “dumping” process in the
radiation of the outer belt has not been found.
Tracing
the probable dumping paths of this radiation to earth, the Minnesota
scientists found that it should show up near the surface of the earth
between magnetic latitudes of 52 and 62 degrees, with a peak appearance at
57 or 58 degrees.
On
the very night of the magnetic storm, the counters aboard Explorer VI
revealed the disappearance of radiation from the outer belt, Dr. Winckler
observed an aurora over Minneapolis, at a magnetic latitude of 57 degrees.
The
tie-in was inescapable. The observed aurora must have been caused by the
jumped electrons from the outer belt.
Such
electrons would produce more than the visible evidence of an aurora. They
would produce X-rays. Previous observations by balloon had already
indicated that such X-rays were often present at relatively low latitudes
during times that visible auroras lay far to the north.
The
Minnesota data thus gives support to the idea that under certain conditions
at least, an aurora may consist of two parts, a visible aurora most likely
appearing near the usual auroral zone, and an X-ray aurora, invisible
perhaps to the naked eye, lying to the south.
The
National Aeronautics and Space Administration picked up the tab for this
work, and most likely will do so in the future as the Van Allens, Arnoldys,
Hoffmans, Wincklers and others bring new light to bear on the remaining
mysteries of the earth-circling radiation belts. Salt Lake Tribune, June
19, 1960.
SPACE FILMS DISCLOSE FAR GREATER RADIATION
BEDFORE,
MASS. (UPI) – Film packs exposed at altitudes up to 700 miles in an Atlas
nose cone showed far greater radiation than previously discovered,
according to the air research and development command.
“Particle
tracks indicate that radiation in the (Van Allen) belts discovered by the
Explorer satellites far outshadow the flux of primary cosmic radiation as
measured by means of skyhook balloons at 20-mile altitudes,” the
report said.
“Counts
in the Atlas-flown emulsions show that for every cosmic ray that penetrated
the block, some 44,000 protons of the Van Allen belt were recorded.
“The accompanying photomicrograph of a section of the emulsion smaller
than the head of a common pin shows a track produced by a heavy cosmic ray
primary immersed in a sea of protons carrying kinetic energies in excess of
four billion electron volts and thus capable of penetrating the Atlas nose
cone.
“The
more energetic of the trapped particles produced ‘stars’ or nuclear
explosions inside the emulsion (film) 500 times more frequently than
observed on earlier Aerobee rockets which reached only 100 miles, below the
intense trapped radiation of the Van Allen belt.” (March 17, 1960.
Deseret News), Salt Lake City)
APPENDIX
II
Deletion from original chapter 4 now chapter 10
EARTH
FLOATS IN ELECTRICAL SEA
By Alton
L. Blakeslee – Associated Press Science Writer
BOULDER,
COLO., Oct. 12, 1957 (AP) – High overhead floats a fantastic electrical
sea.
It
girdles the earth, reaches at least 150 miles deep. It writhes with storms
and savage winds. Powerful electro jet currents course through it.
It
is pulled by tides, pocked by peculiar clouds, bombarded by cosmic rays.
Created by the sun’s cruelest rays, this sea is the ionosphere, a vast belt
of electrons and electrified atoms or ions. It begins 60 miles up, goes at
least 200 miles high.
In
sparsest form it apparently reaches thousands of miles into desolate space.
It’s a shield between you and a deadly sun.
Were
it not there, absorbing the sun x-rays and most power ultraviolet light,
life on earth would perish.
Were
it not there, you might never hear a radio. Short wave radio communication
depends upon bouncing or reflecting radio waves back to earth from this
electrical sea.
Strange
quirks in the ionspheres sometimes perform magic. Miami police calls are
heard in California.
Or
a picture from a TV station hundreds of miles away suddenly appears on the
sceen.
Exploring
this sea is a major activity of the International Geophysical Year, a
co-operative 64-nation effort to learn more about our earth, sun and space.
Fingers of radio itself are a prime method of ionsphere exploring.
Literally thousands of times a day over the world special radio beams are
darting up and bouncing back to measure heights, intensities and other
changing peculiarities of the ionosphere.
When
the full story is pieced together, scientists hope to answer some puzzles
of the high atmosphere and find new or improved ways of putting the
ionosphere to human service.
The
“radio” fingers and other techniques already have disclosed much
of the story, explains Robert W. Knecht, a project leader in sun-earth
relationships at the National Bureau of Standards Boulder laboratories.
In
reality the ionosphere is our outer atmosphere of ultra-thin air. X-rays
and ultraviolet light from the sun rip into molecules of oxygen and
nitrogen, tearing out their electrons, electrifying billions times billions
of atoms.
Usually
the ionosphere has distinct layers.
About
60 miles high is the E layer, then the denser, F-1 region at about 120
miles, the F-2 layer at 200 miles.
The
“E” layer reflects low-frequency or long radio waves. Higher
frequencies or shorter waves penetrate through it, bounce back from higher
layers. Sufficiently high frequencies barrel right on through into space.
Usually this is what happens with TV signals.
During
IGY, nearly 200 special radio-sounding stations from pole to pole are
intently exploring the ionosphere. Each shoots up pulses of radio waves,
sweeping through a quick range from long to short waves in 15 seconds, then
timing and recording the echoes from different layers.
A
few will make continuous recordings of the seething electrical sea.
For
the ionosphere, far from being a static shell, changes, minute by minute,
hour by hour, season by season. It is a sensitive link between events on
the sun and earth, Knecht points out.
Great
flares or explosions on the sun sometimes create a much enhanced D layer
about 40 to 50 miles up. This absorbs rather than reflects radio waves,
producing radio blackouts and interference. Other sunflares have no effect,
for reasons not yet understood.
NOTED
PHYSICIST ANNOUNCES NEW ENERGY SOURCE
Nickola
Testa, the renowned physicist and inventor who developed the great AC
motor, the fundamental principle of radio, and the practical transmission
of alternating power foretold the discovery, many years ago of a hitherto
unknown source of unlimited energy, “so practical that the machinery
to harness it will last 500 years, and so basic that it will undo existing
theories.”
“They
called me crazy, in 1896,” said Dr. Testa, “when I announced the
discovery of cosmic rays. Again and again they jeered when I discovered
something new and then years later saw that I was right. Now I suppose it
will be the same old story when I say I have discovered a hitherto unknown
source of energy, unlimited energy, that can be harnessed.
“The
initial cost will be relatively big. After that hardly anything and
unlimited power for the asking.”
Dr.
Testa has given the world the arc lighting system, the Testa coil and
rotating field principle for alternate current and innumerable other
electrical devices.
Dr.
Testa did not live to reduce a practical application the discovery he
referred to above.
“ASTRONOMY,”
by Robert H. Baker, Ph.D. Professor of Astronomy, University of Illinois,
page 303:
Another
problem relates to the apparent lavish expenditure of this radiation. Of
all the energy that pours forth from the sun, less than one part in 200
million is intercepted by the planets and their satellites, The remainder
spreads through interstellar space with little chance, so far as we know,
of being recovered. The suggestion that the sun shines only in the
directions of material that can intercept it makes an appeal from the point
of view of economy, but appears to have little else to recommend it. It
would seem that nature is squandering its resources of energy so prodigally
that it must end in bankruptcy; but doubtless we have at present an
imperfect account of the situation.”
Foundations
of the Universe, Luckiesh, General Electric,
pp. 41-43 Astronomy, Robert H.
Baker, Ph.D., page 303
The
great success of the atomistic principles as it is involved in the kinetic
theory of matter was one of the wonders of the modern scientific age. It is
to be expected that there will be found other applications equally
fascinating and promising. It is now being pressed further into the service
of explaining the structure of matter …
When
Maxwell (1873) propounded the electro-magnetic theory of light (radiation),
his achievement was epochal. The exact manner in which the Radiant Energy
traversed space was not known, and the next epochal event was the founding
by Planck (1900) of the quantum theory. Here we have the atomistic
principle applied to energy instead of being confined to the material of
the universe as it had been. In other words, in the quantum theory we have
the atomistic idea applied to physical processes. We now have the atom of
matter, the atom (electron) of electricity, and the atom (quantum) of
action (a product of energy and time). Planck assumed the emission of
radiation (from the sun, a lamp filament, etc.) to occur discontinuously.
He conceived elements of energy of equal magnitude analogous to the
equality of electrons, or atoms of a given element. Radiation or Radiant
Energy is emitted of various wave lengths or frequencies which must be
taken into account in laws of radiation … now the physicist uses quanta
as commonly as he does electrons and atoms and molecules. Bodies are built
of molecules, the molecules of atoms, and the atoms of electrons (and
protons) etc. Here we see the atomistic principle applied to
“material” (matter) and then to electricity. Finally, a physical
process – the radiation omitted by the electrons – is divided into quanta.
With such pictures of the Universe being considered we may cease to be
surprised at anything, but our interest and admiration will grow. Will we
ever get to the final foundation?
APPENDIX
III
THE
INSTANTANEOUS POWER AVAILABLE FROM
ELECTRO-MAGNETIC WAVES
by
Richard E. Maxwell, Ph.D.
Introduction
The
objective of this study was to show from a theoretical point of view the
magnitude of the instantaneous power which is available at the Earth’s
surface: The source of these electromagnetic waves (EMW) was taken to be a
single solar source which generates the EMW as a result of nuclear
reactions. It was assumed that the EMW reached the Earth essentially as
planes and that there was no reflection of these waves by objects on the
Earth’s surface. A number of solar sources could have been considered as
could have reflections of the EMW; however, this type of analysis is
difficult and complicated. Hence, the approach taken for this study was to
consider a realistic, but simplistic setting.
Conclusions
1.
If the EMW emanate from a single source, and if they are absorbed into a
cube of volume d3,then the instantaneous power available is
given by P=*****
where
Ex
is the magnitude of the electric field
Hy
is the magnitude of the magnetic field
2.
If Hy= 39.79 amps/meter (equivalent to a B field of 5 x 10^-5 teslas),
Ex=100 volts/meter, and if d = 1 meter, then the power, P = 3979 watts. In
order to obtain 50,000 watts, a 1 cm diameter antenna of length 400 meters
would be required. This implies that the Radiant Energy device is probably
not detecting only electro-magnetic energy.
3.
The product of the field intensities, ExHy should be a periodic function
with a period of 24 hours. This would imply that the power which is
available would be a maximum at mid-day and essentially zero at mid-night,
and because of the line of sight of the EMW, more power would probably be
available at the equator than at the poles.
