A·T·O·N Institute department of

Physics Technology Architecture & Hyperspace

Due to certain breakthroughs of colleagues in "free energy" technologies, we have been asked to post these series of articles. This article is particularly pertinent to these devices.

Dark Matter or Dark Energy?

Major T. E. Bearden

All Rights Reserved

T. E. Bearden, LTC, U.S. Army (Retired)
Director, Association of Distinguished American Scientists (ADAS)
Fellow Emeritus, Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS)


It is proposed that a nondiverged, unaccounted, huge Heaviside energy flow component associated with every EM interaction is responsible for the vexing "missing gravity" known as the "dark matter" problem in astrophysics. The background and source of this dark energy is presented, and some estimate of its relative magnitude is given in a simple case. The presence of this substantial but ignored dark energy associated with observed and accounted masses and charges of distant astrophysical objects may be sufficient to provide the additional observed gravity without further hypothetical dark matter.



Recently George Musser {} has very appropriately summarized the present situation in the search for missing unseen or "dark" matter, thought to be necessary to explain the missing gravity in distant energetic astrophysical entities. Presently all the various theories that would account for this missing dark matter are stumbling.

Perhaps the missing gravity may be accounted for by a vast amount of unaccounted EM energy, already present in every EM field and potential interaction and long ignored. Poynting {} missed this dark energy entirely. Heaviside {} realized it and accounted for it, and Lorentz {} arbitrarily discarded it in the theory of electrical circuits because no one could explain its source. Since then, the dark energy has remained hidden and in scientific limbo for a century, until recently pointed out by the present author {} as well as its source.


The Discovery of Energy Flow Through Space

After Maxwell was already dead, Heaviside {} and Poynting { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480733292 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 2} independently discovered EM energy flow theory. Poynting conceived only that small component of the energy flow which enters the conductors. On the other hand, Heaviside recognized that all space around the circuit's conductors was filled with EM energy flow ó e.g., a good illustration is given by Kraus {}. A small "boundary layer sheath" component of this energy flowing outside the circuit moves right along the surface of the wires, where it strikes the surface charges and is diverged into the circuit. This small Poynting energy flow component enters the circuit and provides the energy subsequently dissipated in the circuit's loads and losses.

However, the "sheath layer" Poynting component is only a tiny fraction of the truly enormous energy flow { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480777072 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 3} pouring out of the generator or battery terminals and flowing through surrounding space, with most of it missing the circuit entirely. The conventional manner of accounting conservation of energy thus fails miserably for every EM circuit, if the available nondiverged Heaviside flow component is accounted. We accent that it is the assumed "accounting method" which fails, not the law of conservation of energy!

Poynting { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480733292 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 2} published prestigiously from the outset, while Heaviside { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480733334 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 6} published more obscurely at first, though later he also published prestigiously {}. So the energy flow theory was named for Poynting, even though he never accounted for the total energy flow per se, but only for a minuscule fraction of it.


The Source of the Dark Energy Is the Active Vacuum

The total EM energy flow around any EM circuit is enormous. At any finite perpendicular distance radially away from the conductors, the flow has a nonzero value { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480793936 \h 7} and is almost parallel to the conductors, with the very slight departure from parallel being due to the divergence of the tiny Poynting component into the circuit { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480777072 \h 3}. So the rate of total EM energy flow actually pouring out of the terminals of a battery or generator is immensely greater than the shaft energy we input to the generator or the chemical energy available in a battery. How are we to explain the source of such an enormous "dark energy" flow in even the simplest circuit?

Indeed, this huge energy flow is extracted by the source dipolarity's broken symmetry in the vacuum flux ó a broken symmetry well-known in particle physics {} for a half-century but not modeled in classical electrodynamics which still does not even incorporate the vacuum's interaction with the circuit, including with the source dipole.


Lorentz Avoided the Dark Energy Problem

To the early founding physicists struggling with a hydrodynamic theory of electrodynamics, quantum mechanics and the active vacuum were not in their repertoire. The enormity of the nondiverged and non-intercepted Heaviside dark energy flow component in space surrounding a circuit was a profound paradox, and few of the electrodynamicists took it seriously. That it appeared directly in the energy flow theory was regarded as a fluke of the mathematics.

