ReviewLetters Sec. 80 Rev. August 21, 2007
< Gravity Concepts >
Light Speed vs Special Relativity Force Interactions RF Energy Concept
< Radiant Press
< Gravity Shield < Gravity Anoma < Rad.-Energy
< Inertia & Magnetism < Field Propel < Rad. Images
False Constant Lite Spd < Grav. Links
< Prev Pg < Contents Bottom \/ Next Pg >
This listing of reviews and correspondence is presented to provide a short
history and an indication of the public's interest in the model. These pro and
con responses from other researchers cover the history back to circa 1975. The
latest version of the paper
is available at the web site URL http://www.netcom.com/~sbyers11
The intent is to condense the reviews and still provide an objective history with the pro and con responses presented as received. In collecting the old reviews it becomes evident that paper copies of documents are very valuable. Digital records are expedient, but the rapid changes in computers, programs and media over a few years make retrieval of old digital records impractical.
The following letter is a copy of the original write up of the radiation and shadowing concept that was eventually sent to the National Science Foundation and others. The reviews will be presented by contact groups and chronological order.
Monday, May 25, 1975
A physical concept has occurred to me that seems to explain many other physical laws. The basis of the concept is the existence of omni directional energy flowing in free space and the absorption or diversion of this flow by atomic matter. A particle (object) of matter in ideal free space would be evenly illuminated and if it absorbed energy the resultant forces would be balanced. Since the earth absorbs energy, a particle (object) drifting near earth would be shadowed from below and would be forced to earth by the unbalanced energy above. This force (on the particle)* is normally called gravity.
This same concept of unbalanced energy flow can be used to explain the following forces:
Magnetic attraction and repulsion
Electrostatic attraction and repulsion
The omni directional energy shadow emanating from an absorbing earth can be closely compared to a point source light system. The shadow effect would decrease inversely proportional to the square of the distance.
Shadow Darkness = Orig. Darkness / Distance Squared
Therefore our normal inverse square law of our three force equations could be the same energy shadow equation. The unbalanced force is directly proportional to the shadow effect. In a system with ray diffusion the equation would be more complex.
Electrostatic Force F= (K Q1 Q2) / R squared
Gravitational Force F= (G M1 M2) / R squared
Magnetic Force F= (U M1 M2) / 4 pi R squared
Light Illuminance E
from point source I E= I / R squared
The force constants would vary and be determined by which energy frequencies they were interacting with.
It is expected that different atomic elements interact with different frequencies (colors) of energy and their similar one directional shadows cause unbalanced forces to bring similar elements together, thus canceling the shadows and regaining force balance. This would compare to two one-way mirrors being forced together in an omni directional light space.
Energy shadows can be omni or unbalanced in direction. Shadows can be created by: nuclear capture, reflection, focus, moderation, diversion, polarization, and scatter.
It also seems probable that there are forms of frequencies of energy in space that we cannot detect that contribute to the forces.
The repulsion of the magnetic and electrostatic forces I believe is due to the focusing of an energy flow in one direction and shadow emanating from the other pole.
I have heard of research work in magnetism and super conduction where they think that magnetic lines of force may be nuclear particle flow. I expect that these people may be close to finding this energy shadow force concept in the labs.
It appears that the energy flow through an object towards earth (gravity) could be modulated by a proper combination of magnetic, electrostatic and nuclear shielding, or other energy diverting means.
This concept seems to be a more satisfying way to explain the three forces that act through a distance than the lines of force concept.
Stanley V. Byers
Thurs. May 28, 1975
* Clarification added 2001
< Prev Pg < Contents Top Pg /\ Bottom \/
There were ten copies of the above concept paper generated. A partial list of the addressees is as follows:
From this response from NSF it is obvious that they mistakenly think the radiation and shadowing concept paper has proposed a material Aether composed of a cosmic particle rain. I do agree that a particle rain Aether will not provide a logical cause for forces at a distance. They apparently had taken my example of gravity acting on a particle and assumed that I was proposing a particulate rain as the cause of gravity. Other readers made the same assumption so I believe the mistake must be attributed to the manner in which the example was presented. There is no place in the original letter that I intended to propose a material particle rain as a cause for gravity. The radiation is the prime cause and is called an "omni-directional energy flow' and is also referred to as "frequencies".
