Atmospheric Control

Electromagnetic Energy in a Glowing Spherical Shell

Weird Weather Warfare & "Energetics Weapons"
Letter by T.E. Bearden

Dear Dr. Evans (Myron):

My deepest thanks to you for this definitive statement, and my strong congratulations to you and your theoretical colleagues for this important work you have done.

Having followed the development of these extreme Russian weapons for two decades as best I could, I would like to assure the scientists receiving your message that this Russian weapon program started by 1950, and was well-underway by the mid-50s. In January 1960 Khrushchev, speaking to the Presidium, referred to such weapons as "fantastic weapons", and as "just within the portfolio of our scientists, so to speak." In short, the weapons were in final development in January 1960. They are loosely known as "energetics" weapons.

The first large energetics weapons were deployed by the Soviets in 1963. They were not yet available - fortunately - during the Cuban Missile Crisis a few months earlier, else that grave confrontation might well have had a quite different outcome.

I personally gathered open reports of hundreds of incidents of testing of these Russian weapons. The power achieved by the weapons is awesome, and very much differing from high power microwaves, lasers, and radars. For a hard reference of very good quality (multiple trained witnesses, investigation by good scientists of conventional training, etc.), eyewitness reports and the investigation of an enormous event are scientifically reported in the following two references (both should be read, as the second contains additional information).

Walker, Daniel A.; Charles S. McCreery, and Fermin J. Oliveira, "Kaitoku Seamount and the Mystery Cloud of 9 April 1984," Science, Vol. 227, Feb. 8, 1985, p. 607-611.

McKenna, Daniel L. and Daniel Walker, "Mystery Cloud: Additional Observations," Science, Vol. 234, Oct. 24, 1986, p. 412-413.

In this incident, a "cold explosion" (sharply pulsed creation of convergent EM energy in the interference zone) was created off the Kuril Islands, above the surface of the ocean. This caused rapid cooling of the localized air, and a resulting sudden insurgence of surrounding air. The result was a sharp upwelling of water and vapor sucked up from the surface of the ocean, rising rapidly to about 60,000 feet altitude, then spreading out into a large cloud. Then in the top of that cloud there appeared an intensely glowing ball (shell) of light. This shell of light then slowly and steadily expanded as a sphere, until it reached some 300 miles diameter. The electromagnetic energy in the glowing spherical shell would thus have been enormous. At that time, the center of the sphere was at an altitude of about 200 miles.

This is certainly not a natural phenomenon. Nature does not make intense little stationary balls of light in the tops of clouds, which slowly and methodically expand to spheres 300 miles in diameter and remain perfect spheres of light.

This is only one of many dozens of similar reports from around the world. Such tests were so regularly observed and reported by airline pilots flying the northern route between Japan to the U.S., that everyone lost interest and the pilots mostly ceased reporting them.

The enormous energy density achieved by these action-at-a-distance weapons is particularly significant.

I personally published citations of many of these reports I found in the open literature.

The weather control referred to by Defense Secretary Cohen is often achieved by using one or more scalar interferometers to produce slow heating in a selected small area of the atmosphere, e.g. in a chosen location over the United States. That heating produces air expansion, reduces the air’s density, and thus produces a "low pressure" area (ground pressure measurement). Simultaneously, at other selected areas, slow cooling over a selected area is produced, resulting in more dense air and therefore a "high pressure" area as measured on the ground. By slowly moving these highs and lows around, the jet streams can be entrained and deviated - and in fact "steered". By altering and steering the jet streams, one can "steer the weather". On July 4, 1976, apparently as an icon gift from the Russians for our U.S. bicentennial, regular engineering of the weather over North America and the United States was initiated (the first tests were apparently in 1967). It is still ongoing. The Russian weather engineering has also been steadily expanded over the territory of other nations, and has added cooling and heating of selected areas of ocean water as well. In short, it now involves "energy tickling" and thus "temperature alteration" of El Nino and La Nina.

These weapons cannot be explained by normal U(1) electrodynamics, since U(1) makes the term "scalar interferometry" an oxymoron. On the other hand, E.T. Whittaker in 1903 and 1904 published definitive work showing that (1) the so-called "scalar" potential is actually a bundle of bidirectional longitudinal EM waves, and (2) all EM fields, potentials, and waves are decomposable into two scalar potential functions (hence into scalar interferometry).

Dr. Evans and the AIAS theorists have just rigorously established the technical basis for the Whittaker scalar interferometry. The interferometry does indeed produce scalar potential gradients and curls in the interference zone, and in the presence of mass such as air, these scalar entities interact with the masses to produce ordinary EM fields, waves, energy, etc.

Eerily, for over a century scientists have calculated the reaction cross section of the scalar potential, never the magnitude of it. And then we have called that reaction cross section the "magnitude of the potential." If one examines the definition of the potential, one finds it defined at a point as the joules of energy collected (diverged) from those bidirectional waveflows comprising the potential, around a unit point charge assumed at that point. One need only point out that this rigorously is the reaction cross section of the potential, not the magnitude of the potential itself. The water swirling around a fixed rock in a river, is not the river. In the ideal conditions, a fixed amount of water is in the "swirl", hence the divergence of the water there has a scalar magnitude. However, the river itself is not a scalar entity, but is a vectorial entity. In the same fashion, potential is a multitude of bidirectional rivers. It is not a scalar entity at all, but is a multivectorial entity. The divergence of energy from that potential, at a point, is a scalar value.

The magnitude of the potential is indefinite. This can be seen from the very simple equation W = (phi)q, where (phi) is the reaction cross section of the potential PHI at a 3-space point in diverged/collected joules per coulomb, q is the number of diverging/collecting coulombs occupying that 3-space point, and W is the total number of joules of energy collected by the charge q. As can be seen, even from a very weak potential with a small but nonzero reaction cross section (phi), one can extract as much energy as one wishes, merely by placing sufficient charges q at sufficient 3-space points. From a single microvolt (cross section), e.g., one can collect a trillion joules of energy, given sufficient intercepting/collecting/diverging charges q.

So all our textbooks teach us to calculate the multivectorial potential’s scalar reaction cross section at a point, and call that the "magnitude of the potential’ at that point - which is a non sequitur. What is extracted from or diverged from an entity, is not the entity itself.

The O(3) electrodynamics being pioneered by Dr. Evans and others is highly significant. For the first time, scalar interferometry has been expressed in proper mathematical terms, and a paper giving this demonstration has been submitted for formal publication.

I would like to express my deep personal appreciation and congratulations to Dr. Evans and his theoretical colleagues for their strenuous efforts. Many people throughout the Western world owe them a very great debt for this important work, which is vital to the defense of our various nations and our very survival.

Most sincerely,

T.E. Bearden, Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Retired)
President, CTEC Inc.
President, American Association of Distinguished American Scientists
Fellow Emeritus, AIAS.