01270 747 008 (UK)

Zero Point Energy (ZPE)

Zero Point Energy (ZPE)

ZPE is the energy that exists as particle-antiparticle pairs or scalar waves, throughout the vacuum of space. It is often refereed to as a ‘foam’ of sub-atomic particles popping in and out of existence. This energy has a high entropy (disorder) which is what prevents it from being made useful by conventional means. Accepted theoretical models say that this random state of fluctuations can not be cohered (brought together) due to the laws of thermodynamics and the phenomenon of coherent states.

Equation for calculating Casimir ForceDutch physicist Hendrik B. G. Casimir discovered that two uncharged parallel metal (or dielectric) plates would be forced together when separated by a distance of a few atoms diameter.

This effect, known as the Casimir effect, is caused by a difference in the level of vacuum fluctuations, between the plates, and on the outside of the plates. The tiny space between the plates limits the range frequencies of ZPE that can appear. This means that the energy density is less between the plates than outside them, therefore they are forced together. Two pieces of Mica were separated by 14 Angstroms (~ five atoms) and produced a force equivalent to 10 tons per square meter.

This is strong evidence for the presence of zero point energy, but it is not coherence. We can not extract useful energy from this force, just as we can’t extract energy from permanent magnets.

v Info from Wikipedia v

Zero Point EnergyIn physics, the zero-point energy is the lowest possible energy that a quantum mechanical physical system may possess; it is the energy of the ground state of the system. All quantum mechanical systems have zero probability of finding system at zero energy, thus the energy of the lowest state is not equal to zero (thus this energy is called zero point energy). The term can be explained on the example of simplest quantum system – oscillator (quantum harmonic oscillator). In quantum field theory, it is a synonym for the vacuum energy, an amount of energy associated with the vacuum of empty space. – energy of virtual particles. In cosmology, the vacuum energy is taken to be the origin of the cosmological constant. Experimentally, the zero-point energy of the vacuum leads directly to the Casimir effect, and is directly observable and measurable in nanoscale devices made of conductors.

The concept of zero-point energy, and the hint of a possibility of extracting “free energy” from the vacuum, has attracted the attention of amateur inventors, despite that quantum mechanics explicitly prohibits transitions from lowest state to any lower state (because there is none). As of 2006, there is no known practical method to extract usable energy from the vacuum, although mainstream research is being carried out by the Calphysics Institute, NASA’s Glenn Research Center, and aerospace giant BAE Systems.

In classical physics, the energy of a system is relative, and is defined only in relation to some given state. Typically, one might associate a motionless system with zero energy, although doing so is purely arbitrary. There is no absolute way to state the energy of a classical system.

In quantum physics, it is natural to associate the energy with the expectation value of a certain operator, the Hamiltonian of the system. For almost all quantum-mechanical systems, the lowest possible expectation value that this operator can obtain is not zero; this lowest possible value is called the zero-point energy.

The origin of a minimal energy that isn’t zero can be intuitively understood in terms of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This principle states that the position and the momentum of a quantum mechanical particle cannot both be known arbitrarily accurately. If the particle is confined to a potential well, then its position is at least partly known: it must be within the well. Thus, one may deduce that within the well, the particle cannot have zero momentum, as otherwise the uncertainty principle would be violated. It is well known that the energy of a moving particle is proportional to the square of its momentum: this is the kinetic energy of the particle. Thus, we deduce that the kinetic energy of the particle cannot be zero without violating the uncertainty principle, and so have a simple, intuitive picture of the zero-point energy: it is the vibration of a trapped particle, a vibration that cannot be removed.


Gravitation and Cosmology

SunIn cosmology, the zero-point energy offers an intriguing possibility for explaining the speculative positive values of the proposed cosmological constant. In brief, if the energy is “really there”, then it should exert a gravitational force. In general relativity, mass and energy are equivalent; either produce a gravitational field.

One obvious difficulty with this association is that the zero-point energy of the vacuum is absurdly large. Naively, it is infinite, but one must argue that new physics takes over at the Planck scale, and so its growth is cut off at that point. Even so, what remains is so large that it would visibly bend space, and thus, there seems to be a contradiction. There is no easy way out, and reconciling the seemingly huge zero-point energy of space with the observed zero or small cosmological constant has become one of the important problems in theoretical physics, and has become a criterion by which to judge a candidate Theory of Everything.

A uniformly accelerating observer will observe zero-point energy of the electromagnetic field as a thermal bath of real photons, in an effect known as the Unruh effect.