Lorentz considered this huge nondiverged Heaviside flow component "physically insignificant" (his term) and logically felt free to neglect it because it did not enter the circuit and did not contribute to powering the loads and losses. However, in today's general relativity any change in spatial energy density represents a curvature of spacetime, hence produces gravitational effects. So the significant Heaviside energy flow component arbitrarily discarded by Lorentz has substantial gravitational significance. But at the time Lorentz discarded the massive Heaviside "dark energy" flow, general relativity had not yet been born and curved spacetime was still a distant vision yet to be applied as a major physics.


All EM Circuits and Loads Are Powered by Energy from the Vacuum

So every EM circuit and load is and always has been powered by energy extracted directly from the active vacuum by the source dipole in the generator or battery. Generators and batteries do not output any of their own internal energy to the external circuit. Instead, they use their internal energy to force internal positive and negative charges apart and form their source dipole. Once formed, the source dipole's broken symmetry { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480777659 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 9} in its violent energy exchange with the active vacuum extracts, reorders, and outputs enormous EM energy from the vacuum. It pours this huge energy flow out of the terminals of the generator or battery, filling all space surrounding the circuit. So the source of the "dark Heaviside energy" component is the broken symmetry of the source dipole with the active vacuum.


Why We Keep Furnishing Shaft Energy to the Generator

Our present EM power system circuits are universally designed with closed unitary current loops containing the external loads and losses as well as the back emf of the source dipole. All the current in the external loads and losses passes back through the back emf of the source dipole in the generator. Half the collected Poynting energy in the circuit is dissipated to destroy the source dipole, while the other half is dissipated in the loads and losses in the external circuit.

Consequently, the circuits keep destroying their source dipoles in the generator or battery a little faster than they power their external loads. Hence to continually restore the source dipole, energy must be continually be furnished to the generator shaft or ó in a battery ó energy must continually be taken from the available chemical energy in the battery.


A Potential or Dipolarity Negentropically Reorganizes the Surrounding Vacuum

We also can examine the vacuum furnishing the energy to the dipole "transducer" or "negative resistor" in another manner. There is a scalar potential existing between the dipole ends, and existing across the terminals of the battery or generator. This potential is a change to the ambient vacuum potential (to the energy density of the vacuum energy flux). Once the source dipole is made and the potential appears between its separated charges, the potential spreads out in all directions, at the speed of light from the dipole. Further, missing from power system electrodynamics is the fact that the spreading potential from the dipole represents an organized, deterministic EM bidirectional wave structuring added to the vacuum potential. This was rigorously shown by Whittaker {} in 1903, advancing earlier work by Stoney {}. The mere formation of the dipolar potential therefore initiates a vast negentropic, deterministic reorgan-ization of the surrounding vacuum, moving outwards in all directions at the speed of light.

We explain briefly how such a vast, spreading, negentropic reaction occurs.

First, there is a continuing and very energetic exchange between the vacuum and any charge or dipole, including those of any physical EM power system. The common interpretation is that this exchange is totally disordered. It is not. To the contrary, it is highly ordered.

After Lorentz regauging of the Maxwell-Heaviside equations, classical electrodynamics implicitly assumes an equilibrium condition between vacuum and the EM power system. In that case, no net energy can be received and utilized from the vacuum. However, the Lorentz-regauging assumption is in error, because of the discovery by particle physicists a half-century ago that every dipole is a broken symmetry { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480777659 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 9} in that exchange. Hence net energy can be received from the vacuum and is received from the vacuum, notably by the relatively large source dipole made in the generator or battery.

However, what particle physicists did not do is apply the Whittaker condition to that potential existing between the separated charges of the dipole. Consequently they entirely missed the negentropic reordering of the vacuum energy that ensues. Whittaker shows us that the expanding reorganization of the vacuum, moving out in all directions from the dipole at light speed, identically is a harmonic set of bidirectional EM longitudinal wavepairs organized in the virtual particle flux of the vacuum. Each wavepair consists of an outgoing 3-spatial LW and its incoming phase conjugate replica wave in the complex plane. Since time is modeled in the complex plane in Minkowski spacetime, a negentropic reorganization of the entire spacetime continuum is underway, merely from the formation of a small dipole! The reorganization is not just 3-spatial, but also temporal because of the appearance of the phase conjugate replica wave in every Whittaker wavepair.