4.
In the book, The Sea of Energy in
Which the Earth Floats, it was reported that energy was available for
conversion and capture at night where the magnitude of this energy was not
as large as by day. From the latter conclusion, the energy expected at
mid-night is essentially zero, and this conclusion contradicts reported
experimental results. This contradiction implies there are multiple sources
of EMW, and it would be interesting to consider the moon as a solar
reflecting body. It seems to me, however, that the area of the moon would
not be large enough to reflect the power as detected at night and reported
in the book. Hence, one must conclude there are multiple sources of EMW.
Analysis
Reference:
Fields and Waves in Communication electronics, Ramo,
Whinnery,
Van Duzen, 1967, Wiley Publications, p. 243.
Energy
flow into a closed surface, S, is given by
Power
= W = -Js E X H • dS
Suppose
that current flow and charge in this region are zero in a medium which is
homogeneous, isotropic, linear, and with zero conductivity.
F
= Fx1 + Fyj + F2k
k
is the direction of propogation -z direction
*****
Assuming
***** implies a uniform planar wave which implies
*****
Taking
i to be in the direction of E = Ey = Ex= 0;
hence,
we have *****implies wave velocity = *****
where
*****
*****
*****
*****
Setting
Hx = Hz = 0 implies
Power
=*****
Assume
waves from only a single direction, and consider the cube of side d-one
side of which is orthogonal to
k
i.e.,
Then,
if the cube absorbs the energy flowing into it, the instantaneous power
absorbed is given by
Power=*****
More
generally,
Power
= -A l E X H
The
time dependent function Ex Hy = f (t) should be periodic with period = 24
hours. The half-range Fourier series expansion of this function is given by
*****
k=1
p=period
where
*****
This
implies Power = -A*****
where,
ak = *****
APPENDIX
IV
ON THE
SUBJECT OF RADIANT ENERGY
by C.
Warren Simmonds, Ph.D.
Many
forms of Radiant Energy are known to be arriving at the Earth’s surface
from outer space. The form of Radiant Energy most familiar to everyone is
the heat and light rays from the sun. These rays have been studied and
measured by scientists for many years and their properties are well known
and documented. Other forms of Radiant Energy are less familiar: Cosmic
rays; gamma rays; galactic noise; radio frequency emanations from the
stars; gravitational waves; and other forms yet unknown and undetected.
With
all the Radiant Energy traveling throughout the universe, presumably in all
directions, it is not an exaggeration to say that the Earth itself is
immersed in energy, or as expressed by Dr. T. Henry Moray of the Research
Institute, Inc. in Salt Lake City, Utah, the Earth is “floating in a
sea of energy”.
Now
with the Earth surrounded on all sides by energy it doesn’t make sense that
mankind should ever suffer from an energy shortage, provided (1) He can use
the energy directly, as in the case of sunlight, or (2) He can convert the
energy to a useable form. An intriguing question is: Can a form of this
Radiant
Energy,
known or unknown, be detected on Earth and converted to a useful form of
energy, such as electrical power? The following calculations will show that
Radiant Energy, regardless of its exact form, arriving at the Earth’s
surface at the usual speed of light, can result in significant amounts of
power (50 KW, for example) at the Earth’s surface for very low energy
densities (200 p joules per cubic meter, or less) in space.
Consider
an ideal detector for Radiant Energy at the Earth’s surface, having an
effective cross-sectional area, A, set perpendicular to the direction of
the arriving Radiant Energy, as shown in Fig. 1. The Radiant Energy is
shown arriving at the velocity of light, c, and the density in space is
taken as, p joules per cubic meter. An imaginary column is shown above the
area. For each second of time, such a column of length equal to c meters
will pass into the ideal detector, carrying a total energy of
cA
X p = pcA joules
Since
this number of joules is received every second, the detected power, P, is
simply
(1)
P
= pcA joules/ sec
or watts
Using
(1), we can determine the density P in space necessary to receive 50 KW of
power using a detector whose effective area, A, is only one square meter.
Substituting
into (1), we have
50
X 10^3 = p X 3 X 10^8 X 1
or,
(2)
p
= 50X10^3/3 X 10^8 = 166 X 10^-6 = 166 microjoules per cubic meter
Fig.
1- Radiant Energy arriving at the Earth’s surface
Now,
166 microjoules is a very small amount of energy. To get an idea of how
small it really is, it represents the energy stored in a 3.3 ufd capacitor
charged to 10 volts. This same energy would only raise the temperature of
one cubic centimeter of water
(3)
166
X 10^-6 joules X gm-calorie/4.186 joules= 39.6 X 10^-6 degrees Centigrade
which
is approximately 40 millionths ofone degree centigrade temperature rise.
So, the actual energy density of Radiant Energy as it travels through space
can
be very small and yet result in what we would call significant amounts of
power. The 50 KW received by the detector having an effective area of one
square meter in our example corresponds to
(4)
50,000
watts X HP/746 watts= 67 Horsepower
which
is sufficient to adequately power an automobile.
Although
the exact nature and form of Radiant Energy is not fully understood, it has
already been successful detected. In 1939, Dr. T. Henry Moray, using a
specially built apparatus, detected 50 KW of useable electrical power in
experiments witnessed by certain distinguished scientists.
APPENDIX
V
THE NEUTRINO SEA—HYPOTHESIS, OR REALITY?
by Dr. H.C. Dudler
University of Illinois Medical Center
The
last twenty years have seen a resurgence of theories which assume a
generalized medium acting to transmit mass energy, and/or information.
Perhaps then the ancient postulates of a phlogiston were close to the
truth.
In
1974, the “Unsettled Earth” issue of Industrial Research carried
an article entitled “Is there an ether?” (1). Since this article
was written more than three years ago, it seems timely to update certain of
the information contained in the “ether” article.
That
there is interest in the subject is evidenced by the number of scientists,
worldwide, who are developing “models” based on the assumption
that all reactions take place within an energy-rich substrate which may
contribute mass and/or energy to any reaction.
Such
an approach to mass/energy exchanges appears in many branches, including
plant and animal biochemistry, structural engineering (2), microbiology,
and quite extensively in astrophysics.
One
aspect of the climate of opinion which dominates the physical sciences of
1977 results from a series of experiments often referred to as the
Michelson-Morley studies, carried on before 1890. Using more modern
apparatus, other investigators essentially confirmed these earlier M-M
studies, concluding that no subquantic medium is necessary for that
transmission of electromagnetic radiation.
But
all of these experimental. designs failed to consider the Earth’s motion
about the center of our galaxy, 220 kin/sec, or the orientation of the
Earth with respect to this motion. From the astronomic information now
available, it appears that the flow of the “ether” that was being
sought was nearly normal to the plane of the apparatus, thus insuring the
“null” results obtained (3).
A
philosophical tenet long taught in all beginning physical science classes
holds that absolute motion cannot be demonstrated. This concept originated
with Isaac Newton (ca 1700); it provided some of the basic assumptions of
Einstein’s theoretical studies (1905-1915).
If
one analyzes the experimental designs of M-M-type studies, it will be noted
that what was being sought was a primary or absolute frame of reference
whereby the lateral motion of the Earth might be demonstrated without
reference to any other body.
This
demonstration first was accomplished by Conklin (1969) (4) on study of the
diurnal variation of the 3.5-cm radiation flux which bathes the Earth. The
Earth’s motion was estimated to be 160 km/sec in a direction defined in
local coordinates as right ascension 13 hr: declination 32 deg.
Recently,
Corey and Wilkinson (5) have shown that there is a generalized flux of high
frequency electromagnetic radiation (19 GHz) in which the Earth is
immersed. Their observations indicate a velocity of 330 km/sec for the
Earth with respect to this “soup.” These studies utilized a
balloon-borne radiometer, with the lower frequencies, as used by Conklin,
tuned out.
Smoot,
Gorenstein, and Muller (6) have studied a still higher-frequency background
radiation flux (33 GHz) at a height of 20 km; they have demonstrated motion
of the Earth with respect to this flux, 320 km/sec, toward a point in the
sky located at 11 hr right ascension: declination 6 deg.
Results
of the various studies may vary. Yet a ball-park figure begins to emerge.
It is an inescapable fact that absolute motion certainly has been
demonstrated. The rush of new techniques, based on new apparatus, extending
the lab bench high into space, has rendered some of our most hallowed
theoretical dogma untenable. Time (and Physics) marches on!
As
a result of the M-M-type studies, combined with the
theoretical/mathematical approach to nuclear science, fashionable during
the past 40 years, there has evolved an assumption that a vacuum (i.e.,
empty space) is essentially inert: mass-free and energy-free. This
assumption recently has led to an unusual state of affairs in the fields of
chemistry and physics.
Two
investigators, working independently, have been nominated jointly for a
Nobel Prize. But the nature of their work has largely escaped the attention
of the U.S. scientific community.
Kervran
of France (7) reports that oat seedlings have been shown to convert
potassium to calcium during the germination phase, with an increase of Ca
in the range of 100 to 163%.
Komaki
of Japan (8) reports that eight strains of micro-organisms grown in
K-deficient culture media increase the total K by converting Ca to K.
These
studies appear to have been confirmed by other investigators. A theoretical
basis for Kervran’s result has been discussed by de Beauregard (9), who
postulates that K, by the addition of a proton (H”), :is converted to
Ca. Reasoning on the basis of presently accepted nuclear theory, this
reaction would require energy of 10 MeV.
The
generalized neutrino sea is considered to be the source of this energy thru
the action of “neutral currents” and “weak forces.”
These mechanisms are those now in general use of particle physicists to
explain the interaction of a host of other subnuclear entities.
During
the past two decades, there has been a resurgence of theories which have in
common, as one of their basic assumptions, the existence of some type of
generalized medium which acts to transmit mass, energy, and/or information.
To better understand the present, and to obtain an overview of the
importance of this subject, let us examine one aspect of scientific
history.
The
necessity of the same type of generalized medium was postulated by Isaac
Newton (Opticks, Book 3, Part 1, Query 18,1704):
“And
do not hot Bodies communicate their Heat to contiguous cold ones, by the
Vibrations of this Medium propagated from them into the cold ones? And is
not this Medium exceedingly more rare and subtile than the Air, and
exceedingly more elastick and active and doth is not readilly pervade all
Bodies? And is it not (by its elastick force) expanded through all the
Heavens?”