Rueda and Haisch (1994, 1998a, 1998b) have proposed that the zero-point fields can have a drag on an accelerated observer, the drag being interpreted as the inertial mass of the accelerated object, and thus explaining the origin of mass. This approach also sheds light on Einstein’s Principle of Equivalence (Rueda and Haisch 2005). Numerous published papers on this topic are archived at the Calphysics website.

Vacuum energy has a number of consequences. For one, vacuum fluctuations are always created as particle/antiparticle pairs. The creation of these “virtual particles” near the event horizon of a black hole has been hypothesized by physicist Stephen Hawking to be a mechanism for the eventual “evaporation” of black holes. The net energy of the universe remains zero so long as the particle pairs annihilate each other within Planck time. If one of the pair is pulled into the black hole before this, then the other particle becomes “real” and energy/mass is essentially radiated into space from the black hole. This loss is cumulative and could result in the black hole’s disappearance over time. The time required is dependent on the mass of the black hole, but could be on the order of 10100 years for large solar-mass black holes.

The Grand unification theory predicts a non-zero cosmological constant from the energy of vacuum fluctuations. Examining normal physical processes with knowledge of these field phenomena can lead to an interesting insight in electrodynamics. During discussions of perpetual motion, the topic of vacuum energy usually encourages serious inquiries.
^ Info from Wikipedia ^


Over Unity and Free Energy Devices

A standard transformer is about 96% efficient and therefore 4% under unity. this means that 4% of the energy passing through the transformer will be lost. Losses are unavoidable and are usually due to heating or vibrations.

The term Over Unity or Overunity, is often used to describe devices or systems which will produce more energy than is required to run them (free energy machines). Real over unity is simply not possible. It actually makes no sense “Over Unity” is equivalent to “More than the same” which is impossible. If a device were to output more electrical power on it outputs than was supplied to its inputs, it must have another power source. In the case of the so called ‘Over unity’ devices this extra energy on the output is said to come from the vacuum fluctuations (a.k.a. zero point energy).

v Info from Wikipedia v
The Casimir effect has established zero point energy as an uncontroversial and scientifically accepted phenomenon. However, due to lack of education of laymen in quantum mechanics, the term zero point energy has also become associated with a highly controversial area of human endeavour – the design and invention of so-called free energy devices, similar to perpetual motion machines in the past. These devices purport to “tap” the zero-point field and somehow “extract energy” from it, thus providing an “inexhaustible”, cheap, and non-polluting energy source.

Controversy arises when such devices are promoted as being revolutionary, but without scientifically acceptable proof that they tap the energy sources claimed. Promoters of a device demonstrate no understanding of how the device might do so; they demonstrate misunderstanding of widely-accepted scientific facts and methods, in development or communication of a theory concerning a device; they make no attempt to exclude prosaic explanations for claimed performance of a device.

Any of these behaviours are liable to taint the reputation of those involved with such devices, and qualified researchers are therefore likely to be reluctant to make any attempt to verify or to even seriously debunk such a device, until the promotors of the device demonstrate competence-enough to be taken seriously. An exercise for the skeptical reader might be to provide a list of controversial free energy devices where none of these situations are the case.
^ Info from Wikipedia ^

Next Page: A Theory Of Everything
Previous Page: Can dimensions be limited, or is the universe really infinite?


  1. two words, one name…Nikola Tesla…’nuf said.

  2. Overunity is achievable! There is a great difference between (a) not understanding why a process works, and (b) applying scientific method and diligent measurement practices. There are a few OU inventors out there who do (b) but humbly do not presume (a). The subset of these individuals who have working technology might be acknowledged. Quantum physics “works” yet few of us truly understand it; the same is true for some of the working OU inventions whose performance is measured beyond any shadow of doubt.

  3. if u could get energy from zpe, surely space would be u der and have to re-absorb some, its a bit like trying to get energy from the seas massive heat store when we have nothing easy at hand naturally colder then it, if we had a store of particles that space would absorb easily, and could somehow ensure any work we got done by zpe eas paid for with those….not free emergy but maybe very cheep lol




  6. umm.. majestic was that a joke?
    Hydrogen from electrolysis – of course, oxygen too. Unless you separate them you might have your own big bang!
    Have I got this right? You’re suggesting making hydrogen and using it in a car – is this 50kW engine or a toy car? Where is the electricity coming from or is the hydrogen stored? Is it stored as gas or liquid? Cost per mile? What range?
    Please tell me more.

