The power source for free energy devices is the zero point energy. Mainstream physics textbooks state that this electromagnetic field permeates all of space, and remains even at absolute 0, and is so dense that a cupful of it is sufficient to heat all the world's oceans to boiling point ( Feynman-Wheeler calculation ). Thus a device which appears to tap energy from thin air, only appears to, since it is actually tapping the zero-point energy. 'Free energy,' devices therefore conform to BOTH the first law of thermodynamics ( energy can not be created or destroyed ), and the second law of thermodynamics ( all closed systems must eventually run down - the system is not closed). Given these facts, it is surprising how many people wrongly claim 'free energy,' is a) impossible and b) against the laws of physics. Wake up, its not. Harold Aspden has now written this file, which makes it clear in terms even a complete and utter idiot should be able to understand, that extracting zero point energy is NOT AT ALL TECHNOLOGICALLY DIFFICULT.

I hope you enjoy the following sites. This list is NOT intended to be comprehensive. What I have tried to do is highlight the best material available. If you wish to research matters further, you are free to do so. For those of you who are still unsure if new / free energy concepts are valid, I have written this file, which provides very simple English explanations of how a number of technologies work. And this file looks at suppression.

Site Link	Short description of Link
http://members.aol.com/JNaudin509/index.htm	I've run out of superlatives to praise this man. I still remember when his site first started. He has moved on from the construction of free energy devices, that was too easy of course, nowadays Jean is more interested in building solid state anti-gravity planes and drawing up plans for deep space drives.... What this French genius has achived ought to make you think VERY carefully about the return the 'hot fusion,' scientific establishment makes on the billions upon billions of dollars thrown at them.... and they say we are the money wasting cranks! Jean also SHARES ALL HIS RESEACRH FOR FREE. You might want to consider following his example. Compare the guts, vision, determination, integrity, and sheer brilliance of this man, to the legions of petty skeptics out there who do absolutely nothing but moan.
http://www.himacresearch.com/	People have been building 200 mpg cars since the early 1920s, if not rather earlier. The principal is very simple indeed. You use a catalyst in the carburetor to turn the liquid oil into gas, that is vaporise it. The engine then runs with perfectly normal and well proven gas engine efficicency levels ( about 70% v. 12% - quite an improvement, with incidentally, a 95% drop in pollution). How hard was that to understand? Are any new energy 'skeptics,' who visit my site seriosuly going to claim this idea can't work?
http://www.a-55.com/	A 50% based water fuel. Nothing glamorous, but this technology deserves a lot more publicity.
http://www.hasslberger.com/	Excellent Victor Schauberger inspired site. I have no clue why the pricipals presented here are apaprently so hard to understand for the professors. Put water in a vortex, the water cools slighty, and the velocity increases. Overall, energy conserved. Vortex hydro power stations would be almost 10 times more efficicent! Invented and patented in the 1930s.... ignored ever since. Also vortex related 1, 2
http://www.hsv.com/writers/bearden/tommenu.htm	General info, including Japanese over-unity motors. I can only presume the Japanese are afraid of the economic turbulence their technology would cause, can't see why else they have not commercialised the technology.
http://www.infinite-energy.com/	Infinite energy magazine. Excellent. Worth considering subscribing, beat the news blackout the media appear to be enforcing on zero-point technology
http://www.rqm.ch/eng/pros_e1.htm	ROM energy extraction technology. Development is going well, currently they are extracting over 300 watts from the zero point energy field. Rapid scaling up of the principle is planned. Looks very promising.
http://www.energyscience.co.uk/	There are a number of interesting technologies around right now, and its obvious some kind of new theory is required to understand these breakthroughs. Relativity with its experimentally disproven insistance that the vauum is completely empty, would appear to be deeply flawed as a mental paradign with which to explore nature. The only alternative theory that really interests me is this one. The site is now one huge text book, but if you can find the time to read it all, you will be well rewarded. To summarise, Mr Aspden has spent many years experimenting in the netherlands of elctromagnetism, when conventional theory then as now, breaks down, and is inaccurate with experimental results by a factor of up to 10. Having derived some simple conclusions about the nature of space from these experiments, Harold found much to his surprise, that these same principals when applied to the bigger picture, explained all the anomalous phenomena you supposedly need Einstein's work to explain. So, its not that Einstein was wrong, so much as once you have a proper experimentally derived understanding of space, the theory appears quite unnecessary and irrelevant
http://www.exoticresearch.com/	Acting to co-ordinate people, conferences etc.
http://www.cyberportal.net/nuenergy/main.html	Radient energy Tesla / Keely / Moray. Looks like we've finally got it figured out. Give the man some champagne!