This
concept had altered but little into the first decade of the 20th Century
(Textbook of Physics, Edit. A.W. Duff, 1912, 3rd Edit, p. 565.):
“The
Ether.-To account for the transmission of waves through space containing no
ordinary matter it seems necessary to assume the existence of a universal
medium filling all space and even interpenetrating matter itself, as shown
by the existence of transparent substances. That this medium can react on
matter is shown by the fact that radiant energy is transmitted from ether
to matter in the case of absorption, and from matter to ether in the case
of emission of radiation by material sources.”
The
version which now so rigidly defines the climate of opinion of 1977 physics
had its beginning in the early 1930s (Textbook of Physics, Edit. A.W. Duff,
1932 7th Edit, p. 556):
“In
recent years doubt as to the necessity for assuming the existence of an
ether has been expressed by some who believe that it is sufficient to
attribute the power of transmitting radiation to space itself. We cannot
discuss the question here, but pending the settlement of the controversy it
seems wise to continue the use of the word ether as at least denoting the
power of space, vacant or occupied by matter, to transmit radiation.
“The
unreality’ of the ether brought out so emphatically by the theory of
relativity has recently become even more pronounced, in connection with the
new wave mechanics. It seems very doubtful, at the present time, whether
light waves have any real existence at all. It is, however, an undisputed
experimental fact that light exhibits the properties of waves, and in the
subsequent paragraphs we shall so consider it, without further regard to
the ultimate nature of the wave motion.”
As
a result of the experimental proof by Reines and Cowan (1953) of the
neutrino as a discrete particle, I posed the following question in formal
lectures:
“According
to recent laboratory studies, the neutrino seems to have a half-life near
infinity, penetration of lead with a half-thickness measured in
light-years, and at least one quantum number, spin.”
Question:
“What has happened to all the neutrinos produced by beta and meson
decay throughout all times?” (1957).
Having
been indoctrinated early in my scientific training as to the logical
necessity of some sort of “ether,” I concluded that a neutrino
flux, generated by the myriad of nearly randomly distributed stars,
appeared to be the long sought characterization of Newton’s “Aetherial
Medium.” I wrote of this (10) and presented papers before the American
Physical Society (Bulletin APS. 7,568,609,1962):
“DeBroglie
(1959) has suggested that certain phenomena arise from the interaction of
particles with a ‘subquantic’ medium, which escape our observation, is in
random motion, and is everywhere present in what we call ’empty space.’ Chiu
suggests (1962) that we exist in a flux of the order 1 x 10 10^11 neutrinos
cm2/sec. Thus, it seems that both theoretical and experimental physics are
moving rapidly toward a concept of quantized fields, or more properly a
particulate’ ether.’
“Observed
net energy of nuclear events may be due to the exchange of mass and kinetic
energy between two classes of particulate matter, i.e., interaction as at
the interface of a two-phase system:
*****
where
(Ma) = total mass of the neutrinos entering into the reaction; (Ea) = total
energy of these neutrinos; (M b) = total initial mass of the nucleons; and
(E b) = total energy of the nucleons entering into the reaction.
“Mass
and energy would then be exchanged by the two systems, momentum being
conserved, with no interconversion of mass and energy.”
In
addition to those names given above, others wrote of “hidden
variables,” “neutrino sea,” etc.,-1962 to 1965-Bohn, Vigier,
Ponticorvo, S. Weinberg, de Silva, Lochak, et al. The volume of literature
has increased steadily; recent review articles now cite hundreds of
pertinent papers.
As
a result of the data and development of concepts in astrophysics, for
cosmological considerations, the neutrino sea has been defined as an
energy-rich, particulate, generalized medium consisting of electron
neutrinos, ~ 10^12/cm^3, energy density estimates ranging from l0^8 eV/cm^3
to as high as 10^10eV/cm^3(I1).
All
this plus muon neutrinos of mass ~0.6 MeV, which appear to be the
counterpart of the uncharged electron.
There
is a practical aspect to these finer points of nuclear theory. That is the
implicit assumption that currently accepted theories define all parameters
of all nuclear reactions.
Such
a state of mind is illogical, for it flies in the face of all previous
experience in the sciences. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that new
apparatus and new techniques produce new and unexpected experimentally
demonstrated facts and relationships, thru which all theories are
eventually rendered untenable.
Quo
vadis
The
unpleasant aspect of inducing vast nuclear accidents has been examined
previously- just prior to the first fission explosions in 1945 (12), and
more recently in discussions of the propagation of fusion reactions in the
sea (13). In short, what is the probability that man can inadvertently
induce catastrophic nuclear events simply as the result of lack of basic
information; or as the result of not using the information now available?
There
is considerable opposition to even the cursory examination of this approach
to nuclear science (14,15,16). The reason is clear from the text of the
1932 quotation above. If there exists a subquantic medium with which it is
possible to interact, then the bulk of modern nuclear theory is untenable.
Several
Nobel prize winners who are fearful of our present headlong rush into
nuclear technology, have pointed out that those who have spent their lives
developing this field now see the usefulness of their work being
questioned. The nuclear leaders of the past 30 years react quite humanly,
for they are most reluctant to accept this turn of events.
Like
it or not, the fact that methods of establishing absolute motion have been
found — that experimental evidence is at hand – indicates that we do
exist in an energy-rich subquatic medium – that we can and are interacting
with this medium.
All
of this information indicates the weakness of present official projections
of limits of nuclear risks. Like it or not, probing questions are indeed,
being asked, worldwide. And no amount of face-saving maneuvers will be
effective in stifling the subject.
Scientific
revolutions can be defined as periods of time in which man is forced to
reorient his basic viewpoint with respect to the workings of the physical
universe in which we are observers and passengers, but not pilots. These
revolutions are the direct result of the development of improved accuracy
in apparatus with which to extend man’s five senses.
New
concepts evolve out of the attempts to correlate and understand the data
which new apparatus produces. Thus, thru evolutionary processes, new
paradigms replace old viewpoints, and man is better able to understand the
workings of the macro-cosmos and the micro-cosmos. He nibbles away at his
vast store of ignorance, bit by bit, generation after generation.
Modern
man has generated three scientific revolutions, each of which required him
to make radical changes in his understandings ofcause and effect. The
studies of Copernicus and Kepler, when integrated into the climate of the
discovery guiding Newton and his contemporaries, (ca 1675) shattered and
ego of the ancients, for the Earth was not at the center of creation, it
was but one of several planets orbiting our Sun.
Earth,
a speck
This
revolution has been extended by the 200-in. telescope, by photo and
electron imaging techniques, and recently by the use of interplanetary
platforms for carrying all manner of sophisticated electronic extensions of
our eyes. The Earth is now but a speck on the outer rim of one galaxy,
hurtling thru intergalactic space at a velocity of 200 to 300 km/sec. We
don’t know where we have been nor where we are going. Neither did the
ancients.
The
19th Century saw the clarification of the nature of air; the combustion
process was defined; heat was shown to result from a kinetic process
involving moving atoms, rather than being a fluid called caloric or
phlogiston. Ofsuch was the second scientific revolution composed.
Beginning
in 1895, the third revolution required man to alter radically his concepts
regarding the nature of the building blocks which were required to
construct all that which man could observe – in fact, that which
constituted man himself.
The
elements which heretofore were thought to be immutable, were sometimes
rather easily altered. In fact, some were changing into other atoms by some
process so mysterious that it was thought to be spontaneous, occurring
without prior cause.
This
third revolution produced such an avalanche of new data that the present
years are being called the “Information Explosion.”
The
fourth scientific revolution is an out-growth of the new data, new
apparatus, new concepts. Man now has begun to study and to define the
particulate substrate which permeates all space and all matter.
The
findings from these studies require man again to reorient his thinking and
attitudes with respect to the Universe about us. But because of inertia,
because of a love affair with the status quo, those indoctrinated in
science 1977 may have to be forced to move ahead into the 21st century of
sub-electron and subquantic physics.
References
1.
Dudley, H. C., Is there an ether? Industrial Research. Nov. 15,
1974, p. 97.
2.
Grimer, F.J., and Hewitt, R.E., Structure, Solid Mechanics &
Engineering Design, John Wiley & Sons. London, 1971, p. 681 and 863.
3.
Dudley, H.C., Bull. Atomic Scientists, Jan. 1975, p. 47.
4.
Conklin, E., Nature, 222, 1969, p. 971.
5.
Corey B.E., and Wilkenson, D.T., cited in Science News, July 3,
1976, p.10.
6.
Smoot, G., Gorenstein, M.V., and Muller, R. A., cited in ScienceNews,
July 16,1977, p. 44.
7.
Kervran, C.L., Prev. era Biologie de Transmutation a Faible Energie,
Maloinx, Paris, 1975.
8.
Komaki. H., Rev. de Pathologie Comparee; 67, 1967, p. 213; 69, 1969,
p. 29.
9.
de Beauregard, O. Costa, Proceed. 3rd. Int. Cong. Psych. (Tokyo),
June 1977, p.168.
10.
Dudley, H.C., New Principles in Quantum Mechanics, Exposition –
University Press, New York, 1959.
11.
de Graaf, T., Cosmic Background of Low-Energy Neutrinos, Astronomy
& Astrophysics. 5, 1970, p. 335.
12.
Konopinski, E.J., Marvin, C., and Teller, E.; Ignition of the
Atmosphere with Nuclear Bombs, Los Alamos Report La – 602 1945. Classified
Secret. Declass. Feb. 1973.
13.
Dudley, H.C., Ultimate Catastrophe, Bull. Atomic Scientists, Nov.
1975, p. 21; June 1976, p. 38.
14.
Bethe, H., Bull. Atomic Scientists, June 1976, p. 36.
15.
Feld, B.T., Bull. Atomic Scientists, June 1976, p. 38.
16.
Dudley, H.C., Morality of Nuclear Planning? Kronos Press, Glassboro,
NJ, 1976.
APPENDIX
VI
Article
reprinted from Lettere Al Nuovo
Cimento,
Vol.
13, N. 1, May 3,1975; with permission.
LETTERE
AL NUOVO CIMENTO VOL.13, IC 1
3
Maggio 1975
Neutrino
Structure of the Ether.
M.
RUDERFER
Dimensions,
Inc. – Hempstead, N.Y.