  7. Type your message here
    All energies are extracted from a common source with in the Universe which potentially stores all of the energies that the Universe will ever be required to provide.
    Energy cannot be made with out drawing on
    upon this infinite source. As this sole energy source is “potential ” then it is stored safely and stable.
    Where else could this energy be stored?

  8. lets work together on this site and come up with ideas to help our planet instead of arguing over trivial things. we are human beings trying to survive in a world of confusion. Lets take that confusion and turn it into a positive and take our world back from the bureacrats. follow laws, be cool, and put ideas that will save the planet into the minds of the everyday public. recycle, renew, invent, and pass it on. I would like my children to live in a clean safe world.

  9. i would like to comment if i may. Hydrogen cells are being produced by the public and they are currently being used in vehicles instead of gas. Hydrogen cells can be assembled easily. Stainless steel plates one eigth inch thick. The plate have to be close to one another about an eigth to a sixteenth inch apart. run your plates neg, pos, neg, pos..etc anywhere from 4 to 30 plates small in size around 3 to 4 inches. Submerse the plates in water with a teaspoon of salt and apply electricity, you now have hydrogen gas. the top can be sealed on your container and a hose ran outside into a bubbler unit, this prevents backflash..( explosion ) a bubbler is a container of water you run your hydrogen hose down into. the bubbles will float to the top. seal the container and wait for it to pressurize. run another hose from the container to collect the gas and run it into your fuel line. hydrogen on demand made from electricity. pass on this information and lets screw the oil companies. go to http://www.youtube.com watch the hydrogen generator experiements.

  10. Well, i had somethig intelligent to say but chaos drone ruined it. I just deleted much of my comment for the sake of this thread and its ability to be maintained. i doubt ill be back. thanks chaos.

  11. You can find our email address on this page.

  12. a person called marc schneider cantacted me as if am the owner of this site ,i don’t kno him of course ,but am sure he needs to contact u .he waht i could understand from his mail to me that he wants to promote for ur site on multilingual search engines… so provide me somewhere to forward that mail to u .

  13. Im sure the roots of the problem is creating a very efficent trasducer.

    when I say this, I mean energy can’t be created or destroyed, so I belive it could be trasduced from one form to another.

  14. it drove a constant current ranging between 1-3uamp ,it’s very small indeed but not bad for low quality small dimensions preparation i did.
    on the other hand the experiments i did on my idea brought about 1watthr from a very small device in closed room at night (of a voltage of about 1.1V DC) and both voltage and current can be controlled from the design of the apparatus.
    u must be one of those believing in the funny everysingle day violated theory of evolution. anyway let’s close that subject.

  15. A voltage is only useful for energy purpouses if it can drive a current through a conductor. Can your device create a sustainable flow of curent?

  16. forgot to send this schematic of the patent , i made it by winding a piece foil around a plastic rectangular prism .then around it a piece of poly ethylene sheet then another foil , there were avoltage of around 17mV
    ,first i beleived it was radiant energy and that was due to the ionization difference between the plates (one exposed ,the other isn’t)
    but it worked under grounded water of my sink wiht nearly the same voltage .
    here is the fullpatent

    surely no doubt about this one after trial

  17. Well I beleive in freedom to express your opinion, so your message is shown. This is nothing to do with ZPE though. If this starts generating som random discussion about religion and science than I will have to remove the messages as this is not what this site is for.
    I think it is arrogant to be so certian either way about the existence of any ‘creator’. Just a simple question… Who creates the creator? The only fact is that there is no pysical evidence for, or against. Only opinion can remain.

  18. this one goes for u ,u don’t have to publish it i can’t believe that a one (suposed to be intelligent) and can’t belive that there is a creator . all i ask u for is to read those links i need nothing else , and u won’t lose a anything. and this one aswell contain alot of associated links

  19. about the damn masons they prevent the commercial scale production of such power systems
    about me i have a free energy idea,and i have took some measures for small models so far and they are very promising ,it’s actually a device based on tesla’s radiant energy patant but this one is much more effective than his am just preparing at the moment to record a patent or to make the militia adopt but first am making smoe improvements first ,so i can’t totally prevail the detail’s yet ,it’s supposed to to provide a free uninterrupted supply of hydrogen gas .
    but am surely will prevail it specially to u if they refused or if i recieved the patent.

    by the waytry that link

  20. Hmmmm….ok….
    Well if you or anyone else has a device which can defy the standard physical model then we openly invite you to show it to us and allow it to be tested. If it worked we would happily help promote it and the ‘new’ physical principles involved.