Why does the vacuum automatically and so easily begin a giant negentropic reorganization of itself? To understand it, let us first examine the assumed equilibrium between the vacuum energy flux and the charges and dipoles in the physical system. Thermodynamically, the physical system is in equilibrium with the "external" active vacuum environment. Also, thinking backwards so to speak, the external active vacuum is a thermodynamic system in equilibrium with its "environment", the physical system.

Now break the thermodynamic equilibrium on the physical system side, as particle physics verifies is done in the power system by a mere dipole. Simultaneously that breaks the equilibrium of the far more energetic vacuum with its "environment", the material system.

The vacuum responds to changes at the speed of light, its "velocity of the medium," so to speak. As a thermodynamic system now far from equilibrium {} with its physical system environment, the vacuum is permitted to and therefore rapidly does the following: (1) self-order, which is the bidirectional Whittaker ordering now speeding out in all directions from the dipolar broken symmetry, (2) self-oscillate, which it now does remarkably in forming all those Whittaker wave oscillations, (3) power itself and its "load" (its environment, the physical system) which it now does most remarkably, and (4) exhibit negentropy, which is all of the foregoing and the furnishing of enormous observable energy flow from the broken symmetry dipole.

In short, that is the source of not only the Poynting energy flow component intercepted by the physical power system, but also is the source of all that non-intercepted and ignored Heaviside "dark energy" flow component that Lorentz erroneously discarded.

One must keep a sense of humor. Instead of performing entropic engineering as we do, where we "wrestle" nature vigorously to the mat with brute force, all we have to do is use negentropy. Just "open a little porthole" of broken symmetry ó the source dipole, which we will have to entropically pay for ó and nature happily leaps forth and starts reorganizing the entire vacuum energy of the universe! She is happy to be permitted to do it, and she gladly pays us with copious free energy sent out of the "porthole" dipolarity for us to catch and use as we will.

To perform entropy, we must do positive (entropic) work, which means we pay for all the energy which is dissipated to continually brute-force wrestle some part of nature to the mat as we wish. Nature protests this brutal treatment by attempting all the while to restore symmetry, furnishing the Newtonian third law reaction to oppose our rudeness.

To perform negentropy, we must "do" negative work ó which means we must accept and receive ordered energy for free! All we have to do is initially pay to make the little porthole. Nature so loves negentropic reorganization of the entire vacuum energy, that she will handsomely and gloriously reward us with an extreme energy flow for opening the tiniest broken symmetry "porthole" which allows her to do so. She will gladly continue to pour out energy through that porthole, as long as it exists. If we fight nature, we must pay brutally for it. If we "tickle" nature just a bit, nature pays us back enormously, many times over, continuously, and with great gratitude by "changing into bright new clothes" of dazzling form and astounding energy.


The So-Called "Scalar" Potential Is Not a Scalar Entity

The "scalar" potential is not now and never has been a "scalar" entity. Instead, it is a multiwave, bidirectional longitudinal EM wave flow and EM energy flow entity, as shown by Whittaker. In its interaction with a unit point static charge, the net reaction cross section of the fixed potential has a scalar magnitude ó but that simply represents the energy diverged from the potential and forced to swirl around the static charge. The energy continuously trapped in the slight diversion of the potential's "rivers of energy" around the intercepting unit point charge is not the potential itself, else a whirlpool in a river might be taken to be the river.

There is no problem at all in making enormous rivers of energy. Just make a dipolarity ó a tiny potential. Its myriad of rushing rivers of energy will flow indefinitely, powered freely by the negentropically reorganizing universe, so long as you do not destroy the little dipolarity "porthole".

In short, the simple dipole is the ultimate negative resistor, easily made and utilized {}.


Lorentz Avoided the Dark Energy Problem Rather Than Solving It

Lorentz entered the EM energy flow scene to face the terrible problem so quietly raised by Heaviside. Lorentz understood the presence of the Poynting component, and also of the Heaviside component, but could find no explanation for the startling, enormous magnitude of the EM energy pouring out of the terminals of the power source (pouring from the source dipole) {}.