(ricevuto
il 10 Gennaio 1975)
Although
existence of an ether is widely rejected, this is not a precise
interpretation of relativity is stated, the concept of the aether as a
substance is thereby removed from the physical theories. For there is no
point in discussing a state of rest or of motion relative to the aether
when these quantities cannot, in principle, be observed experimentally …
It should no longer be regarded as a substance but simply as the totality
of those physical quantities which are to be associated with matter-free
space. In this wider sense there does, of course, exist an aether; only one
has to bear in mind that it does not possess any mechanial
properties.”
Accordingly,
the widespread rejection of an ether applies to a Galilean ether, but not
to a Lorentz-invariant ether since its description of observation is
necessarily identical to that of relativity. The Lorentz ether has
furthermore been demonstrated to be inseparable from relativity,
has potential advantages for physical theory
and is compatible with one-way light tests.
The most direct verification of the validity of a Lorentz ether, and one
which is independent of relativity, is found in the theoretical works of
IVES. Building on the earlier theories of FITZGERALD, LORENTZ and LARMOR,
he produced a classical derivation of the Lorentz transformations,
showed the consistency of the Lorentz ether with experiment
and extended Lorentz-ether theory to gravitational phenomena
by a classical derivation of the Schwarzschild metric, hence to an
identical explanation of the three famous tests of relativity. He further
showed
that the gravitational equivalence of the ether and relativity theories
results from the proper correction of Newtonian gravitation, which has an
infinite speed of propagation, for propagation at the speed of light. As a
result, any Lorentz-ether theory of gravitation which provides the static
Newtonian gravitational force is necessarily equivalent observationally to
general relativity.
The
admissibility of the Lorentz ether focuses attention on its properties.
This ether is not directly observable by any known dynamic or
electrodynamic means yet it is associated with the physical attributes of
matter-free space, i.e. the vacuum, and therefore has observable energy
properties. These include the macroscopic (general relativistic) properties
of space-time, which govern the motion of matter and light, and the
microscopic (quantum electrodynamic) interactions, as is evident in the
Lamb shift and the anomalous gyromagnetic ratios. If the Lorentz ether (=
the vacuum) is not to be regarded as a substance, what is responsible for
its physical attributes?
Knowledge
of ‘substance’ is acquired by direct observation. However, observability is
not a constant, but is a function of time because man’s ability to measure
has been changing rapidly in recent history. What is accepted as a
‘substance’ may consequently vary with time. Today the various known
systems of matter constitute a hierarchy which comprises the observable
Universe, galactic clusters, galaxies, stellar systems, ponderable bodies,
molecules, atoms and elementary particles; a few centuries ago we could
identify with certainty only one level of this hierarchy – ponderable
bodies. Furthermore, there is no substantial evidence that the present
hierarchy is complete. Each level of the hierarchy also contains unique
forms of energy transfer; if Nature’s hierarchy extends beyond its present
limits, there must exist unknown forms of energy transfer in the Universe
which are now unobservable. This is not unlikely because our still
accelerating technology presages further expansion of the presently known
hierarchy: We are now avidly seeking the structure of elementary particles
and our estimate of the size of the Universe has been increasing
logarithmically over the last century.
The probability that the known hierarchy actually extends further then
suggests a feasible definition of the ether: It is the totality of all the
presently unobservable forms of energy that may exist in the microcosm.
The
least detectable class of stable particles in the known hierarchy of matter
– the neutrinos – may now be considered as the most prominent component of
such an ether. It is presently believed that a vast sea of low-energy
neutrinos (and antineutrinos) permeates the Universe; no satisfactory upper
limit to the power flux in this sea has yet been accepted.
Three properties immediately result which are consonant with essential
properties of an ether: i) the energy in the neutrino sea is presently
unobservable due to the lack of any known means for detecting low-energy
neutrinos; ii) the total unobservable energy in the neutrino sea may far
exceed the total energy contained in matter, i.e. the vacuum is then a
plenum rather than a void; iii) since neutrinos are restricted to speed c,
the neutrino sea is necessarily Lorentz invariant.
The
velocity spectrum of the neutrino sea may be more precisely described in
terms of the measured upper limit Ant to the rest mass of neutrinos. Thus
(1)
*****,
where
MrC2 is the total energy of the neutrino and V is its speed. Letting V= c-
Ac
and
substituting in eq. (1), we get
(2)
*****
If
Am/mv<2 10^-10 for 50 MeV antineutrinos, as recently suggested by LANDE
et al. assuming their detected
antincutrino pulses originated from a collapsing star, then Ac/c<2
10^-20 . If the composite photon theory based on the phasor structure of
the neutrinos
is assumed, the measured upper limit to the rest mass of the photon applies
to propagation of neutrinos with velocity cover the same spectral range as
has been verified for photons.
A
fourth property generally attributed to the ether is an ability to transmit
light. This is provided by the neutrino sea in view of a recent analysis by
HONIG
in combination with the properties of phasor neutrinos. HONIG initially
assumed an old ether model consisting of “two oppositely charged
continuous superposable fluids” and proceeded with the aid of a
toroidal transformation to harmonize the Hertzian description of radiation
and planck’s quantum restriction. The required polarized fluid is provided
by a phasorneutrino sea in the following way: Phasors are rotating vectors
introduced by STEINMETZ over 70 years ago and were subsequently applied
extensively in macrosopic applications. They are represented analytically
by
*****
where
#o is the constant electric of magnetic amplitude,.0(W = d0/dt) is
rotational angle (speed) in the complex plane and t is time. If such
phasors are applied directly t microscopic forms of radiation then in the
reference frame of a massless particle and by differentiation of (3) and
substitution from E = hw, where E is total photon energy:
*****
For
a system with constant total energy, this is identical in form to the
conventional Schrodinger wave function except for a difference in sign,
which derives from a difference in microscopic and macroscopic conventions.
e.g. as for current flow. However, the direct identification of # in (4)
with an electric or magnetic phasor leads to the feasibility of a composite
photon 13,14 and electron and to observable
astrophysical predictions.
These phasor fields have been physically described by long dipoles but the
properties of a neutrino are generally satisfied by one rotating electric
dipole moving with velocity c 14. BONNOR has demonstrated the consistency with the Maxwell-Einstein equations of
dipoles moving with velocity c. When such dipoles are applied to the
neutrinos of the universal sea, we obtain a vacuum filled with
submicroscopic positive and negative charges, i.e. a dually charged fluid
as required by HONIG. Although the equivalent neutrino “fluid” is
not continuous, neither is any physical fluid. For negligible discontinuity
with respect to Honig’s mechanism, the ability of the neutrino sea to
propagate electromagnetic radiation then follows.
A
fifth property generally attributed to the ether is an ability to transmit
gravitational forces. Each neutrino dipole may be expressed in terms of
finite electric and magnetic susceptibilities 14 which, when
averaged over all neutrinos in any volume, provide a physical origin for
the permittivity and permeability of the vacuum. The method of Wilson[19]
then permits an electromagnetic approach to gravitation equivalent to
general relativity. Another equivalent, but more heuristic, approach is
provided by the 200-year-old concept of LESAGE which is based on the
attractive force obtained between masses situated in a sea of moving
microscopic particles which pervade and interact slightly with matter. A
modern version may be based on the verified V -A neutrino-electron scattering interaction,
or the more intense resonant scattering predicted to account for a variety
of astrophysical phenomena (14,17). If an isotropic neutrino power flux S
impinges on a spherically symmetric mass M and there is a fractional
transfer of power flux em to M by the accumulated scattering interactions,
the radial power flux component leaving M has a lower value (1 – em )S
which, by the geometry, must be spherically symmetric. There is then a
differential flux emS directed toward its center which, from the geometry,
must decrease as 1/r^2, where r is distance from the center of M A test
mass m at large r then experiences an unbalanced power flux in the
direction of M, hence an unbalanced static force of
(5)
*****
since
the E’s, from the Compton-effect kinematics, must be dependent only upon
total mass and energy of the interacting particles when averaged over all
directions. This force is undistinguishable from gravitation and accounts
fully for the Newtronian static force if the E’s and S have appropriate
values. Correction for the finite velocity of neutrinos after IVES, as
discussed above, provides the observational equivalent to the
general-relativistic description.
If
an isolated mass is stationary in an isotropic sea, scattering interactions
averaged over all directions produce no net motion of any of its particles,
the mass remains at rest and there is no heat production. However, to the
extent that there is randomness in the neutrino flux, which must be small
if the neutrino number density is high, each particle experiences small
random variations in interaction. For electrons this provides a po
tential mechanism to account for 1/f electrical noise (f = noise
frequency) and, for more massive particles, a potential involvement in the
origin of radioactive decay[21].
Heat production per unit mass due to random motion is necessarily
negligible, but accumulation in large masses may become significant. If so,
this should be masked by nuclear heat generation in stars and may become
first noticeable in large masses that have not achieved nuclear burning,
e.g. in regard to excess heat production of Jupiter.
If
an isolated mass is moving uniformly in the neutrino sea, the accumulated
effects of all scattering components normal to the motion cancel, but those
in the line of motion survive and, in any given time interval, are
(6)
*****
(7)
*****
where
***** is the net change in momentum of the neutrino sea (mass) and AU. is
the kinetic energy gained by the mass. Eliminating Ap„ we get
(8)
*****
Since
the kinetic energy is all supplied by the neutrino sea at velocity c = ds/dt,
expression of (8) in differential form results in a force
(9)
F
= dUm /ds = dpm /dt,
and
Newton’s second law is affirmed for matter interactions with the neutrino
sea. Because the forces in (5) and (9) arise from the same basic scattering
mechanism, the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass is also
affirmed.
It
should be noted that the existence of a vast store of energy in the
Universe which can interact with matter may be directly pertinent to the
urgent need for nonchemical forms of energy suitable for human use.
THE
SEA OF ENERGY …
“Enough
energy is coming to the earth to light over 1.5 million (1,693;600)
100-watt lamps for every human being on the earth today. Without the use of
a prime mover, no fuel of any kind need be taken as a dead load since this
energy can be ‘picked up’ directly by ocean liners, airplanes, or any form
of transportation. Heat, light and power can be made available for use in
all kids of building and for all kinds of machinery. An example would be to
pump water onto the desert lands, the power source being only a fraction of
the weight of any steam plant or any kind of engine in use today, and all
this at a fraction of the current cost.
“A
wild dream? No! It’s a proven reality, as hundreds of people know who have
witnessed the Moray Radiant Energy invention – powered from the
cosmos.” So stated Thomas Henry Moray in the original edition of his
book, The Sea of Energy in Which the Earth Floats.