    I must say your comments are not put nicely. Should Allah actually exisit I doubt it would have any empathy for your angry attitude. The so called ****en masons have no influence on myself or any part of RMCybernetics. They could not stop ‘free energy’ if we genuinley could produce it.

  21. what makes us stick so much strongly to the former laws of physicists.einstien stormed newton , eli cartan and einstien worked on developing theories about torsion fields ,then torsion field wa proven to move 10^9 the speed of light which violate his own theory of special relativity and those of lorentz.
    also that casimir plates when put 10nm far from each other light was calculated to move 1/10^36 faster that it does in space.
    so what makes us so bloody sure.
    i have a schematic for a torsion field harnesser and i build a one and worked in night time and under grounded water.

    and am believing what does bruce depalma allege

    cuz all the bloody shit we r in and the refusal of this free energy is a consequence of the ****en masons
    may ALLAH burn them.

  22. This is very theoretical and controversial area of physics but I must disagree with what you have said. You are making statements as they are fact, when in fact it is just speculation.
    There is no conclusive evidence for aether at all. If there were then there would be no controversy around the subject. The Michelson–Morley experiment was performed in 1887 to test the hypothesis of the aether. They concluded that there was no medium in which energy was propagated. This has been re-tested many times since then.
    The main flaw of this test was that it was performed on earth right near the surface (well from a tall building) which does not allow any consideration of aether being dragged with the earth just as air close to the surface of a ball is dragged with it.
    There are efforts underway to construct a large scale version of a similar setup in space, away from the effect of 1G gravity. This may be the first experiment to find conclusive evidence either way.

    Matter and energy are not made from different fundamental things. They are made from the same things. Matter or particles of any sort are not just solid homogeneous points in space. They are the interaction of every bit of the universe. Electromagnetic radiation can be folded onto itself into a sort of self resonating standing wave to form the most basic of particles. Particles can be unravelled to release electromagnetic radiation in parts or by totally annihilating matter.

    Pure energy and time are not myths. They are simple paradigms that our ape minds use to gain an understanding of the universe in a way that can be shared, written and explained to others. Time and energy are not independent things either. Energy is is expressed by the universe as change with time which we see as work.

  23. Hello everyone. The evidence in favor of there being a radiant energetic ether is conclusive. It does exist, and it can and has been used for energy, propulsion, and other things. We can precipitate matter from it in any form we desire, the ultimate “replicator”.

    I contend against the Einstein/Relativist claims, though, that “Matter is pure energy” and “Energy and Matter can be converted into each other”. Energy is merely the capacity to do work. Energy is not a substance. Energy is not a thing. Matter is a thing. The ether is simply matter: Very fine, ultra small particles that, when together, can have gaseous or liquid properties.

    This myth of “pure energy” needs to be dispelled. Same with time. Time is not a thing, not a substance. Time is simply how we perceive events occuring.

  24. Hi, I’m just trying to wrap my head around zero point energy. If there are quantum particles vibrating everywhere then shouldn’t there be some sort of universal very high energy (gamma or above) electromagnetic radiation that could be picked up by a tuned circuit?

  25. I think the world would be better off if we all tried to “believe” each other because years have been wasted quibbling over definitions. You’re both right-you can’t “create” energy…therefore pursuit of extracting all forms of energy in the easiest cheapest way possible should be our goal. I envision us inputting some initial energy and then sitting back and relaxing while the machine extracts enough energy to keep itself going as well as outputting enough for our needs. It couldn’t last forever–but just my lifetime would suit me. And it breaks no laws…believe!

  26. Paul,
    I think you answer your own questions there. Basically they don’t mention it because they have never seen any evidence that would suggest that these things are real, or worth looking into.

    Vacuum will not compensate for distance.
    Gravity is a distortion in spacetime caused by the concentration of energy (i.e. matter)
    We experience gravity as a force because we cannot perceive more than 3D directly.

    There is no “energy of the vacuum” created. Energy can not be created or destroyed. it only changes from one form to another. The useful energy throughput in a device is usually underunity because some energy is converted to unwanted heat or vibration.

  27. When energy is inputed and under-unity energy is outputed, what do you call the energy of the vacuum created in the process?

  28. If gravity’s force can be multiplied but reduces distance, can the vacuum created compensate the distance?

  29. can extra dimensions and kaluza-klein theory, etc. be used to explain astra travel and OBEs? ANd why haven’t Hawking and Witten,… and quantum mechanics studied astral projection as something that could actually be real?