A second letter was sent to NSF on Dec. 28, 1975 expanding the concept and presenting the original Oct. 13, 1975 planet density graph. The latest version of this graph is provided below.
Thumbnail size graphs, figures and letters may be seen in full size by selecting and clicking the thumbnail images. Returning to this page is accomplished by clicking the back arrow of your browser.
It can be seen in the last paragraph that the NSF has advised me to send a copy of the radiation shadowing concept for gravity and remote forces to the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.
From my paper records a condensation of my 1978 letter to the USAF Office of Scientific Research (AFSC) is re-typed into digital format here. We did not have a computer available until 1981.
< Prev Pg < Contents Top Pg /\ Bottom \/
Aug. 25, 1978
US Air Force
Office of Scientific Research
Washington, D.C. 20032
I have enclosed a research paper "Energy Pressure Theory of Unified Force"..... I expect the Air Force is conducting research to discover the basis of... field propulsion and may have already considered the energy pressure theory.
The USAF interpretation of the paper "Nature of Gravitation" from Russia (FTD-TT-64-323) is a good review of the energy pressure theory as applied to gravitational (force only).
If cosmic isotropic radiant energy is the mechanism by which all "forces at a distance" function, it should be possible to use existing technology to modify this prime energy flow, and achieve gravitational interaction. Existing technology is presently interacting with a large portion of the known electromagnetic energy spectrum. With some modification in quantity and approach the same technology may achieve interaction with the prime radiant energy.
Most of the proofs presented with this paper are based on data from planetary motion. It is possible that other confirming data may already exist in spacecraft tracking records. Accurate tracking data of the moon or spacecraft during an eclipse of the sun or moon should prove helpful.
If our government wishes to keep this work confidential they should express interest soon. I intend to reveal this work.... if the government declines.
Signed Stanley V. Byers
From an overall view, the above two responses were welcome and taken as a pro view of the concept. In view of the fact that The National Science Foundation had advised me to contact the Air Force Office of Scientific Research,... then the Air Force advised me to contact the National Science Foundation,... I did not make any more attempts to contact these government organizations again until I provided them with an updated version of the paper, circa 1990's.
< Prev Pg < Contents Top Pg /\ Bottom \/
Shortly after this radiation and shadowing concept occurred to me, I realized that extensive writing would be necessary if I hoped to have others understand the system. Since I had accumulated very little writing experience I decided it would be best if I found an experienced writer that would be willing to work with me on the project. With this in mind I first contacted the San Francisco office of McGraw Hill. This occurred even before I had sent the first concept paper to the National Science foundation and others.
My first contact there was with Mr. Tom Carmody at McGraw Hill. He showed an immediate understanding of the radiation and shadowing system and provided some very helpful suggestions. He alerted me to the availability of the valuable reports from the Gravity Research Foundation awards system, which was supported by Roger W. Babson. He also planned to contact Mr. Charles Anderson of Stanford Research Foundation for an introduction,... and he would contact McGraw Hill's New York office to determine if they were interested in the project. I have no recollection or record of the outcome of these proposed contacts.
Mr. Carmody then introduced me to Mr. Bernard Cole, Manager of Electronics McGraw Hill at the San Francisco Office. After a short discussion of the project they suggested that I obtain a lawyer for my interests and also obtain an experienced writer for co-authorship. After the McGraw Hill meeting I felt quite encouraged, as I took their response to be supportive of the concept.
I proceeded with a search for an experienced co-author. The following is a censored condensation of the letter sent to a local well known author who was recommended by others. He tried to be helpful,... but he ended up sending the copy number six of the original concept paper to Dr. Harold Puthoff of Stanford Research Institute (SRI) , without asking for or receiving my authorization.
The unauthorized receipt of the paper,...
"Energy Pressure Theory of Remote Forces",
was followed by Puthoff's et al discovery and publications of their concept,...
Zero Point Energy Pressure Theory of Remote Forces. (ZPE)
Dear Dr. xxxx,...(experienced writer)
A new concept which I believe is a significant development concerning the physical laws of inertia and mass attraction has been conceived. There is existing independent evidence that supports the concept. Additional evidence is available through a minimal investigative effort. Conclusive evidence may require a significant laboratory and engineering development project. The concept is such that no new technology should be required for proof or development. The presently available technology applied in the framework of the concept should shortly provide verification. ....
