Except for Quantum Electrodynamics, there has been no real extension of Maxwell’s classical electromagnetic (EM) field theory since his electromagnetic EM field equations were developed in 1864. These equations describe the behavior of vector fields of low (U1) Lie group symmetry. In this respect, Terence W. Barrett has used topology, group and gauge theory, to extend Maxwell theory into tensor fields of higher symmetry form: SU (2), SU (3), and higher, that describe the behavior of specially conditioned EM fields. One of Barrett’s ways of emitting SU(2) EM fields was driving alternating current through toroidal coils at any of the resonant frequencies that will occur for a specific toroid geometry. Experiments to explore the possibility of achieving such resonant frequencies and SU(2) EM emissions will be described.
There are two classes of errors encountered in investigating claims of anomalous energy. One deals with experimental errors, such as misreading and misusing instrumentation or improper handling of uncertainties and errors. The other deals particularly with mistakes made in testing thrust forces. A partial list of the former was published in ESJ 36. What follows is among the first attempts at the latter.
Claims of overunity can often be attributed to lack of familiarity with how oscilloscopes collect and display data. Slow sampling rates can alias actual trends and smooth spikes. Simultaneous displays of current and voltage readings often do not align corresponding data points vertically. For best results in calculating power, the current and voltage should be multiplied point-by-point and then integrated. The automatic power calculation features on some oscilloscopes erroneously integrate and then multiply. In addition, currents induced in lines from the environment are often underestimated. A checklist of common pitfalls is provided.
An experiment is described which attempts to replicate the results of Podkletnov et al. concerning an alleged detection of a gravity-like force above a spinning superconductor. The experiment is based on Podkletnov’s published descriptions plus personal communications but found no evidence of a gravity-like force to the limits of the apparatus sensitivity. A full description of the apparatus and operation is given.
This paper reports progress in an experimental investigation started in the Hathaway Laboratory in 1994, dealing with the liberation of intermolecular bond energy from ordinary water by means of an arc discharge. Photographic evidence of fog generation and explosion during the arcing period is included. A new fog accelerator is described and a table of results of the kinetic energies of fog jets is provided. A renewable water energy cycle is outlined. The fog kinetic energy has been found to be greater than the difference between the capacitor input energy and the heat losses. Given energy conservation, the only external energy input that can account for the fog kinetic energy is solar heat from the atmosphere.
Second place in the Electric Spacecraft Competition was awarded to H. David Froning, Jr. and Terence W. Barrett for their paper, ?Electric Spacecraft Propulsion by Specially-Conditioned EM Fields.? (See ESJ 24:17-22.) This is an update. Preliminary tests of some of the concepts presented in the original paper have been completed in a collaborative effort with George Hathaway at Hathaway Associates, Toronto. The latest findings are presented with an outline for the direction of future experimentation.
Adapted from a paper published by the Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Inc. in 1990, the following account concerns an unusual phenomenon called ?The Hutchison Effect,? which involves levitation and molecular disruptions. This effect resulted from a complex interaction of electrical devices, including those of Nikola Tesla and Robert Van de Graaff. John Hutchison of Vancouver began this research in 1979. George Hathaway of Toronto, Canada, herein explains this effect, with detailed information from John Hutchison?s laboratory, his own analyses, and video documentation.
The following is a critique of Frode G. Olsen?s article, ?Circuit Analysis of the Hyde Generator,? on pages 30-33.