  30. According to the currently accepted model of the universe, energy is always conserved. This means energy can not be created or destroyed. It can only be converted form one form to another. This is a fundamental law of thermodynamics.
    Even matter its self can be converted to different forms of energy. The total amount of energy making up matter can be easily calculated using Einstiens famous equation E=mc2.
    The letter c represents the speed of light in a vacuum which is about 299792458 m/s. and m is the mass in kilograms.

    The reason energy seems to get used is because most processes will convert some energy to heat which is simply re-absorbed and spread out in the surroundings.

    Matter and energy are really just different forms of the same thing. But what is this thing!? Well there’s currently a few ideas, but the main one is called String Theory or M-Theory.

    These theories try to explain the most fundamental things to create a unified theory of everything. The problem is, noone has actually managed to unify all the known forces into a single theory (well some people think they have) because gravity is just so darn strange. It does not fit into everything else so we end up with multiple theories and contradictions.
    Our page on theunified theory of everything is currently being updated so check it out again in about a weeks time.
    I guess this doesn’t quite answer your question, but it’s still a pretty uncertain area.

  31. Hi, thanks for your patience with my obtuse questions. Here is one more…
    What, or how would someone describe the energy which is used, created, or expended by our own planet, the thing that keeps the status quo, the balance? There is something which provides the motive power and a glue that binds the planetary mechanisms together. What is that thing, whats the name for something that holds rock, air, water, planets, everything in balance. I believe that Gravity is just another effect or ‘user’ of the ‘Bigger source’. I’m working on my book manuscript and would find it much easier to grasp and describe this universal effect if it had a name. Any suggestions or inspired thoughts would be greatly appreciated…
    Regards Grant

  32. I expect that the term ‘over unity’ would still hang around for a while, but if such devices were commercialised I would definatley excpect a more ‘cool’ (or at least more accurate) sounding term to become the norm.

    It’s a mater of semantics really, but I just think that this term does not accurately describe the phenomenon.

  33. Wow!
    Cheers for the reply.
    Are you suggesting that if ZPE was achieved the (theoretical) universal energy would negate the term ‘Over Unity’ and would then require a new nick name to describe something for nothing…
    Regards Grant

  34. I’m not sure if it can be attributed to an individual. The term probably evolved from the common use of terms like ‘under unity’ and ‘unity gain’ which are commonly used when describing transformer or amplifier characteristics.
    It seems like a logical step to use the term ‘over unity’ to describe a power supply that is taking in 10W from a battery and outputing 11W for example. The problem is that even if this power supply were able to tap the ZPE, we would have to count this as an input source. Therefore 10W Battery + 1W ZPE = 11W output = Unity

    It’s like saying a car reaches over unity because it outputs more work than you put in when pressing the accelerator!

  35. Hi
    Just quick question – when was the term Over Unity first used…and who was it who penned it?
    Regards Grant Wyness

  36. Lets get things straight about D-T hot fusion – (if ever developed to >>breakeven – since commercial systems have, from the start, been 50 yrs in the future. “Just give us more money to study it, we’ll get to work” ) It produces so many neutrons that the whole reactor rapidly becomes extremely radioactive creating problems that far exceed the radioactivity problems seen w/ fision power generation. In addition, no one has a clue as to what construction materials to use because of the rapid degradation of anything exposed to such high doses of neutrons or how to extract the energy to make electricity. D-T fusion study is just another branch of the so called “full empolyment act”, i.e. welfare.

  37. Pah. We will all be dead from the side effects of universal energy loss long before we have a chance to kill each other over what remains. Besides, we’ve got perfectly good excuses to kill each other right now, like oil and minor cultural differences.

  38. That is certainly a negative peception. There is plenty enough energy in the environmet to meet our needs, and there will be a virtually limitless supply of clean energy when fusion reactors have been perfected.

    From what I’ve read about overunity machines, its apparently inventing/promoting them that gets you killed! 🙂

    The theoretical value for the amount of energy in free space is far greater that the energy in matter that is released in nuclar reactions. This makes OU technology potentially very dangerous, as it could be used to make a whole new range of weapon systems.

    The energy problems we face are just a product of the silly political systems that most of the world has to endure. Even if OU is possible, it is not neccesary for sloving the worlds energy crisis. In fact if such technology were to be suddenly released there would be massive changes in the flow of money (and power) which could have disasterous conequences.

  39. If Overunity is not possible, all human beings will kill each other for the last scraps of energy.

Leave a Reply