Newman's Energy Machine

 

                (word processor parameters LM=1, RM=70, TM=2, BM=2)

                      Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501

                           Sponsored by Vangard Sciences

                                    PO BOX 1031

                                Mesquite, TX 75150

                                    NEWMAN3.ASC

                                 October 29, 1990

       --------------------------------------------------------------------

       By WARREN E. LEARY

       AP Science Writer

       WASHINGTON (AP) -- Government engineers say a backwoods inventor's

       amazing energy machine has a number of unique features but lacks a

       critical one -- it doesn't work.

       The National Bureau of Standards said Thursday that more than two

       months of court-ordered  testing  has  failed  to  prove  Joseph  W.

       Newman's claims that his controversial machine produces more energy

       than it consumes.

       "At all conditions  tested,  the input  power  exceeded  the  output

       power," the government's standards-setting agency said in a report.

       "That is, the device did not deliver more energy than it used."

       Newman, who terms himself a self-educated, backwoods  inventor  from

       Lucedale, Miss., who  used common sense to come up with his machine,

       immediately rejected the test results as biased and meaningless.

       The agency by its own admission used  unconventional instruments and

       methods to reach  its conclusions, said Newman, whose  quest  for  a

       government patent has attracted national attention.

       "I do not  accept  these results at all," Newman said in a telephone

       interview. "I predicted this decision.  It's just another example of

       the injustice I'm fighting against."

       The bureau's report   said   that  because  of  unusual   electrical

       characteristics of the  machine,  it  had  to design a test plan and

       combination of instruments specifically  for  Newman's  non-standard

       device. But it said it carefully checked the instruments to assure

       the accuracy of the tests.

       Newman said he  would not accept results coming from  unconventional

       testing that could not be repeated by others.

       "If I built my own test equipment and said that it proves my machine

       worked, no one  would give me much credit, no one would believe me,"

       Newman said. "But that's what the  Bureau  of Standards has done and

       they expect people to believe them."

       The inventor has been trying for six years to get the U.S. Office

       of Patents and  Trademarks  to issue a patent on an  energy  machine

       that defies accepted laws of physics.

       Patent examiners say the invention looks like yet another proposal

                                      Page 1

       for a perpetual  motion  machine, one that would produce more energy

       than it uses so that, theoretically, it could run forever.

       This has been the goal of inventors for centuries, but conventional

       science says it is impossible.

       Newman contends his device is not a perpetual motion machine, but

       a revolutionary energy  source  that  uses  the  previously  unknown

       magnetic properties of copper coils to release more energy than it

       consumes.

       U.S. District Judge Thomas P. Jackson, presiding over Newman's

       suit against the patent office, ordered a new trial date after

       getting results of the tests he ordered from the bureau.

       John P. Flannery, Newman's lawyer, said Jackson set Dec. 8 as the

       date for a non-jury trial to determine if the inventor will be

       awarded the patent.

       Flannery said he asked the judge to permit Newman to examine the

       special equipment used to test the energy machine, but that Jackson

       refused to order it. If the Patent Office does not allow examination

       of the test devices, Flannery said, he would seek another court

       order to do so.

       The Bureau of Standards said that during the testing,  it found that

       Newman's device "behaves  in  a  manner which is entirely consistent

       with well-established laws of physics."

       A device would be called 100 percent  energy  efficient if it simply

       transmitted all the energy coming into it back to the  outside,  the

       report said, and it would have to show an efficiency of greater than

       100 percent to make more power than it consumed.

       The bureau said the efficiency of Newman's machine ranged between

       27 percent and 67 percent, depending upon the test being run.

       Never did the  energy  coming  out of the machine exceed the battery

       power going into the device to get it running, the report said.

       --------------------------------------------------------------------

            If you  have comments or other  information  relating  to  such

            topics as this paper covers,  please upload to KeelyNet or

            send to the Vangard Sciences address as previously listed.

              Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.

           Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson

                             Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet

       --------------------------------------------------------------------

                     If we can be of service, you may contact

                 Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346

       --------------------------------------------------------------------

                                      Page 2