Nikola
Tesla insisted the energy of the universe was waiting to.be tapped. Great
scientists have mathematically proven its existence. Why has this greatest
source of energy been ignored? Is the reason political or economical?
The
5th edition of The Sea of Energy carries a complete history of Dr. Moray’s
work, including documentation of the experiments he performed, showing that
he developed a bi-polar transistor as early as 1927, and by 1939 had
successfully demonstrated that his Radiant Energy device would deliver as
high as 50,000 watts of power. This energy, omnipresent in the universe, is
waiting to be harnessed.
The
book tells how Dr. Moray was harassed, threatened, and even shot; he
finished his life in semiseclusion. Even though eminent scientists examined
his device during and after its operation, and admitted that they could not
understand the source of the power they had witnessed, still he was never
able to gain their support for his work.
Four
chapters of Dr. Moray’s original book containing his theories have been
edited and republished in the new edition, along with appendices and
references of scientific data that verify his work. The conclusion suggests
how this vital research might be continued.
History
reveals that man is bent on exploiting the natural resources around him
with little or no thought for conserving or extending the limited supply.
We no longer can afford this luxury. Can we afford to lose the only truly
innovative proposal for the development of an energy source? Especially in
this day with its critical, ever-increasing energy needs? Will you do
something about it? The world may yet obtain and utilize this power. You
can help. Find out how. Begin by learning what has already been done and
what now needs to be done.
ENERGY SHORTAGE REAL?
UNLIMITED
FREE ELECTRICAL ENERGY
“At
long last a new, updated, and improved version of T. Henry Moray’s book is
available. The Moray story reads like science fiction, but make no
mistake–it is all true. Moray succeeded in building and steadily improving
a free-energy device in the 1920’s and 1930’s, apparently tapping the
infinite zero-point energy of vacuum and producing electrical power-or at
least producing an energy that would power electrical devices. Moray’s
“radiant energy” had some strange characteristics: (I) It was
produced out of nothing, or in modern terms, it produced observable energy
from virtual energy of the universal vacuum; (2) it was high frequency; (3)
it did not heat up internal circuits – implying that it did not flow
through 3-dimensional circuits (this in turn seems to imply that the
ordinary circuitry only performed time synchronization to with hyperspatial
/ hyperdimensional
energies or virtual state resonances, to cohere and collect (superpose)
hyperspatial / virtual energies into observable energy).
“Now
the hard core establishment scientist usually confuses free energy with the
perpetual motion machine. He cites the conservation of energy law and the
inevitable frictional loss of some energy inside any physical device as
proof that one cannot produce a perpetual motion machine. This is actually
illogical thinking based on the fixed assumption of a closed system. What
is true is that, in a physical machine, one cannot form a closed system
consisting of the machine, its output, and its’ input and expect the
machine to continue to run. In such case, frictional losses represent
energy lost from the system, and the total energy of the closed system thus
rapidly drains down to zero and the machine ceases. However, one can easily
build a machine where input, machine, and output are not a closed system;
if its input comes from an inexhaustible external source, the machine will
then run forever and deliver its output, barring mechanical failure. A
simple example is a paddle wheel in a river; the wheel will draw “free
energy” from the flowing river until mechanical failure occurs. So to
build a free energy device, one does not seek to violate the conservation
of energy law, but rather seeks a perpetual river or “sea” of
energy to tap. Moray actually found a new, infinite source or
“sea” of energy which could be tapped; his device should be
meticulously examined in this fashion rather than simply attempting to
classify it as a “perpetuum mobile.”
“This
book gives a great deal of insight into T. Henry Moray’s thinking; his
radiant energy device, and his experiences in his repeated attempts to get
his machine accepted for the benefit of all mankind. A rather complete
history and background are also included.”
Book
Review by Tom Bearden from SPECULA
Ask
about the House of Moray Research Foundation $1,000.00 CONTEST for the best
theoretical explanation. Do not overlook this opportunity! The Contest
closes January 31 each year.
“As
a result of a careful study of documents submitted to me, 1 am convinced as
an electrical and electronical engineer that the principles expounded and
experimentally demonstrated by the late :Dr. Moray already forty years ago
are correct. My conviction is based on scientifical and technical
considerations and confirmed by my own history and philosophy.”
P.H.
Matthey, Boine, Switzerland
“Years
ago I had the opportunity of meeting Dr. Moray and working with him on some
of his theories. I am convinced of the validity of his work and believe
that this will be of interest”
Mark
J. Hagmann, Ph.D.
CALIFORNIA
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
PASADENA
NORMAN BRIDGE LABORATORY OF PHYSICS
November
5, 1929
Mr. A. H. Lovesy,
c/o Utah Oil Refining Co.,
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Dear Mr. Lovesy:
Replying to your letter of October
26th, my former letter stated my position completely with respect to your
proposal. If Mr. Fletcher and Dr. Gyring have the time and the inclination
to investigate this matter I am glad to tell you that they are competent
people to do it. and I should have great confidence in their findings. It
is utterly impossible for me to take the time from the important matters I
am engaged in to investigate it myself. In addition to ` that. it does not
interest me as stated for the reason that I am always suspicious of a
person who is trying to conceal things from a group of scientists.
Very
truly yours,
(Signed)
Robert A. Millikan
——————————
Letter from Dr. Harvey Fletcher to C.R. Benzil
April
17, 1933
Dr. C, R. Benzel
708 Ninth Ave.,
Greeleys Colorado.
Dear Dr. Benzel.
It In true that I did
seE the device which Dr. Moray has invented. The fact that I did has caused me
considerable inconvenience as I have received letters of inquiry from all
over the United $tates. I did not have an opportunity to go over his
apparatus thoroughly, so I cannot say what in la that is producing the
effect.
In answer to your first question, I was
not able to determine the nature of the gurrent. I judged from Its effects
that it was a high frequency current. In answer to your second question, I
do not know what ware the parts used. Dr. moray showed me a circuit but he
Seemed to be unable to know enough about electrical circuits to draw a real
circuit diagram. The one which he showed me as inoperative, In answer to
your last question, at first I thought Mr. Moray was sincere and was simply
self-deceiving in thinking he had the effect, However, recount developments
have led me to question his sincerity.
Sincerely
yours,
Harvey
Fletcher
Acoustioal
Rosearch Director
——————————
Letter to K.K. Steffenson from Bell Labs
BELL
TELEPHONE LABORATORIES
INCORPORATED
463
WEST STREET NEW YORK
CHELSEA
3-1000
August
2, 1937
IN
REPLY REFER TO
JBK-328-GZ
REPLYING
TO
MR. K. K. STEFFENSET
Hotel Cecil
Seventh & Main Streets
Los Angeles, Cal.
Dear Mr. Steffensen:
Dr. Pletcher is in Europe at present.
In his absence I am replying to your letter of July 30 regarding the
apparatus which Dr. Moray has developed.
Looking through some correspondence
which Dr. Fletcher had several years ago concerning the Moray apparatus I
believe the following represents his experiences and judgment in the
matter. The demonstration was so Contrary to his expectations that he was
very much interested. He was not allowed to examine all the parts of the
device and in consequence had no idea how it operated Despite his inability
to determine how apparatus functioned. Dr. Fletcher felt that there was
very little chance of the device operating in the manner claimed for it by
the inventor. However, he stated that even a small chance of success
warranted a complete investigation of the device. He suggested that if Dr.
Moray wished to have the device accepted by the scientific world it would
be necessary for him to explain its operation to a reputable scientist and
have this scientist duplicate Dr. Moray’s performance.
I hope these comments may be of soma
assistance to you.
Very
truly yours,
T.
B. Kelly.
——————————
Letter from Dr. Harvey Fletcher to K.K. Steffenson
BELL
TELEPHONE LABORATORIES
INCORPORATED
463
WEST STREET NEW YORK
CHELSEA
3-1000
September
22, 1937
IN
REPLY REFER TO
HF
– GZ
REPLYING
TO
MR. K. K. STEFFENSEN
211 Horizon Avenue
Venice, Cal.
Dear Mr. Steffensen:
I have just returned from Europe and
have read some of the letters which you have sent to the Laboratories. It
is true that I do know something about the Moray patent but to recount its
history from the many letters which I have received would be a laborious
task. If you wish this information end will mail me a check for $100 I will
be glad to get it for you.
Very
truly yours,
(Signed)
Harvey Fletcher
Physical
Research Director.
——————————
Letter to John Hand from Dr. Harvey Fletcher
BRIGHAM
YOUNG UNIVERSITY
PROVO.
UTAH
June
5, 1957
College Of Physical &
Engineering Sciences
Mr. John Hand
General Delivery
Calgary, Alta, Canada
Dear Mr. Hand:
I will have nothing further to do with
Moray or his invention. I went to the trouble of arranging for an
electrical concern in New York to build his apparatus and to try it out.
The reason it was never done was that on the day that Moray was supposed to
arrive in New York he sent a telegram saying he would not come. From that
day I have felt that he is trying to deceive the public. I have no way of
deciding whether or not his invention is genuine simply because he refuses
to let anybody see it or build one like it.
Sincerely
yours.
Harvey
Fletcher, Dean
——————————
Letter to Mr. Schiess from Dr. Harvey Fletcher
BRIGHAM
YOUNG UNIVERSITY
PROVO,
UTAH
October
22, 1956
College Of Physical &
Engineering Sciences
Dear Mr. Schiesa:
It is true that I witnessed a
demonstration by Mr. Moray in Salt Lake some 15 or 20 years ago and it hen
been a source of annoyance to me ever since.
I have recommended to him and to his
sponsors that the only way he will. ever get recognition for his radiant
energy machine is to have a respectable engineering firm build it and prove
that it will work. Since he has failed to do this, I have lost confidence
in both his theories and his machine;
Sincerely
yours,
Harvey
Fletcher
——————————
Letter from A.G. Foster
October
31, 1973
To Whom It May Concern:
Early this spring (1973) Hey Fletcher,
Jr had been invited by members of the Systems Engineering section on one of
the weapon systems at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, to discuss details of a
mathematical. analysis relating to the system. Harvey, Jr at that time was
on the Brigham Young University faculty.