I am seeking a technical author interested in developing the necessary scientific papers and books necessary for the professional presentation of the concept. I would like to meet you to explain the concept and discuss the aspects of the proposed business. .... I am enclosing a resume of my work experience to lend credibility to this unbelievable letter.
I am confident you will be completely fascinated with this development and I am anxious to reveal it to you.
In case you decide in favor of contacting me, I have enclosed my business and home addresses. Please feel free to contact me any time. Evenings and weekends may prove to be the best times, since I travel around the Bay area during the week.
If you cannot consider writing the work, you may be able to suggest another writer
Signed Stan Byers
Via phone conversations with the above writer, Dr. xxxx, it was decided that he would arrange a meeting with SRI personnel to allow me to present the concept to them. I presumed that if the SRI personnel were receptive of the concept that he would consider helping me with the writing task. The following is a letter that I sent to him prior to confirming a planned meeting with SRI. I also provided him with copy number six of the original concept paper that I wished to keep confidential.
Dear Dr. xxxx...(experienced writer)
I would like to explain the concept to you prior to any presentation to SRI personnel.
I am confident there will be no problem in understanding the necessary principals. A trial presentation prior to any group presentation seems advisable.
Any arrangements you can make for time or place is acceptable with me. If we have not made an arrangement by Friday I will make a short call at your home Friday at 7 pm to make a later appointment.
Hope to hear from you soon.
< Prev Pg < Contents Top Pg /\ Bottom \/
For some long forgotten reason our proposed meeting with his SRI friends did not occur. With my concern for
the confidentiality of the concept paper I called the Dr. xxxx and requested that
he return the copy number 6 of the paper. He informed me that he no longer had
the paper because he had given it to Dr. Harold Puthoff of SRI, but he did not
provide me with the phone number to contact his friend.
I then started trying to call Dr. Puthoff at SRI but I was not able to contact him on the phone. I did not have Puthoff's private office number nor home number, so I could only call the front office and leave messages. With my calls and messages remaining unanswered, I decided to go to SRI and try to call on him without an appointment. The SRI building had restricted access, so the guard looked up Dr. Puthoff's phone number and would only call and talk to Puthoff's office himself. I was advised that Puthoff was not available for a meeting with me. That was OK, since I had taken the precaution to read Puthoff's private number, reading upside down across the desk, when the guard was looking it up in a computer printout. I left with out talking to or knowing if Puthoff was there or not. Armed with his private office phone number I was able to call him within a few days. One of his first questions was to determine how I had obtained his phone number. So much for stonewalling and government high tech security.
I explained that he had obtained my concept paper on the Energy Pressure Theory without my authorization and I would like to have it returned. He advised me that he had not yet read the paper.
With the fact in mind that he had the paper and I had the hope that Puthoff may still be able to convince Dr. xxxx to help write the project, I proceeded to explain and sell the concept to Puthoff. Since the radiation and shadowing concept is geometric, I was able to explain the system over the phone. Dr. Puthoff paid attention through the complete presentation and gave no indication that he had heard of the concept prior to the tutoring. Experienced teachers know when the student comes to the point of understanding of the subject. Students also do not sit through an involved explanation if they have already mastered the subject system. If one tries to tell a person the way to San Jose and the person already knows the way to San Jose,... the traveler lets you know that he knows the way to San Jose.
Puthoff came to an understanding of the concept via the phone and gave no indication that he had prior knowledge of the radiation and shadowing system. He retained the copy number six of the concept paper which he had obviously not yet read.
The discussion soon turned to characterizing the background radiation.
He suggested that the prime radiation may be related to the concept of dark radiation
that he said is popular in the occult sciences. Dr. Puthoff's name has been well
known for his government sponsored work in the field of extrasensory perception
(ESP). At that stage in my development of the radiation concept it was my belief
that the prime radiation consisted of frequencies well above that of gamma rays. Since I
had no knowledge of nor interest in the occult
sciences I did not argue with his suggestion nor try to change his concept of
the "dark" radiation".
