Table of Contents

A little less than 100 years ago, two bicycle mechanics showed that the scientific establishment was dead-wrong about the "impossibility" of heavier- than-air flight. On December 17, 1903, Orville and Wilbur Wright burned their names into history at Kitty Hawk, though it took five more years — not until late 1908 with a flight demonstration at Ft. Myer, Virginia — for the Establishment's media organs even to acknowledge that the Wrights had pulled off a scientific and technological coup. Following the Wrights' seminal achievement, the next hundred years witnessed a revolution in transportation and commerce. Then astronautics built upon aviation with explosive technology— giving rise to communications satellites, weather satellites, and voyages to the Moon, planets, asteroids, and comets. Space exploration has been severely hampered, to be sure, by the lack of an energy source much more potent than chemical combustion, and spaceflight has been saddled by a restrictive physics that is built on the shakiest of foundations. That is about to change, with a revolution in electricity that has a lot to do with the fundamental physics of the universe.

It is a little over a century after much of our world began to have access to widely distributed electric power, thanks to the pioneering by Nikola Tesla of polyphase alternating current. This began in 1896 with the generation of electricity at Niagara Falls and its transmission to other parts of New York. But Tesla's plans were far greater. He wanted to launch a world of free energy —one in which electric power could be tapped by anyone at any point on Earth via "wireless transmission." Despite that great genius's mostly unrecognized impact on civilization, an era of free energy did not break out; Tesla's hopes were put on hold. His famous 187-foot Wardenclyffe transmission tower on Long Island was erected in 1903. It's ostensible purpose had been for global radio communication, but Tesla's driving ambition for it had been to launch wireless power transmission as well. This was not to be. Financial reversals and other problems led to the tower's destruction; it was sold for scrap in 1917. But the quest for free energy did not die. Just as there had been many failed aeronautical pioneers toward the latter part of the 19th century, so there were to be many failures in the quest for free energy —and some near-miss successes— throughout the 20th century.

Though we have seen many dead-end detours on the road to free energy, it may be that 2003 will mark a turning point in that journey. Victory is long overdue! Today, many solid strands of research in free energy are coming together, and the final triumph of limitless, clean energy is very much within reach. In fact, sad to say, the primary ingredient holding back a raging breakout of a New Energy revolution is R&D money— in the right hands, of course! Foremost among the hopeful developments in New Energy is the recognition of the work of Tesla himself, though free energy will not come in the way the great inventor had planned it. Most likely there will be no generalized wireless transmission of power, but there will be free energy tapped from the vacuum state—the aether—at countless distributed sites with compact free energy devices. Thus, the inevitable end of the power-grid— just as Tesla had envisioned. This is in the process of happening as legitimate aether physics is recovered from the impending wreckage of Einsteinian relativity and its fiction of the "nothingness" of so-called "space-time." I draw the attention of those readers with a more mathematical physics bent to the compendious work of Dr. Paulo and Alexandra Correa on their www.aetherometry.com website. There one will find precisely how matters went astray, beginning in the 19th century, and continuing with the many limiting fictions under which physics still labors.

If one does not care to probe the details, but wants to see prototype plasma power and self-sustaining aether motors in operation, there is now a 100-minute DVD, "From Plasma Power to the Aether Motor," which can be ordered from www.aethera.org. Dr. Harold Aspden, an aether theorist himself and former director of IBM's European patent operations (from 1963 to 1983), introduces the Correa technology by describing how electromagnetic theory went astray as early as the 1820s! Seeing the DVD may not exactly bring one to "believing," but it is the next best thing. My hard-fast testimonial based on hands-on testing and familiarity with the physics and its discoverers, is that this technology is for real—there is no hanky panky involved, no concealed batteries, etc. This is the first time in the quest for free energy from the aether that such pedigreed devices have appeared in accessible public view.

No less than three types of free energy technologies are displayed in operation and testing: 1. The mid-1990s patented pulsed plasma power Pulsed Abnormal Glow discharge (PAGD^TM) reactor devices, powering spinner motors and spinning up flywheels (50 watts of DC electricity in, 500 watts mechanical power out); 2. Patent-applied-for self-running Aether/ORgone Motor-Converter technology, stemming from the work of Nikola Tesla and Wilhelm Reich— motors that are driven by aether energy captured with "orgone accumulators," by vacor (evacuated) glass tubes, and even by ungrounded human bodies! and 3. Stirling motors driven not by fuel combustion, but operated anomalously from a hybrid orgone accumulator chamber during both daylight and deep into a cold Canadian night. The pioneering documentary is filled with simple demonstrations of massfree aether energy —from the vacuum, the ground, the atmosphere, and human bodies. This illustrates the existence of an energy realm which has heretofore been both ignored and grossly misunderstood. Yes, there is an intimate connection between physics and biophysics—as some of the more effective complementary medical approaches have long suggested. "Qi" energy is not just some "New Age" term; it's for real, and its physics can increasingly be understood qualitatively and quantitatively.