Harvey, Jr brought his father, Dr
Harvey Fletcher, with him. Knowing of his prominence in the scientific and
engineering world I took the opportunity to visit with Dr Fletcher in an
empty conference room while the technical meeting with Harvey, Jr took
place in an office dorm the hall. I spent nearly 20 minutes alone with Dr
Fletcher before we were joined by Harvey, Jr and two other government
engineers, one of wham was Don Jones. All three of us government engineers
had some knowledge of T. Henry Moray’s scientific discoveries and were
curious as to Dr Fletcher, knowledge of these sane discoveries.
To my knowledge Dr Fletcher was not
aware that the three of us had to same degree investigated the Moray
discoveries. Harvey, Jr had learned on a previous occasion that we were
interested in the energy energy findings. I directed a number of questions
to Dr Fletcher which were designed to remind him of his earlier work
including his position with the Bell Labs.
Dr Fletcher described same of his
experiences with Edison and Millikan and stated that he, Fletcher, was
actually responsible for the so-called Millikan oil-drop experiment
although Millikan did collaborate with HM. Circumstances were such that
Millikan received the credit for the famous measurement of the charge on an
electron. Harvey, Jr joined in the conversation impulsively for a moment in
support of his fathers activities in science.
After this preliminary discussion and
establishment of a friendly rapport, I asked several other questions to
determine if Dr Fletcher had had any , contact with T. Henry Moray. I did
this in a manner such that he wouldn’t take offense at the questions or
feel that I was biased in any way. I had heard from others that Dr Fletcher
was sensitive about the subject.
Dr Fletcher stated that indeed he had
known and talked with Henry Moray, had observed the energy device
functioning, and further observed that there was a marked interest in
technical circles, about the Moray energy discovery along with some
skepticism. He remarked that some, including himself, desired to test the
device under laboratory conditions at the Bell Labs in New York to
determine its Validity and functional characteristics. Dr Fletcher went on
to state that Mr Moray had been invited by him to come back to the Bell
Laboratories and that Hr Moray had agreed but did not arrive in Hew York
for reasons unknown to Dr Fletcher.
During the entire conversation Dr
Fletcher talked with lively candor and interest about both Mr Moray and Dr
Millikan. I have concluded, therefore, that Dr Harvey Fletcher seas
sufficiently aware of the Moray discoveries and in particular the energy
device known as “Radiant Energy” to promote an interest in it at
the Bell Laboratories. To my memory the time period involved ryas the
1930’s but no specific dare was mentioned during the conversation with Or
Fletcher.
(Signed)
ARTHUR G. FOSTER
Professional
Engineer (EE)
Utah
2222
Ohio
19285
——————————
Letter from Ernest Wilkinson
BRIGHAM
YOUNG UNIVERSITY
PROVO.
UTAH
March
4, 1959
Dr. Henry T. Moray
25 South 5th East
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Dr. Moray;
Our Dr. Harvey Fletcher indicates that
he has had previous contact with you and that he went to some inconvenience
at one time to attempt to verify your quite astounding claims. He informs
me that generally a new discovery or idea is verified by disclosure to
other qualified scientists so that they may by following the originator’s
directions, repeat his discovery. This method has been used in the
scientific world since the time of Galileo.
Scientists generally are quite anxious
to disclose their work so that it may be verified and developed. Our patent
laws provide protection for patentable new inventions, and publication
establishes prior right to new ideas.
Dr. Fletcher indicates that you have
consistently refused to make any such disclosures in accordance with
accepted scientific procedure. Each of your demonstrations has had an
element of the mysterious about it, which makes it impossible to completely
determine the genuineness of your claimed discoveries.
Until you are willing to have your
ideas tested and verified in an acceptable manner, I fear there is nothing
we can do to assist you. If and when you are willing to publish your work
in accepted scientific journals, and have your discoveries evaluated by an
impartial jury of qualified scientists, we shall be most happy to assist
you in any way we can.
Sincerely
yours,
Ernest
L. Wilkinson
President
Letter from Gene Vickers
Advanced Concepts, Inc.
Phone (801) 532-5851
P.
O. Box 74
Salt
Lake City, Utah 84110
January 14, 1974
Mr. John Moray
Research Institute
2505 S. 4th E.
Salt Lake city, Utah 84115
Dear John:
At 10:00 a.m. on February 28, 1963, you
and I had an appointment with Dr. Henry Eyring in his office at the
University of Utah.
The purpose of our appointment was to
discuss Radiant Energy; not only to discuss it, but to obtain Dr. Eyring’s
comments on his witnessing the demonstration of Radiant Energy. I informed
Dr. Eyring of the purpose of our visit, and he agreed to discuss it with
us.
To the direct question “Have you
seen Radiant Energy demonstrated?” he answered, “Yes,” that
he was present at a demonstration presented by Dr. Henry Moray of what Dr.
Moray called Radiant Energy. I then asked him if energy was produced, and
he again replied, “Yes,” he earl evidence of energy being
produced, that he saw lights light up.
I then asked him if he would be willing
to make a statement to that affect. He replied, “No.” I asked him
why. He replied that he had seen evidence of energy produce . e was al owed
to examine the device, all except one part that Dr. Moray held in his hand.
Because he was not allowed to examine the small items held in Dr. Moray’s
hand, he would have to say he did not see Radiant Energy in operation
because he was not allowed to examine all parts of the device producing the
energy, that as a scientist he would have to see everything or he could not
attest to the unit working.
I then asked him what difference it
made if he didn’t see the small part that was capable of being hidden in
Dr. Moray’s hand, that if the device worked certainly that small part
couldn’t affect his visual observation of the device producing energy. Ha
replied that as a research scientist he had to know and understand all the
working parts or he could not make a statement using his name that he had
seen the device in operation. He felt his standing in the scientific
community was such that it would be improper to say he had seen the device
when he didn’t see and understand the operation of all parts.
I then asked him if anyone asked him
about it, would he be able to say he had seen it work. He said he would
have to say no again for the reason he had given prior, that he had not
seen the little part held in Dr. Moray’s hand.
He told us that he was at a loss to
understand private research such as Dr. Moray conducted. The reason was
that he had worked in public research, and everything they worked on was
made public. Nothing was held back.He felt that each man had the right to
pursue whatever research he wanted to, but he could not understand a person
pursuing individual research, developing something of such a magnitude as
Radiant Energy could be and then withholding the information from the
public.
John, I have placed in quotation marks
as near as I can recall Dr. Eyring’s exact words. Other statements are
recollections of his comments but are not recollections from notes of such
extent that I can say these are direct quotes. However, the words I have
used convey the meaning of what he was saying.
I hope this is helpful to you in scone
way.
Sincerely,
Gene E. Vickers
President
——————————
Memo, Feb. 19, 1965
Salt
Lake City, Utah
February
19, 1965
Regarding Gene Vickers’ and John
Moray’s visit with Dr. Henry Eyring in the Doctor’s office at the
University of Utah in 1963, I can only give an account of this visit from
memory after hearing what took place recited to me first by Mr. Vickers
(whom I suggest you contact for complete details) and on more than one
occasion by John Moray.
Gene (Mr. Vickers) and John called on
Dr. Henry Eyring by appointment and John asked the Doctor if he would give
them an account of the Doctor’s visit at the Moray laboratory and his
witnessing the Moray Radiant Energy device in operation under an
experimental demonstration.
The Doctor replied, “I never saw
anything.” John replied, “You never saw anything! What do you
mean? You saw the device in operation, saw it heat a flat iron, a glow
heater, run a special high frequency motor and light a bank of standard
electric light globes.” The doctor said “Oh, I saw some lights
light but that did not mean anything.” John replied, “You saw the
device in full operation and made several tests of disconnecting wires,
etc. and in the end the device was opened and dismantled part by part for
you and you were permitted to examine all the parts.” Dr. Eyring said
“Yes, but I did not see anything, and I may be a Prof. Anthony and a
Dr. Mitchel when I say it but I did not see anything (this expression has
been used to describe an adverse attitude around certain Utah people for
many years) and my position is still one of I did not see anything and what
I did see I did not understand.”
As I said above, I would suggest you
get a statement from Mr. Vickers for first-hand information as I do not
wish to bother John in this matter at this time.
I also suggest you read a letter I
wrote a Mr. Herman after he had received a letter from Dr. Henry Eyring. It
must be remembered Dr. Carl Eyring, after he had spent a day with me and
his personal friend, Attorney Robert Judd, and had been very impressed and
interested in R.E. to the point of trying to assist in wording a theory, he
turned to the induction theory and in several ways made such a spectacle of
himself over R.E. that the big bosses of the B.Y.U., who had been
considering him for President of the B.Y.U., put another in in his stead.
Dr. Fletcher is also a relation of
Doctors Carl Eyring and Henry Eyring, and Dr. Fletcher has made a number of
ridiculous and contradictory statements in writing regarding R.E. All this
can be proven by documentary evidence and many of these facts have been
publisned in print over a long period of years with no effort on the part
of any of these Doctors to refute my statements and the letters of this
friend in the matter.
Why is it these gentlemen of high
repute, when they cannot refute R.E. from any standpoint, resort to an
unfounded; an untrue personal scandal over a period of several years?
(Signed)
T. Henry Moray
——————————
Fig.
39 (Page 109) – S.E. Bringhurst sworn statement before J.B. Bell
850 Three Fountains Drive
Unit No. 198
Murray, Utah 84107
March 19, 1971
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
During the later part of July, 1936, I
witnessed an experimental test made by Dr. T. Henry Moray at his laboratory
which was then at 2484 South 5th East, Salt Lake City, Utah. This was only one
of the many experimental tests I had witnessed with various Groups of men
present.
At this experiment there was a bank of
lights consisting of 35 standard electric licht globes, 20 of which were 150
watt globes and 15 of which were 100 watt globes. There was also heated to full
capacity a 600 watt clove heater, a standard 575 watt flat iron and a special
motor which had been designed by Dr. Moray. A picture of this experiment was
made in my presence by a commercial photographer, with some of those present
being in the picture. I would like to call attention to the electric globe which
did not light which was in series with the device when it was in full operation.
it will be noted in this picture, which is true of all that have been taken of
this device in operation, the whiteness of the light which came from these
standard commercial light globes.
I have witnesses many of these tests which
have been more or less alike. These tests were made to prove various
improvements made in the device from time to time.
I have also read many of the letters of
those who have also witnessed various experimental tests of this device in
operation.
Samuel
E. Bringhurst
STATE OF UTAH
County of Salt Lake
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19th
day of March, 1971.