I did consider his response to be pro toward the radiant energy and shadowing concept. Dr. Harold Puthoff and I did maintain frequent phone contact for a period from the fall of 1975, into the summer of 1976, discussing the radiant energy and shadowing concept. With an interest in helping he provided the following copies and references to related works by others:
The following are copies of letters that Puthoff sent concerning the project. There is little doubt that the letters provide a pro view of the concept. Upon receiving the first letter I was completely surprised to see that he was claiming that he had prior knowledge of and subscribed to the same concept a few years back,.. which was prior to receiving my phone instructions and my concept paper. He had neglected to mention his prior knowledge of the concept during my initial efforts in explaining and discussing the isotropic radiation and shadowing concept paper with him. Of course if he had disclosed his prior knowledge of the concept during our phone conversations it would not have been necessary for him to repeat the disclosure in the letter. If he had disclosed prior knowledge during the phone explanation, it would have been a shock to me, and I am sure it would have changed the manner in which I initially described the concept to him. It was thoughtful of him to provide this information about his supporting view and prior knowledge in the December letter. Claiming existence of prior knowledge and advising me of the unsubstantiated claim of prior knowledge,... after receiving my explanations and concept paper,... justifies his later publications of a parallel concept with a different title and under his name without concern about plagiarism or the need for providing a citation.
< Prev Pg < Contents Top Pg /\ Bottom \/
During the period of contact with Puthoff , I had been experimenting with the objective of causing an unbalance in a DC electromagnet. In an effort to obtain field propulsion thrust, I was using 300,000 volts DC on a shield around the electromagnet, hoping to deflect and unbalance the E field flow. This model views the magnetic line (B field) as a solenoidal flow in the E field spectra. This E force field radiation flow is "not" viewed as Electromagnetic radiation in this model or in any model to my knowledge. The E force field radiation is modeled here as a subspectra of the Prime radiation. In the early versions of this paper, Prime radiation was called Energy Pressure. In order to distinguish the balanced isotropic Prime radiation from energy and potential energy, the term energy pressure has been avoided in subsequent versions.
Puthoff published papers on this radiation and shadowing concept circa 1987, Ref. Physical Review D 35, 3266 and the following web links:
EarthTech International, Inc http://www.earthtech.org/publications/
California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics- Research http://www.calphysics.org/newtech.html
Society for Scientific Exploration www.scientificexploration.org/
Many of his papers, starting circa 1987, are available on the web. In order to compare his claimed prior development of the radiation and shadowing concept with the concept paper he obtained in 1975,... it would be of interest to obtain any links to his or his colleagues prior original papers. From his post 1987 papers, that I have reviewed, the only difference between his work and the above 1975 original concept paper, in my opinion, is that he has limited his papers to the study of gravitational force and does not try to attribute the other inverse square remote forces to the radiation and shadowing concept or any cause whatsoever. He has also abandoned his suggested concept of dark radiation as the medium and has proposed that the radiation medium consists of high frequency electromagnetic radiation, which he calls Zero Point Energy (ZPE). He equates force and shadowing interaction of matter to the Lorentz (electromotive) force. He and his colleagues from the Society for Scientific Exploration have restricted their papers to the remote forces of gravity and inertia as related to the radiation and shadowing of the ZPE. In some of his papers he suggests that ZPE causes the jiggle of the particles and the jiggle of the particles charge generates the ZPE radiation.
< Prev Pg < Contents Top Pg /\ Bottom \/
The phenomenon of ZPE as first observed was not connected in any way to the concepts of inverse square forces. The concept of Zero Point Energy appears to have originated circa early 1900's, when it was found that atoms retain some vibratory movement when the temperature has been reduced to a point near absolute Zero. This is evidenced by the fact that some liquids do not freeze at absolute zero degrees. Why Puthoff et al, attribute the ZPE motion and the Casimir force between plates, to the existence of an electromagnetic background radiation is unknown. In a restricted environment where EM radiation is the only recognized form of energy wave radiation, this view is understandable.
If one attributes the remote forces of gravity and inertia to Electromagnetic (ZPE) radiation and its shadowing, then how do we model the remaining remote forces, such as the strong force, electric charge, magnetism and EM radiation. Since the E and B force fields are required to propagate EM radiation, it is not possible to attribute the cause of these three forces to a medium of EM radiation (ZPE). Therefore, with their ZPE (EM radiation) system, a second universal isotropic radiation medium (prime radiation ?) will have to be proposed to provide a cause for the remote forces of strong force, E , B and EM radiation and the inertia of neutrons.