http://www.servtech.com/public/discjt/	Anti-Gravity, free energy, inertia bybass. Similar to the Hamel effect but much more expensive to build. The effect was discovered in the 50s.... anyway... Mr Searl is still not dead and I suggest you sign up as a member for $50 ( Mr Searl is honest, don't worry), and maybe this time he'll get some attention from the people that matter - hey its worth a try.
http://www.keelynet.com/	Gone off the boil recently, but still an essential bookmark. Contact fellow researchers
http://members.aol.com/overunity/html/	Looks like Jean Naudin has now (again) become the focus for research. I've put Bedini's page down to link 0. Its possible the Hamel effect alone when scaled up with neodymium magnets could solve a lot of the world's energy problems. One of the best projects for the home experimenter, can be tacked with simple radio shack magnets. Hamel research is at about the same point Adams motor research was at 5 years ago before Harold Aspden replicated and explained that device. We need more feedback from experimenters to iron out the bugs.... Also on Hamel effect 0, 1, 2, 3, 4
http://www.eagle-research.com	Milage improvers, HEAT technology
http://www.alt-energy.com/	Solar technology is available off the shelf now of course. And I've also just discovered this company. They sell a lot of excellent energy saving products, and have just introduced an innovative new generator with no moving parts
http://www.padrak.com/ine/index.shtml#SPACEENG	Institute for New Energy with many artiicles
http://www.songs.com/philo/fusion/	Farnsworth hot fusion device. It would seem the scientific establishment has made a mistake in overlooking this research.
http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Lab/1135/	The Free Energy Encyclopaedia, good & free
http://www.newphys.se/elektromagnum/physics/Kee	The famous Keelynet archives, - a must read & free
http://www.newphys.se/elektromagnum/	Free energy files
http://www.omicron-research.com/	Anti-gravity group
http://www.iinet.net.au/~steveb	Mad Scientists' lair. One of the early sites, not currently being updated
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1287/	A deicated home experimenter
http://www.keelynet.com/gravity/curtis0.htm	Another take on the Adams technology, this one is patented and should see mass production sometime soon. Hey, it looks like repeated experimental evidence proves the principle Mr Adams discovered really does work! Despite what the 'experts,' say. Anotherinteresting permament magnet design, also see the Johnson motor referenced in the patent.
http://web.globalserve.net/~lambdac/	Over-unity plasma technology, it works, but I doubt it is really suitable for the home experimenter.
http://www.josephnewman.com	I do not like the way Mr Newman presents his technology. Aspden's low key no fuss approach is more to my liking. No expensive book to buy from Aspden either.... still, his machine does appear to work, and even if I struggle to accept many of his other opinions, he still deserves support
http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html	Cold Fusion Times. Also Cold fusion the book, and Cold fusion the paper
http://biz.onramp.net/~ceti/	CETI, one of a number of small firms developing cold fusion technology. Be as Skeptical as you want, CETI were offered $15m for their patents, and that was just for the early prototypes in 1995!
http://www.linearenergy.com.au/index1.html	Promising device, 1 moving part, and cold air as output
http://www.free-energy.co.uk/	Book on lost English perpeptual motion device, that works on a gravity differential. Would work well in third world countries. One of those 'why didn't I think of that,' devices.This site gives you a feel for the principal of operation, but it would be a lot more fun if you bought the book and tried to figure it out for yourself. Try to resist the temptation. Not many brain teasers of this quality in the world.
http://www.overunity.de/over.htm	Study of over-unity phenoma from a long-standing web site
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3752/hcoler1.htm	Hans Coler device. Developed in Nazi Germany. Examined by British scientists at the end of the war. A 200 page report was made. 50 years on, the British government has decided 30 of the 200 pages can be released. i.e. enough to prove the damned thing works, but not enought to build it. Bastards... and people say governments don't suppress new energy technology! Also reference Harold Aspden's site for more info.
http://www.tesla.org/	International Tesla Society. They do a lot of excellent conferences, check to see if there is one upcoming
http://www.trufax.org/menu/energy.html	Part of the Leading Edge reasearch home pages
http://www.dnai.com/~zap/	More general info with a very unfortunate Christian slant that devalues some of the information on offer
http://colossus2.cvl.bcm.tmc.edu/~wje/free_energy/	The free energy page
http://www.homepower.com/	Products for the home
http://www.open.org/davidc/	Gyroscopic inertial thrusters
http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/	IMB patent index, images last 10 years, abstracts since 71
http://www.keelynet.com/magsourc.htm	Wanting to experiment? Good sources for the excellent neodymium magnets
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/3664/	This nice man was kind enough to link to my site, so I return the favor
End of Table

Quick access to this site is provided through the url http://www.geocities.com/timharwoodx

Please use this graphic to link to this page if you have a website ( only 3.3kb ) - Right click the mouse button on the image, select 'save image as...'

