Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

· Home
· Forum
· Special Sections
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 40 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here


Hot Links

American Antigravity

AESOP Institute

Closeminded Science



Integrity Research Institute

New Energy Movement

New Energy Times

The Orion Proj.




Science Hobbyist

Tom Bearden's Page


Want to Know

Other Info-Sources
NE News Sites
Alternative Energy News
E-Cat World
NexusNewsfeed ZPE
FringeEnergy News
NE Discussion Groups
Energetic Forum
Energy21 YT Channel
Energy Science Forum
Free_Energy FB Group
The KeelyNet Blog
Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
Vortex (old Interact)
Magazine Sites
Electrifying Times (FB)
ExtraOrdinary Technology
IE Magazine
New Energy Times

Interesting Links

SciTech Daily Review
NEXUS Magazine
Find Jobs

A Commentary On Vacuum Energy
Posted on Sunday, July 23, 2006 @ 15:24:02 GMT by vlad

Science by Mark A. Solis

Energy From The Vacuum: How Much Is There?

Dan Solomon’s recent announcement that there may be energy states below the vacuum state is fairly interesting, if not completely unexpected. (See previous post: Some new results concerning the vacuum in Dirac’s hole theory)

The vacuum energy has been estimated at values ranging from 10^31 Joules per cubic centimeter to 10^120 Joules per cubic centimeter. Any way you look at it, there is a huge amount of energy present.

Heretofore, it appeared that what might be driving devices that draw on vacuum energy (such as the Correa device) was a charge pumping action resulting from the "re-disordering" of ordered fields by the very chaos of the boiling quantum vacuum itself. (This idea, incidentally, has been my own opinion on the matter, based on the manifestation of output on the trailing edges of the high voltage excitation pulses used in Correa's PAGD devices.) This chaos would represent entropy "at the end of the road" as you follow energy (or motivity) in our world down to zero, the vacuum state.

Now, however, Dan Solomon throws a monkey wrench in the works with his discovery that you can extract energy from BELOW the vacuum state. (MORE than 10^120 J/cm^3?) Oh, the implications….

Matrix Dirac: "Let off some steam, Bennett"

For those who saw Schwarzenegger's "Commando," that's a little pun. Nonetheless, it is a relevant pun. Allow me to explain:

Dirac's Hole Theory of the vacuum is part and parcel of a wave model that reveals an underlying structure to the vacuum which no one ever would have expected to exist IF the vacuum state was the end of the entropic road.

Turns out it's only an intersection….

Consider this quote from the current Wikipedia [re: Dirac Sea]:

"On the other hand, the field formulation does not eliminate all the difficulties raised by the Dirac sea; in particular, the problem of the vacuum possessing infinite energy is not so much resolved as swept under the carpet." (Boldface italics by me.)

The bottom line is that no one wanted to believe that this could be the case. The same thing happened over the positron issue until positrons were shown to exist by Carl Anderson in 1932.

The demonstration that positrons exist tended to force the issue. Again, to quote the current Wikipedia [re: Dirac Sea]:

"The Dirac sea is a theoretical model of the vacuum as an infinite sea of particles possessing negative energy."

There is energy on this side of the vacuum state, and negative energy on the other side. Here, we experience entropy. On the other side, there is negentropy.

The complete structure of the quantum vacuum, then, is a great matrix of sorts (caveat: my description) with energy on this side, negative energy on the other side, and the "vacuum state" (with maximum entropy, and hence maximum negentropy) in the middle---the boiling chaos of the spontaneous emission and annihilation of electron-positron pairs.

Without getting unduly technical about how this translates into available energy---

How much energy can we extract from the quantum vacuum? If we assume a symmetry based on something like Newton's First Law (yes, I know, that's oversimplifying it), then there is at least as much energy below the vacuum state as there is above it.

How much is here?

How powerful was the Big Bang when the universe was created?

It seems safe to say that there is plenty of energy to be had from below the vacuum state. It's only a matter of how far we can reach into the other side. (And that's pretty far.)

To paraphrase the way comedian Jay Leno might put it, "Take all you want. We'll get more."

Good Things Come In Small Packages: A Speculation

One last note of interest is that it seems to me that the more we learn about how to extract vacuum energy, the smaller the space from which we seem to be extracting it.

Consider the previously mentioned energy densities of the quantum vacuum: from 10^31 to 10^120 Joules per cubic centimeter. We are talking whopping energy from a tiny space. And that is from the vacuum state.