Unable to solve the dark energy problem by any rational means, Lorentz found a clever way to avoid it. He reasoned that the nondiverged Heaviside component was "physically insignificant" and could therefore just be discarded. So Lorentz { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480733364 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 4} simply integrated the entire energy flow vector (containing both the Heaviside and Poynting components) around an assumed closed surface enclosing any volume of interest. A priori this mathematical procedure discards the dark Heaviside energy flow component (which misses the circuit entirely and is wasted) and retains only the intercepted Poynting diverged component. Decades later, electrodynamicists are still happily avoiding the problem by continuing to use the Lorentz integration procedure {}.


The RCSs of the Fields and Potentials Are Not the Entities Themselves

The retained Poynting component is determined by the reaction cross section (RCS) of the circuit with the entire energy flow component, including the dark energy Heaviside component. A single-pass of the energy flow will result in only the small "single-pass" RCS determined by the surface charges of the circuit. This is the energy that actually enters the single-pass circuit, and later is dissipated from the circuit. Thus it will match our instrumental measurements in such a circuit, since we measure dissipation.

We have previously {} pointed out that additional energy can be collected by simply retroreflecting the energy flow back and forth iteratively across the circuit and its reaction cross section.

From an energy flow viewpoint, we have all been taught to calculate the magnitude of the reaction cross sections of the field and potential with a fixed unit point charge, not the magnitude of the field and potential themselves { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480733380 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 14}. Many orders of magnitude more nondiverged EM "dark energy" flow surrounds every divergence of energy from the field or potential by the ubiquitously assumed unit point static charge. However, following Lorentz's lead, this dark energy component is not accounted or utilized. Yet simple retroreflection of the already passed dark energy, returning it back across the intercepting charges in the circuit, will collect additional energy. So will resonating the intercepting charges so that they increase their reaction cross sections in the flow, as shown by Bohren {}.

At a point in deep space there is usually no convenient unit point charge anyway, so there is no divergence of any energy flow present and no selection of a tiny Poynting component. Hence none of the EM energy flow is diverged in massless space, and the EM field or potential in space are topological entities, arising as forms of EM energy-induced curvatures of spacetime itself.

The magnitude of the "dark-energy-induced" curvatures of spacetime surrounding every EM interaction with charged mass are much greater than what we normally calculate, since we do not calculate the actual EM energy involved, but only a "reaction cross section" of the EM energy involved with a unit point static charge, multiplied by the magnitude of the interacting charge.


Demonstration and Proof of the Presence of the Dark Energy

Bohren's experiment { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480792944 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 17}, which is readily replicated {}, collects 18 times more energy from the usually nondiverged Heaviside component, just by resonating the charge and thereby sweeping out a greater geometrical reaction cross section than the static charge that is used to calculate the Poynting flow component. It follows that "the" field and "the" potential input to the intercepting charge have far more energy "in the vicinity of" an interacting point static charge and of a unit dipole than what is accounted for in the conventional EM model where the magnitudes of the fields and potentials are erroneously taken as being the magnitudes of the energy diverted from them by a unit point static charge. This enormous extra energy, however, does not participate in the interaction and is the "dark energy" component recognized by Heaviside and then erroneously discarded by Lorentz.

As an example, in a very simple battery-powered resistor circuit the arbitrarily unaccounted Heaviside dark energy flow component surrounding the circuit and missing it entirely may be 1013 times as large in magnitude as is the accounted Poynting flow component that enters the circuit {}. This is the problem that so vexed Lorentz, and that has only recently been explained by the present author { FUSSENDNOTEREF _Ref480733380 \h \* FORMATVERBINDEN 14}.


Dark Energy Is a Candidate Source for the Missing Gravity

In space occupied by mass with intense ongoing electromagnetic interaction activity, there is far more EM energy present at the interactions and in their vicinity than physics and electrodynamics accounts for, because of the arbitrary and erroneous discard by Lorentz and his modern followers of the vast Heaviside "dark energy" component of every EM interaction. This of course has immediate gravity implications.

It follows that the energy calculated by the astrophysicists as being available in the interactions of light and mass in distant astronomical entities is grossly understated due to Lorentz's arbitrary omission of most of the actual EM energy flow present. The total spacetime curvature induced by the dark energy in the presence of those interactions is much greater than the astrophysicists calculate and account. In turn, it follows that the gravity calculated by the astrophysicists for those energetic distant astronomical entities is significantly understated.