When the medium of EM radiation (ZPE) is modeled as a cause for the inertia in matter, another paradox appears. This occurs when EM radiation is said to have momentum, and therefore causes inertia in matter via impinging interaction. If momentum exists in their ZPE (EM) radiation, then their model has no original cause for the inertial force in radiation or matter. The existence of inertia has been assumed, with out an original cause. This same paradox exists with the material Aether Model of the 1800's.
The publications of Dr. Puthoff and his colleagues have brought much needed
public attention to the concept of radiation and shadowing as a cause of remote forces.
NASA's project Breakthrough Propulsion and the parallel British project Greenglow have had Puthoff's write-up of the radiation and shadowing concept presented as center pieces at their seminars.
It appears that my quest for help from an interested technical writer was successful, but this type of help is not what I was looking for.
The next significant contact effort was made to the Westinghouse Corp. in Feb. 14, 1980. Since I was obtaining conflicting and confusing responses from the many government contacts, I thought that I may have a better chance of obtaining a focused response from an industrial organization. It becomes obvious that this was wishful thinking. The following is a condensed copy of the first letter sent to Westinghouse.
February 14, 1980
Robert E. Kirby CEO
Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Dear Mr. Kirby,
A technical paper, "Energy Pressure Theory of Unified Force" has been completed that relates the physical forces that act through a distance to a common cause. The paper includes a substantial list of significant proofs and data that support the theory. With this theoretical model, for the first time, various experimental paths become self-evident that may lead to the artificial control of the effect of gravity on an object.
An earlier copy of the paper was sent to the Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR). A copy of their letter of response is enclosed. Although I was pleased with their recognition of the paper, their exact response was completely unexpected. In my opinion it says that the theory and proofs warrant further study,... but belong in the field of gravitational theory, which is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF).
I had fully expected that if the AFOSR thought the theory warranted further study, they would immediately offer support in refining existing proofs and defining the experimental paths that may lead to interaction. I had previously contacted the National Science Foundation and they had advised me to send a copy to the AFOSR. The AFOSR in the enclosed letter advised me to contact the NSF. For the above reasons I think it would be best to obtain Westinghouse support in forming a professional proposal to our government.
If a Westinghouse review of the concept results in additional support, it is believed that the United States Government interest and funding will soon follow.
Credibility for the concept cannot be established through the normal channel of publication, since the concept may lead to early developments of significant value. Initial credibility is best indicated by the letter from AFOSR. Colleagues in the Department of Energy and the Stanford Research Institute have also expressed interest in pursuing the study.
Presently academic groups embrace the subject of gravity modification with the same enthusiasm as that reserved for the subject of perpetual motion. Since this is a scientifically forbidden subject , I wish to ensure that Westinghouse does not hastily dismiss this paper through misunderstanding or because of an incomplete review. Therefore, prior to requesting that Westinghouse review the paper, I would like to establish a written agreement specifying the minimum effort to be expended for the review.
If the review results in Westinghouse support I would expect our first goal would be to affirm AFOSR interest. This would no doubt consist of proposals for tests similar to those proposed in the AFOSR letter. There are additional tests to establish early feasibility that should provide a more traditional form of evidence than the AFOSR proposals.
The reference list from the subject paper has been enclosed. These works should prove of value to provide background prior to a complete review.
If Westinghouse wishes to pursue this study, I can be contacted through my home address.
Signed, Stanley V. Byers
The following is a copy of the response from the Westinghouse patent department. In view of the fact that the paper had not been published, nor had the process been patented,.. it appeared to me that there was no protection for the paper other than an agreement of confidentially. Although I was and still am a complete novice in any patent or legal matters, this response seemed completely ridiculous from my laymen's viewpoint.
This response may be a good example of why laymen and lawyers should not try to correspond. This above response is proposing the exact agreement that I was trying carefully to avoid. From my viewpoint, Westinghouse was asking me to disclose everything without even providing me with a receipt or a hand shake with a promise of confidentiality. Needless to say, I did not pursue further contact with them. Patent and legal departments should not be performing public relations, sales or technical functions.
Web page address URL http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/ReviewLetters.htm
Web site by: email@example.com
< Prev Pg < Contents Top Pg /\ Next Pg >