NOTARY
PUBLIC
Residing
at:
A.B. Jenson sworn statement
Salt
Lake City 6, Utah
December
28, 1962
Dr. T. Henry Moray
Salt Lake City, Utah
You recently asked if I would recall a test
made during 1938 of the Moray Radiant Energy Equipment. To the best of my
recollection, the test was as follows:
I accompanied a group of people consisting of
Mr. J. C. Jensen, Mr. Greely Snyder Dr. Moray, and myself ?I recall one other
person also was with us but will not give the name, as I am not sure whether I
am correct). We drove out past St. Johns in Toole County, Utah, and then 25 to
30 miles southwest of Johnson’s Pass. At that time there was no installation at
Dugway, no telephone or electric wires in the vicinity – merely desert land.
Dr. Moray had packed his equipment and tools
necessary to erect it. We selected a spot 50 to 75 feet from our automobile. We
assisted in driving a steel rod about 6 feet into the ground. With a blow torch,
wires were soldered to the steel rod. We erected two tent poles and fastened an
antenae made of #10 stranded copper wire.
The wire from the antenae was fastened to
the box containing the Moray Radiant Energy Equipment and the ground wire that
had been soldered to the steel rod was also fastened.
Dr. Moray had brought a board with about 35
150-watt lamps mounted thereon, a high frequency motor, a 1000-watt taylor’s
iron, and I believe a heater or fan.
After connecting the “ground” and
“antenae” to the box. Dr. Moray “plugged in” the lamps,
iron, rotor, etc. The energy from the box lighted the lamps, heated the iron,
ran the motor, etc.
We all examined the equipment and determined
there were no batteries: there were no hidden connections to electric outlets,
as we were miles from any power lines; Mr. J. C. Jenson drove the automobile and
selected the location for the demonstration, thus there could have been no prior
preparation at the test site by Dr. Moray.
Although the demonstration took place nearly
25 years ago, I still vividly recall the reaction of all who witnessed it. It
was our firm conviction that the Radiant Energy Equipment was truly as
renresented by Dr. Rorav.
Very
truly yours,
(Signed)
A. B. Jensen
David Gardner Affidavit
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF UTAH
County of Salt Lake
DAVID I. GARDNER, being first duly sworn,
deposes and says: That I am a licensed Civil Engineer in and for the State of
Utah, License No. 427, and hold a degree of B. S. in Civil Engineering from the
Utah State University; I have been a practicing Civil Engineer for the past
thirty-seven (37) years, District Engineer for Salt Lake County Water
Conservancy District, District Engineer for Granger-Hunter Improvement District,
and various other positions.
I am also an inventor with letters patent on
a ditch lining device and a patent pending on a service connection on a water
main; I also designed and built a dredge boat which is successfully operating.
That sometime about the year 1936 I was
invited to visit the laboratories of Dr. T. Henry Moray in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Upon my arrival, there were many other people present to see this experimental
demonstration of Dr. Moray’s During the course of the evening Dr. Moray
demonstrated what he called “radiant energy” consisting of a battery
of approximately forty 200 watt globes, small electric motors, flat irons, and
electric fans connected to a board wired conventionally with outlets for each
globe and electrical appliance. The demonstration consisted of stringing a smal
piece of thin copper wire of very small diameter across the room, Connected on
each end of the wire were two porcelain insulators small enough to hold
conveniently in one’s hand in order to pull the wire tight. I was given one end
of the insulator and someone at the other end of the room was given the other. I
was advised by Dr. Moray to pull the wire tight which I did. I asked him what
would happen if I touched the wire. He said nothing would happen except it would
turn the lights off. I asked him if it would shock me and he answered,
“No”. We then pulled the wire tight and Dr. Moray turned on the switch
or did some other operation which I do not at present recall, but the lights
came on in full force and the electrical appliances functioned beautifully.
Being of an inquisitive mind, I wondered if he was telling the truth so I
carefully let my hand touch the small copper wire.. and the lights went off as
Dr. Moray said they would. Dr. Moray said that someone was touching the wire; I
took my hand off the wire and the battery came on and the appliances again
functioned. How it worked I cannot say, but that it did work I am sure. There
was, of course, much discussion of the phenoma that we had witnessed among the
crowd.
The gentleman who had invited me to the
demonstration mentioned a contrivance that Dr. Moray had also invented with
which he could pick up sounds without them being broadcast from a radio sending
station. He said that he had heard a demonstration of this device. I asked if I
might hear it also; he called Dr. Moray over and asked if I might see a
demonstration of the “sound pickup device” and I was granted the
privilege.
There was an old radio box of conventional
design with two headphones plugged into the box. Dr. Moray tuned the device by
turning the knob in front. He handed me one set of headphones and one set to my
nephew Mr. Clark Gardner; he then arranged for three people to walk out of the
house into the street and carryon a conversation to which we were tuned. One of
the people chosen to walk from the house was my brother Archibald Gardner; the
others were Louis Gardner who had invited me to see the demonstration, and Mr.
Albert Dimond who I knew well and whose voice I could determine. I was sure I
was listening to these three men. I remember distinctly it was raining at the
time and I could bear the patter of the rain on the pavement as they walked. I
remember them saying they had better hurry back into the house lest they get
wet.
In the course of their return. I wondered if
I might hear other people talking and despite the advice of Dr. Moray not to
fool around with the tuning device, I moved the knob slowly and heard very
distinctly the sounds of a railroad station: the whistle of the train, and a
porter or the station master at the station saying, “All aboard”. The
nearest station to the receiving set would have been a minimum of five (5)
miles. I knew not what station I had tuned in on or what railroad, but the
people were talking the English language.
I know that the people walking on the street
had no transmitting device or any other instrument with them. They would not
believe me when I told them what I had heard, but they said I was repeating
their conversation.
David
I. Gardner
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 14th
day of September, 1963.
NOTARY
PUBLIC
Letter from W.H. Lovesy
Utah
Oil Refining Company
Salt
Lake City, Utah
June
29, 1932
Mr. T. Henry Moray
2481 south 5th East
Salt Lake City. Utah
Dear Henry
I have handed you the original letter of
Murray 0. Hayes, dated October 24, 1929, in which he advised of his being shown
and haring explained to him the wiring diagram of the assembly, and also the
fundamentals of the detector, end in which he stated plainly that while it would
not have been noticed unless pointed out by you, at the same time he had become
familiar with all of the detail of the construction of your device for utilizing
cosmic energy, and added that you had applied only fundamental principles of
eletric circuits.
There is attached a second letter In which
Mr. Hayes furnished ms a detail of his educational record.
The memorandums on the face of these two
original documets were made by me at the time I was conslting with Murray O.
Hayes in my office and, at the tins, he definitely advised ms that he had been
shown every detail of your invention and added that he could mobs one of the
machines himself from the information that had been given him.
Murray O. Hayes made these similar
statements to ms several times, and it may be from my determination in haring
him repeatedly make the declaration that he had been shown every detail of the
invention that would give him the impression that I had a doubt about the
invention,
Personally, I have never had a doubt, but I
thought the real detail secrets of the invention were hold only by yourself and
after my conference at New York with Harvey Fletcher and Carl Eyring,at the Bell
laboratories, — having agreed with them that I would endeavour to induce you
to give the detail of your invention to Murray O. Hayes, — I did, as I have
stated repeatedly ask Murray O. Hayes if he could duplicate your machine, and in
every instance his answer was emphatic sad to the effort that he could do so.
Yours
truly,
(Signed)
Memo on Vern Knudsen
This letter was written to Mr. Richards
because he had been instrumental in having this test of the Moray radiant energy
device witnessed by Dr. Vern Knudson of Stanford University. I gave this
interview to Dr. Knudson and let him witness this experimental test because he
had promised that he would, if he were permitted to be present when this
experimental test was run, give me a letter stating exactly what he had seen and
his reactions to the test. When Dr. Knudson failed to give me the promised
letter, I wrote the following letter to Attorney Richards in Los Angeles,
California. He also maintained offices in Salt Lake City under the firm name of
Clark, Bowen, and Richards. Original copy of letter follows.
Salt
Lake City, Utah
December
22, 1931
Dear Mr. Richards:
I note with interest your reference to Dr.
Vern Knudson as Dr. K. and the statement that the “demonstration”
given by Dr. Knudson was interrupted by the “valve stopping”.
When Dr. Hurray 0. Hayes and I met with Dr.
Knudson in your Salt Lake office and talked with him prior to ‘the experimental
test, Dr. Murray 0. Hayes and I went over with Dr. Knudson accounts of several
“demonstrations” that had been given before of the radiant energy
device. He covered in detail the one given to Dr. Harvey Fletcher and to Dr.
Carl Eyring and others. I asked Dr. Knudson if any of the explanations of the
theory I had given him were other than scientifically and electrically sound and
correct. Dr. Knudson said they were not; all was sound and correct; that
everything I had told him was okay. I asked Dr. Knudson if I were to give him
the same kind of a “demonstration” as all the letters he had read on
radiant energy which described what had been done in the past, if he would also
give me a written statement. I told him that was the understanding under which I
would be willing to give him the opportunity of witnessing this experiment. It
had been on this basis that I had talked this test over with Mr. D. V.
Farnsworth and Dr. Hayes when they and you, Mr. Richards, requested I give my
consent to Dr. Knudson being present at a R. E. test. This, Doctor Knudson
agreed to. I told Dr. Knudson I expected to run an experimental test of the
radiant energy equipment right away, and that we might as well run it in a day
or so as later. I told Dr. Knudson it would only be upon this basis that I would
consent to give the “demonstration with him present. I had asked Mr.
Farnsworth and The others before I met Dr. Knudson what good was to be
accomplished by “demonstrating” to these doctors of science. I said
they come, they see, they believe, but dare not speak of what they see and least
of all, do they dare to write the details of the tests. Dr. Murray O. Hayes
said, “Dr. Knudson is different, he is afraid of no ones opinion. He will
give you a letter.”
I told Dr. Knudson while in your office just
what I would do and what I expected of him. He said if I showed him the things
recited in the other accounts which he had read, he would be satisfied and okay
the device as being all I claimed for it. I showed him all of these things and
more. The fact that he could not continue his “tinkering” was his
fault. However, the scientific investigation had ended, and so what happened
should not stop him from telling and writing about what he saw and heard.