We appropriately call the present but arbitrarily unaccounted Heaviside energy a "dark energy" ó "dark" meaning unobserved or unaccounted for. It has remained hidden for more than a century, since Heaviside first discovered it, and a century since a vexed Lorentz discarded it.



Dark energy is a bench-testable, still-unaccounted entity in astrophysics {} and is definitely generating more gravitation in and around the observed and evidenced energetic masses than is accounted for in present theory. With the present dark matter theories stumbling, as pointed out by Musser, the fact that this dark energy is certifiably there, as is appreciable excess gravitation from it, should be closely examined. The long-missing gravity could well be a problem resulting from the arbitrarily discarded and unaccounted "dark energy" rather than from the hypothetical missing "dark matter."





. George Musser, "What's the Matter?", Sci. Am., May 2000, p. 24.

. J. H. Poynting, ìOn the transfer of energy in the electromagnetic field,î Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, Vol. 175, Part II, 1885, p. 343-361.

. Oliver Heaviside, Electrical Papers, Vol. 2, 1887. Quoting p. 94: ìIt [the energy transfer flow] takes place, in the vicinity of the wire, very nearly parallel to it, with a slight slope towards the wireÖ . Prof. Poynting, on the other hand, holds a different view, representing the transfer as nearly perpendicular to a wire, i.e., with a slight departure from the vertical. This difference of a quadrant can, I think, only arise from what seems to be a misconception on his part as to the nature of the electric field in the vicinity of a wire supporting electric current. The lines of electric force are nearly perpendicular to the wire. The departure from perpendicularity is usually so small that I have sometimes spoken of them as being perpendicular to it, as they practically are, before I recognized the great physical importance of the slight departure. It causes the convergence of energy into the wire.î

. H. A. Lorentz, Vorlesungen ¸ber Theoretische Physik an der Universitt Leiden, Vol. V, Die Maxwellsche Theorie (1900-1902), Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft M.B.H., Leipzig, 1931, "Die Energie im elektromagnetischen Feld," p. 179-186. Figure 25 on p. 185 shows the Lorentz concept of integrating the Poynting vector around a closed cylindrical surface surrounding a volumetric element. This is the procedure which arbitrarily selects only a small component of the Poynting flow associated with a circuit ó specifically, the small component striking the surface charges and being diverged into the circuit to power it ó and then treats that tiny component as the "entire" Poynting energy flow. Thereby Lorentz arbitrarily discarded all the vast Poynting energy transport component which does not strike the circuit at all, and is just wasted.

. Myron Evans, T. E. Bearden, et al., "Energy from the Vacuum," submitted to Physica Scripta, 2000.

. Oliver Heaviside, "Electromagnetic Induction and Its Propagation," The Electrician, 1885, 1886, 1887, and later. A series of 47 sections, published section by section in numerous issues of The Electrician during 1885, 1886, and 1887.

. John D. Kraus, Electromagnetics, Fourth Edn., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1992. Figure 12-60, a and b, p. 578 shows a good drawing of the huge Poynting energy flow filling all space around the conductors. Almost all this energy flow is not intercepted by the circuit, not diverged into the circuit to power it, passes on out into space and is wasted.

. Oliver Heaviside, "On the Forces, Stresses, and Fluxes of Energy in the Electromagnetic Field," Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, 183A, 1893, p. 423-480.

. T. D. Lee, Particle Physics and Introduction to Field Theory, Harwood, New York, 1981. Quoting, p. 184: "...the discoveries made in 1957 established not only right-left asymmetry, but also the asymmetry between the positive and negative signs of electric charge. ÖSince non-observables imply symmetry, these discoveries of asymmetry must imply observables.î

. E.T. Whittaker, ìOn the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical Physics,î Math. Ann., Vol. 57, 1903, p. 333-355. The potential is identically a harmonic set of bidirectional EM wavepairs, where each pair consists of a spatial wave and a phase conjugate replica wave. Any potential thus represents a deterministic, negentropic reorganization of the vacuum energy.