Scientific American maganzine( December 1997, pp. 82-85) has recently been publishing articles rubishing the zero point energy which conclude,'if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.' Now, I have to take them to task for publishing this sort of marterial. Why? Because scientists always scoff at new ideas, and claim that they are 'impossible.' Mainstream scientists of the day always miss the boat for new technology. Nothing ever changes there. Still, you might think people would have learned this by now - some have, but not scientific American apparently. The case of the Wright brothers among many others, proves to be highly enlightening. They were dubunked by Scientic American ( the very same people debunking zero point energy - good track record guys ) as frauds. I'm serious, I do not have to make this stuff up. The fact that the Wright brothers had given public demonstrations to thousands, did not change the minds of anyone at scientific American magazine. Because they all knew for a fact, that heavier than air travel was against all the known laws of physics, and would not be possible for 5000 years. After all, 'if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.' So heavier than air travel must be impossible. I don't know if Scientific American ever apologised to the Wright brother for their slander, but I suspect not. The article also gos on to claim money is being diverted away from real science to zero point fantasy. Sure, like spending $500m a year on hot fusion for no result is money very well spent ( lots of fat paychecks for the professors ), but $5m a year on the zero point is ripping off the american tax payer! Twisted logic to put it mildly. I Guess 100 years ago they would have demanded hot air baloon research got massive funding to build air ships, while this heavier than air fantasy was strictly denied any funding.

Moving on, Edison of all people suffered a similar fate at the hands of the 'experts,' with the newfangled electric light bulb idea of his which was also impossible and against all the known laws of physics. That he had lit up his local neighbourhood with his electric lamps was not enough proof, and he was 'debunked,' by many leading scientists and periodicals of his day. For example, from the New York Times, January 16, 1880, 'after a few more flashes in the pan, we shall hear very little more of Edison or his electric lamp. Every claim he makes has been tested and proved impracticable.' Third example, read this book about the story of longitude. And final example, read any decent book on the history of jet engines. Sir Frank Whittle was ridiculed as a dreamy young man when he said not only might jet engines work (gasp), but that they might even be faster and better than conventional prop planes (wow). It was only WW2 which finally enabled Frank to get funding. The fact Frank was not given funding earlier, I think its fair to say, crippled Britain's war effort. When reading up on free energy, you might want to keep some of this scientific history in mind, and wonder if there are some new chapters to books on scientific blunders and narrow-mindedness waiting to be written.

The Search for Free Energy

Lets cut the bull here, a lot of peple think we're still searching for free / clean / new energy. WE'RE NOT. Clean energy options in the shape of Schauberger turbines and Pogue carburetors have been around since the 1930s. The Adams over-unity motor was inventned in the early seventies, the design of which was publically given away, admittedly in a rather cryptic manner, in 1992 by the frustrated inventor. I provide simple english, explanations for how all those devices work. Its not about finding free energy, its about getting technlogies which in some cases have been around for over half a century into mass production. Free energy has NEVER EVER EVER been a technology problem, ALWAYS ALWAYS a poltical one. Now, with the rise of the internet, I have to say there is quite simply no longer ANY EXCUSE for not implementing these technologies. And why the hell don't enviromental groups promote these technologues, instead of climbing around on oil rigs and doing stupid publicity stunts? Could it be enviromentalists are just a bunch of anarchists who don't actually give a damn about the environment? Maybe.

For the record the American government currently has a gagging order in effect on several thousand patents click here if you want to see the legislation involved. Thats how America works, the land of freedom and opportunity, yup, sure thing.

On the same theme grabbed from another site

Arthur C. Clarke characterized the four successive stages of response to any new and revolutionary innovation as follows:

1. It's crazy!
2. It may be possible -- so what?
3. I said it was a good idea all along.
4. I thought of it first.

The Aharonov-Bohm effect, predicted in 1959, required nearly 30 years after its 1960 demonstration by Chambers until it was begrudgingly accepted. Mayer, who discovered the modern thermodynamic notion of conservation of energy related to work, was hounded and chastised so severely that he suffered a breakdown. Years later, he was lionized for the same effort! Wegener, a German meteorologist, was made a laughing stock and his name became a pseudonym for "utter fool," because he advanced the concept of continental drift in 1912. In the 1960s the evidence for continental drift became overwhelming, and today it is widely taught and part of the standard science curriculum. Gauss, the great mathematician, worked out nonlinear geometry but kept it firmly hidden for 30 years, because he knew that if he published it, his peers would destroy him. In the 1930s Goddard was ridiculed and called "moon-mad Goddard" because he predicted his rocketry would carry men to the moon. Years later when the Nazi fired V-1 and V-2 rockets against London, those rockets used the gyroscopic stabilization and many other features discovered and pioneered by Goddard. And as everyone knows, rocketry did indeed carry men to the moon. Science has a long and unsavory history of severely punishing innovation and new thinking. In the modern world such scientific suppression of innovation is uncalled-for, but it is still very much the rule rather than the exception.

A huge thankyou to all the people who have visited this web page since March 1998 resulting in hits. And thats a genuine count started from 0. I hope you have found this page, the main reason I started my web site, to be extremely interesting. Personally, I regard it as the best single introduction to free energy available, be it on the web, or in print e.g. Don't bother buying The Anti-Gravity Handbook, or The Coming Energy Revolution. So, I've got you straight to what works and saved you a huge amount of research time, SO NOW GO BUILD THINGS AND CHANGE THE WORLD!

Theories links Lesser companion page to this one.

Health links Including the rediscovered electronic frequency device, which you can easily build from off the shelf parts, which cured 16 /16 cancer patients in a government trial in the 1930s. The main problem with the device is that it is going to put the drugs companies out of business..... so don't expect to evern see any government or corporate support for it.