Now for "cold fusion," the indisputably verified —and most widely validated of the emerging free energy technologies. The field is more properly referred to as LENR— Low Energy Nuclear Reactions. In effect, the science has become modern alchemy! The transmutation of heavy elements is shown to occur with remarkable ease in certain systems. Though LENR technological energy devices appeared to be imminent in the mid-1990s, various materials problems with thin- film metal coatings in electrochemical cells produced a severe setback. Now new gas-type cells are showing much greater promise. Furthermore, the offshoot from cold fusion launched by Dr. Randell Mills in 1991, a kind of new hydrogen physics revision of modern quantum mechanics, appears to be blossoming at the well-funded BlackLight Power Corporation in New Jersey (see www.blacklightpower.com). Dr. Mills and his colleagues have just had an article published by the American Journal of Physics (December 2002)— a sign of the establishment cracking perhaps?

The year 2003 could be a great turning point for LENR, because cold fusion will, indeed, "return to MIT," my alma mater, which has rightly been called the "bastion of skepticism" against cold fusion. MIT is usually only too happy to lend its official imprint and sponsorship to conferences on subjects of scientific and technological importance. But on August 24-29, 2003, when the Tenth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF10) meets in Cambridge, Massachusetts, it will not be at MIT. Instead, cold fusion scientists will convene a few blocks away from MIT at the Royal Sonesta Hotel. They will come from Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Russia, the U.K., the United States, and elsewhere—a struggling, highly underfunded community of researchers. Will MIT President Charles Vest or any other high- level MIT dignitary be there to welcome the participants? Not a chance. The organizing chairman of ICCF10, who will greet the attendees, is MIT Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Peter L. Hagelstein, who in April 1989 became one of the earliest proponents of coherent metal lattice dynamics theories as the underlying generic mechanism for cold fusion phenomena. That academic "impropriety" has earned Hagelstein no honors at MIT—quite the contrary.

We are now almost 14 years into the cold fusion controversy, which began with the March 23, 1989 announcement by Drs. Fleischmann and Pons at the University of Utah. The more things change, the more they stay the same: Less than twelve hours after the 1989 cold fusion announcement, the Exxon Valdez (recently de-commissioned for scrap in 2002!) had run aground and spilled millions of gallons of oil into the pristine waters off Alaska. In November 2002, another oil tanker has spilled a few million more gallons, off the coast of Spain; it has sunk to the ocean floor and will likely continue to exude oil for years. Had the scientific process gone they way it should have, cold fusion by now might have begun to end oil spills forever, as the horrors of the Fossil Fuel Age receded.

On April 14, 1989 during the height of the cold fusion furor, Professor Hagelstein gave a talk on cold fusion theory at MIT to a packed, closed-door meeting of a few hundred faculty and staff who hung on and debated his every word. On November 4, 2002, Hagelstein gave an open-door cold fusion seminar in the very same room at MIT, this one under the auspices of his department's Research Laboratory for Electronics (RLE). The talk in the oak-paneled Grier room was, indeed, smallish, not well attended. About ten of those present were the "converted" already — myself, other MIT graduates Dr. Mitchell Swartz and Dr. Brian Ahern, retired MIT Prof. Keith Johnson, Dr. Graham Hubler from the Naval Research Laboratory, and a few others. The others were mostly students. There were only a few professorial-looking people there. None of the bitter enemies of cold fusion came—the subject has been so killed off, in their view I'm sure, that there was no need to show up.

A most important MIT person was at the meeting —MIT Prof. Mildred Dresselhaus, who during the last year or so of the Clinton Administration headed the US DoE Office of Energy Science. She had signed the negative DoE report in 1989, but has been friendly with Prof. Hagelstein for many years, and to her credit has continued to be interested in cold fusion. But during her brief stint at DoE, Dresselhaus evidently didn't pull any strings for greater openness toward cold fusion either at DoE or at MIT, though she could have. This is cowardice, plain and simple. She failed to stand up for what she evidently can see is something that obviously needs a second chance—an official re-evaluation. Today, with no help from Dresselhaus, a handful of cold fusioneers in official and semi-official positions are engaged in an effort, likely to be futile, to bring about a $10 million cold fusion rebellion from within DoE! Hope springs eternal among the desperate. But I wish the rebels well and, other than these remarks, I won't "blow their cover." Most likely, a cold fusion Renaissance will come from private sources of funding. In fact, for this and other reasons, in late 2002 we formed the non-profit New Energy Foundation, Inc. in New Hampshire (IRS 501c3 tax-deductible status applied for), to raise desperately needed research funds for quality pioneering R&D in the New Energy field.

After almost 14 years in the Cold Fusion War, I've personally had quite enough of the Establishment's shenanigans. We spend billions and billions of dollars on all manner of dead end projects, and this "little project" of cold fusion—with potentially huge consequences—is given nothing at all. In fact it is kicked down endlessly by paid thugs—the hot fusioneers and the well-funded "theory-of-everything" high energy physicists. Now cold fusion is simply dead, as far as the academic gangsters are concerned.

Does the world want free energy badly enough to find some way to pay for this research? If most governments won't fund it, will entrepreneurs and venture capitalists? Not many of the latter have stepped forward. And if venture capitalists won't fund LENR or aether energy, who will? Will people of generous spirit consider donating tax-deductibly with targeted contributions for this research through the mechanism of a charitable foundation (www.infinite- energy.com)? One can hope. The grand experiment has begun in a possible turning point year.