Could it be--that the farther we reach into the realm of negenery and negentropy (below the vacuum state), the smaller the physical space involved? And could this mean that an infinitesimal space contains infinite (neg)energy?

If indeed the Dirac Sea truly is an infinte sea of particles of negative energy, then this almost certainly is the case.

Tomorrow's "free energy" device may be nothing more than a ring on your finger--so you won't lose it!



Security Code: Security Code
Type Security Code

Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

Related Links
· More about Science
· News by vlad

Most read story about Science:
100 miles on 4 ounces of water?

Article Rating
Average Score: 4.5
Votes: 2

Please take a second and vote for this article:

Very Good


 Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

"A Commentary On Vacuum Energy" | Login/Create an Account | 6 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Re: A Commentary On Vacuum Energy (Score: 1)
by FDT on Monday, July 24, 2006 @ 13:36:14 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message)
The Dr. Simhony method, in which the energy term in the equation E=mc² is taken to mean binding energy between the electrons and the positrons, tells us that 1.02MeV is required to liberate an electron positron pair. This however does not tell us anything about the energy which is actually contained in the electron positron medium. It is merely a measure of how  far down hill the electrons and positrons already are, when they are in the bound state.

If we adopt the rotating electron positron dipole model for the electric sea,

we can then read more into the significance of the 1.02 Mev, in terms of predicting what energy actually already exists in the electric sea.

Classical orbital mechanics tells us that in order for an object in circular orbit, under an inverse square law, to escape from its orbit, it requires an additional amount of energy equal to the amount of kinetic energy which it already possesses. Hence, under the double helix model, each dipole in the orbiting bound state, already possesses 1.02 MeV of orbital kinetic energy. This translates into about 10^25 Joules per cubic centimeter.

This of course is not the whole story. There is also the potential energy which is theoretically infinite. The conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy involves the formula Q1Q2/r, where Q1 and Q2 are the charge of the electron and positron, and where r is the distance between them in the dipole. In the bound state, they keep a certain equilibrium distance from each other, probably of the order of two femtometers. If a way could be found to cause them to fall closer together, this would release kinetic energy. A total fall ending at r=0, when the electron and positron would coincide, would theoretically release infinite kinetic energy.

There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the electric sea contains an enormous supply of energy. But the question still remains as to what materials we need to interact it with, and at what temperatures, and pressures, and at what strength of magnetization, or polarization etc.

Aleatha has already suggested that the magnetocaloric effect is an example of a situation in which energy is being drawn out of the electric sea in the presence of gadolinium, while the sea is in the magnetized state. Aleatha further suggests that the energy in the sea itself would be constantly replenished. In fact, the overall pressure of the sea would result in an equilibrium which would indeed keep topping up the energy lost to the gadolinium. That situation would sustain until such times as an overall reduction in pressure of the electric sea resulted in some noticeable adverse effects in other walks of life. The speed of light is a function of the pressure of the electric sea, and would be one way of measuring any long term pressure changes in the electric sea.

Yours sincerely, David Tombe

Re: A Commentary On Vacuum Energy (Score: 1)
by nanotech on Monday, July 24, 2006 @ 14:06:44 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message)
That is very interesting! Thank you Mark Solis.

In the original Green Lantern comic storyline, he met a dying alien who gave him this power ring..which tapped the power of "white holes". Very fascinating....imagine if we could make a zero point energy/electric sea-powered device that can focus the ZP radiation energies to do all sorts of wondrous tasks.

Re: A Commentary On Vacuum Energy (Score: 1)
by Albersawa (Singularities_R_Us) on Tuesday, July 25, 2006 @ 12:08:34 GMT
(User Info | Send a Message) http://laps.noaa.gov/albers/physics/na
The sine wave applied in Soloman's paper has a unitized frequency called 'm', or electron mass.  We work here with 'c' and 'h-bar' equal to one.  Putting them back in to get a unitless argument of the sine, it should read:  sin(mtc^2/h-bar ).   The point is that the frequency is the natural frequency of the electron or something around 10^21.  Is this useful?  Also I wonder if there is radiation implied by our imposition of the electric field, and would it balance out this negative remainder?  I note a very pregnant line in sec.5, which speaks to my questioning of the radiative vacuum:  we m;ust allow charge 'q' to be small enough that larger order terms in an expansion don't matter.  Then he seems to wiggle around some, saying that really only the product 'qV' appears and has to be small.  One could also interpret  this in light of my assertion that the vacuum must offer infinitesimal charge response! 


All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.