. E.g., see G. Johnstone Stoney, ìDiscussion of a New Theorem in Wave Propagation,î Phil. Mag., Vol. 43, 1897, p. 273-280.

. See any good expose of the technical characteristics of disequilibrium system; e.g., Ilya Prigogine, From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1980. In 1977, Russian-born Belgian chemist Ilya Prigogine received the Nobel Prize for chemistry for contributions to nonequilibrium thermodynamics, especially the theory of dissipative structures.

. E.g. See Thomas E. Bearden, "Bedini's Method for Forming Negative Resistors in Batteries," Proc. Internat. Cong. 2000, St.-Petersburg, Russia, July 3-8, 2000 (in press).

. Thomas E. Bearden, "On Extracting Electromagnetic Energy from the Vacuum," Proc. Internat. Cong. 2000, St.-Petersburg, Russia, July 3-8, 2000 (in press).

. E.g., see W.K.H. Panofsky and M. Phillips, Classical Electricity and Magnetism, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1962, 2nd edition, p. 181; W. Gough and J.P.G. Richards, European J. Phys., Vol. 7, 1986, p. 195.

. Bearden, "On Extracting EM Energy from the Vacuum," ibid.; Myron Evans, T.E. Bearden et al., ibid., T.E. Bearden," On the Principles of Permissible Over Unity EM Power Systems," J. New Energy, 4(2), Fall 1999, p. 16-39; T. E. Bearden, ìEnergy Flow, Collection, and Dissipation in Overunity EM Devices,î Proc. 4th Internat. Energy Conf., Academy for New Energy, Denver, CO, May 23-27, 1997, p. 5-51. In Figure 5, p. 16 the fraction of the Poynting energy flow that is intercepted and collected by the circuit is roughly shown to be on the order of 10(13 of the entire Poynting energy flow available.

. Craig F. Bohren, "How can a particle absorb more than the light incident on it?" Am. J. Phys., 51(4), Apr. 1983, p. 323-327. Actually the resonant particle increases its geometrical reaction cross section, thus intercepting not on the Poynting component intercepted by a static unit charge, but also some additional energy from the surrounding and unaccounted Heaviside flow component. In short, Bohren's experiment decisively proves the presence of the unaccounted Heaviside energy flow component.

. H. Paul and R. Fischer, {Comment on ìHow can a particle absorb more than the light incident on it?í},î Am. J. Phys., 51(4), Apr. 1983, p. 327.

. T. E. Bearden, ìEnergy Flow, Collection, and Dissipation in Overunity EM Devices,î ibid., 1997. For the very rough calculation, see Figure 5, p. 16.

. And to most other branches of physics. The effect upon quantum mechanics of the introduction of hidden order inside every potential ó including the quantum potential ó would seem to have startling consequences. Similar hidden order exists inside every ordinary EM field and wave, if we add superpotential theory where two potential functions comprise any EM field or wave. Each of those two potentials is subject to direct alteration of its internal Whittaker structuring, which at least in theory can be engineered.

In stripping the interacting charge of its self-fields and self-potentials, Lorentz-Dirac electron theory eliminates the associated deterministic, negentropic ordering of the vacuum surrounding any charge or dipole. As Hestenes puts it, "The electron in the Dirac theory is an emasculated charged particle, stripped of its own electromagnetic field, like a classical test charge. The central problem of quantum electrodynamics... is to restore the electron's field and deduce the consequences. This is the self-interaction problem. Whether, in the ultimate solution to this problem the electron will emerge as a true singularity in the field or some kind of soliton... is anybody's guess. One thing is certain, though, the problem is nonlinear. And if quantization is a consequence of this nonlinearity... then the self-interaction problem can never be solved with standard quantum mechanics; a more fundamental starting point must be found." David Hestenes, "Zitterbewegung in Radiative Process," in The Electron: New Theory and Experiment, David Hestenes and Antonio Weingartshofer, Eds., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1991, p. 21-36. The quote is from p. p. 33.

A potential impact on general relativity and particle physics looms, where at least in theory any spacetime curvature is itself internally structurable by smaller ST curvatures produced to order. Thus precise sets of ST curvatures, or "engines" tailored to perform specific actions on mass, including inside the atomic nuclei, or even inside a nucleon itself, may be possible.