Nothing more, nothing less could be expected. He promised he would give me his
opinion in writing. After the test, when I asked him if he could see any way
that I could have “faked” the “demonstration”, he stated
most emphatically that it could not have been faked, repeating that there were
no indications of faking whatsoever; that such a demonstration could not be
faked. Later, after he had examined the transformer of the device, he stated
that with the amount of amperage he had seen taken from the device was positive
proof that the current developed by or in the machine was different than in any
in use today. Because the transformer would have burned up with normal current,
yet the transformer showed no signs of even ever having been warm. He was
informed by Dr. Hayes that the transformer had been in use under the same type
of strain for many tests in the past.
It is true, Dr. Knudson said after the valve
burned out, that the tests which he wished to perform but.which he could not now
that the device was inoperative would not have proven anything. I said, you will
agree if the machine would have performed or would not have performed this would
have proven nothing. His answer was, such tests would prove nothing. It was Dr.
Knudson’s fault that the detector burned out because of the excessive inductive
kickback he subjected the device to by throwing the main switch in and out so
fast and often that this continual breaking of the circuit built up an inductive
kickback, which would “blow” any electrical circuit. Dr. Knudson later
said to Dr. Hayes when asked what he expected to prove by his idea of these
tests, that, such tests as he had in mind would prove nothing except if Moray
were telling the truth when he said that the radiant energy current would not
operate a conventional motor. For arguments sake, let us grant this type of
current would work a standard motor. What would that prove? Such a test would
prove nothing at all which would offset the scientific proof of ooeration that
Dr. Knudson had seen. The question now arises, was this a scientific test of a
scientist or was Dr. Knudson playing detective. All my theory could be
incorrect, but that would not prove or disprove the various tests as to where
this type of energy was coming from. Does Dr. Knudson want to acknowledge he was
not capable of investigating by scientific tests or to recognize the difference
betwen high frequency, A.C. or D.C. current? Dr. Knudson acknowledge a current
to be different-when it did not burn up the transformer under such a heavy
current load. Dr. Knudson has more than enough scientific-‘knowledge to handle
the situation so why would he not stay with the scientific facts? No one even
could hint that Dr. Knudson.is not qualified, therefore, the only other answer
is he was afraid to stand by what he promised and saw and wanted a way out from
his promise to write a letter. Another case of history repeating itself. That I
can’t understand is why some men have so little confidence in themselves so they
let fear seal their lips. Fear of being criticized for witnessing a new
phenomena. Dr. Knudson , like all the other men of science who have seen R. E.
could not point out one little thing in the whole test.which was not
scientifically sound and correct:
One might now.go into the matter of how Dr.
Carl Eyring changed in his attitude because fear of criticism made him make
foolish statements rather than acknowledge facts and stand by his original
promises and his statements that all Moray had told and shown him was
scientifically sound and correct. So Dr. Eyring started to argue with Moray at
the B.Y.U. and came up with his induction from power line theory. He argued that
a 100-watt standard light globe required three amperes of current to operate.
This was the same as saying that 100 divided by 115 equalled three. Dr. Eyring
is a brilliant scientist as also were many of the others, but fear makes us
humans say and do strange things. Just another case of history repeatinq itself.
Dr. Harvey Fletcher gave as his theory that
the energy that was being received by the R.E. device was from some form of
battery reactions in the tubes which were kept alive b e action of the universe.
He stated, however, that if t is were t e case, a results were far more
wonderful than the theory which was claimed by Moray. Dr. Fletcher said the
current was high frequency. Dr. Knudson also admitted that the current received
by the Moray device was high frequency.
I never consented at the meeting with Dr.
Knudson in your office to permit the device to be “tinkered’s with. It was
Dr. Knudson’s “tinkering” that threw the device out of balance by his
causing the inductive kickbacks and by placing that extra coil, which he
furnished, in the circuit which caused the surges and caused all the damage.
This, Dr. Knudson acknowledged after he had seen the inside of the device. I
tried to tell him at the first when he wanted to insert the coil in’the circuit
that this could happen, but he would not listen. I remember saying, “Dr.
Knudson, there is no use connecting such a coil in the circuit as you will
understand after you see the inside of the device. It cannot possibly prove
anything and may do damage.” Some days later, Dr. Knudson conceived the
idea and made the statement that I received the energy from an outside source,
and I had a hidden wire in the 90 foot antenna pole. Please analyze this
statement, Mr. Richards, This shows Dr. Knudson lost his head, and such a
statement is beyond all reason. In the first place, what good would a hidden
wire do? If you analyze the type of tests that were made before Dr. Knudson,
what good would hidden wires do? Also, where would I get a bit 90 feet long or a
device capable of operating a bit of that length to make a hole in which to hide
a wire in the pole? The pole has been examined many times under the closest
inspection by many qualified men and State officials. Go over these tests made
with any man with a knowledge of electricity and he will have to decide such a
statement could be made only because of gross ignorance or because one lost his
head in a desire to come up with an excuse to avoid the keeping of promises. No
one could ever accuse Dr. Knudson of ignorance. The only other answer can be
fear. If you, Ns. Richards, had stayed in the laboratory instead of running all
over our home upstairs hunting for the method of how it could have been faked,
you would have done more to satisfy yourself than by what you did in running
around the house. You ran into my wife’s bedroom, the bath room, and all over
the-place when she was not dressed for strangers. One thing you did find out was
that she was not generating the current by running on the carpet as one
scientist had suggested when he, too, lost his head. Anyway, you found we had
polished, hard-wood floors, no carpets to run on to generate over four thousand
watts of electrical energy by.
Naturally, I am disappointed with Dr.
Knudson’s attitude, but the test accomplished in part some of the things I
needed to determine in my efforts to improve and stabilize parts of the device.
Naturally the damage to the equipment will be expensive to repair, but that is
partly offset by the pleasure I received from another recognized, noted
scientist having to agree that the radiant energy discovery is all I claim for
it and that he could not disprove my theory on the operation of the device or
point out any faults in the presentation. This, Dr. Knudson-did before another
scientist-who witnessed all which was said and done by Dr. Knudson and myself at
this test.
Will wait with pleasure meeting you again
upon your next trip to Salt Lake. With kind personal regards.
Sincerely
yours,
T.
Henry Moray
Letter from E.G. Jensen
1373
Harvard Avenue
Salt
Lake City, Utah
March
21, 1938
Dr. T. H. Moray
2484 South Sth.East
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Dr. Moray:
In accordance with your request and in order
to make a record of a demonstration You made me March 20, 1938 of your Radiant
Energy device, I am attaching, hereto a sketch which illustrates the equipment
reed, and with this letter outlines results obtaired.
Nunber One conderser consisted of two small
sheets of about 30 gauge aluminium separated by but making contact with a piece
of one-quarter incn thick plate glass. The plate glass was larger than the
aluminum sheets and overlapped them. Number Two condenser was about
1″x1″x 1/8″ and had the capacity of .025 MF. It was a commercial
condenser such as is carried in stock. at electrical shops and was manufactured’
by Igrad Condenser & Manufacturing Company.
With the 60 Watt Mazda Lamp and the two
condensers attached to the antenna and the antenna and ground attached to the
box containing your Radiant Energy, equipment in the man ner shown on the
sketch., the 100 Watt Mazda Lamp on the secondary or output side of the box was
lighted. Unscrewing the 60 Watt Mazda Lamp from its socket caused the 100 Watt
lamp to go out, but it immediately lighted when the 60 Watt lamp was screwed in
its socket. The 60 Watt lamp did not light under any condition or hook-up.
Shorting the antenna. and ground by. placing- a wire across then, caused the 100
Watt lamp to go out. Similar shorting with the hands also caused the 100 Watt
lamp to go out. No. electricity could be felt when shorting with the hands. If
either the ground or antenna wires were disconnected from the box, the 100 Watt
lamp would go out. Neither of the condensers or the 60 Watt lamp on the primary
side of the box were necessary but were simply put on to show that the high
frequency power will jump or pass through the condensers. The 100 Watt lamp was
lighted with each of ‘the condenser connected in the antenna singly as well as
together as shown in the sketch. A small, fractional horse power motor was
attached to the lamp socket on the secondary side of the box and the motor
operated with the same connections used far lighting the lamp. Lamps of
different Wattage were treed on both the primary and secondary side of the box
and worked the same as those shown on the. sketch.
Yours
truly,
E. G.
Jensen
Letter from George Piper
January
10, 1938
Salt
Leke City, Utah
To Whom It May Concern:
I have worked in electricity all my life,
was with the Utah rover and Light Company for thirteen years, and worked in all
departments including sub-stations. I have been with the Kearns Corporation over
seventeen years; and have charge of all the electrical work for the Tribune and
Telegram Publishing Company and in Kea???????? and Tribune Buildings.
On December twenty-third, 1937, I witnessed
a demonstration at Dr. Moray’s home at 2454 fifth East of his electrical marvel
box. He let me sea inside this box end there was a transformer H. J. some of his
cold tubes and some condensers. Dr. Moray connected this box to an arial and
ground wire and lighted about thirty small 120-volt lamps. He then disconnected
the ground wire from the outside and two of us hold a counter poise antenna
attached to glass insulators in the room and when he connected the box to this
counter poise antenna I saw the same results.
During this demonstration and while the lamp
and appliances were on I shorted the arial end ground wires. There was no spark
it just turned off the power from the box. I then took bold of both of these
wires. There was no feeling and they were both cold.
He then took a larger box, about 18 x 30 x
15 and connected it to the out side arial and ground wire, From this box he
lighted about fifty 100-Watts, 120-volt lamps, ran a small motor especially
round, an ordinary electric iron, and a 500-watt glow heater.
Dr. Moray then disconnected the appliances
and lamp, and attached two long wires to the box and we pulled the main line
Utah Power and Light Company service switch for his home. We attached the wire
from the box to the house side of the switch and he lighted his home, heated
irons and beaters; in foot everything the Utah Power and Light Company service
would do except run motors which I understand have to be specially wound.
Standard globes were used but they seemed to
give a softer light which was more like daylight.
I am satisfied myself from ay experience in
electricity that there was no fake of any kind or consealed batteries.
Everything was in the open so I could sea every operation. I did not see the
inside of the larger box.
It was a very remarcable demonstration and
one which I will always remember.
Geo.
R. Pyper
Sea of Energy in Which the Earth Floats - Chapter Selection
Chapter 10 – Capture Of Energy By Resonance
The Sea Of Energy In Which The Earth Floats
Chapter 08 – Reactions By Electron Excitation
The Sea Of Energy In Which The Earth Floats
