Gyroscopic Magnetic Particle Motor
Newman's Gyroscopic Theory
The theoretical basis of Joe Nemans' Revolutionary Energy
Machine challenges many accepted laws of physics.
The starting point for understanding Newman's ideas is his
assertion that the fundamental building block of all matter is
the gyroscopic particle, an infinitesimal unit of matter that
spins like a gyroscope.
Newman claims that the mechanics of magnetism and
electricity, which have never been fully explained, can be
described in terms of how gyroscopic particles react and
The idea that a single type of particle is responsible for
the forces at work in the universe is an old one, yet some of
the latest research in physics involves the investigation of
New and smaller particles with previously unknown properties
are being discovered on a regular basis.
Newman's theories also depend heavily on the idea that all
matter is concentrated energy, which can be released if one
has a mechanism for unlocking it.
That notion is at the heart of Einstein's work and the
equation E = mc^2, then the argument that he is trying to
patent a perpetual motion machine has no merit.
Theoretically, Newman's machine could run indefinitely, but
--- according to him --- not because it is CREATING energy to
run itself, but because it is converting matter to energy.
In radically oversimplified terms, this is what happens when
Joe Newman throws the switch on the Revolutionary Energy
1) An electrical current is sent through a long (miles long)
coil of copper wire, magnetizing it and creating a strong
2) Newman describes the mechanics of the magnetic field as
"shells of force" composed of gyroscopic particles that move
in a spiral pattern around the wire.
Originally IN the wire, the particles expand outward and thus
create the magnetic field.
3) When the particles form a magnetic field, Newman says,
they are traveling at the speed of light in two directions ---
in the spiral pattern around the wire, and in their own normal
This gives him the right side of the E = mc^2 equation; the
particles (mass) multiplied by the speed of light squared.
4) The machine operates in pulses; that is, the electrical
current is continually turned on and off. This causes the
magnetic field --- in other words, the gyroscopic particles
--- to expand and collapse.
5) When the trillions of gyroscopic particles that have been
released collapse back into the wire, some of them collide
with other gyroscopic particles.
Because of the nature of the gyroscopic spin, the collisions
cause the loose particles to bounce off at right angles; those
particles emerge at one end of the wire as electrical energy.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution (7-13-86)
Will Joseph Newman's Energy Machine
Revolutionize the World?
LUCEDALE, Miss. - In the piney woods southwest of this
southwest Mississippi town, off the broken blacktop and two
miles down a rutted sand and dirt road, through three gates,
past the "Keep Out" and "Beware of the Dogs" signs, smack in
the middle of nowhere, sits Joseph Westley Newman, a man who
says he can change the world.
In this land where heat devils beat from the ground in waves,
Newman says he can bring water to the desert places of the
world, eliminate poverty, and improve the quality of
everyone's life. If only Newman's enemies will let him. Newman
does not look the part of a savior. He sports hair waved
across his head in the style of a Baptist deacon.
In the heat Newman is calm, cool and certain. He carries a
gaze direct as a laser. He says, "What I have done will
revolutionize the world." What has Joe Newman done?
He has built the Revolutionary Energy Machine. His
government, Newman's proclaimed enemy, says his machines are
frauds. Not so, says Newman. Instead they are the bootstraps
by which mankind can pull itself up. Across the tidy,
tile-floored workshop from Newman sits a copper-sheathed
canister the height and diameter of a fire hydrant.
At the far end of the workshop, swaddled in miles of copper
wire, is another machine, a 9,000-pound version the size of a
five-person hot tub, its circular rim topped with a circle of
These are two of Newman's Revolutionary Energy Machines,
which he knows will free the world from drudgery and make the
First, Second, and Third World as one.
It is these machines and others like them, using Newman's
same revolutionary theory, that Newman claims produce more
energy than they consume. That would allow men to light cities
for pennies, power cars without pollution or gasoline, drive
machines to make salt water fresh. But it is his own
government, represented by the National Bureau of Standards
and the U.S. Patent Office, that Newman says is his and
It is his own government that Newman claims has waged a
seven-year war to keep his invention from improving the world.
"All I am doing is opening doors," Newman says.
The government, through its unwillingness to grant him a
patent, says Newman's machine, which he has invested about
$700,000 in developing and defending, does not do what he
"The NBS results show that the device behaves in a manner
which is entirely consistent with the well-established laws of
physics," says the report, released June 26.
The "well-established" laws of physics say a machine cannot
put out more energy than it consumes.
Government report `a mockery of justice' ---
Newman says he knew what the NBS report would show. As a
matter of fact, so certain was Newman that he issued a press
release before the report became public saying it was a
"mockery of justice."
The inventor says he is certain his machine works, can
demonstrate that it works, and is willing to defend his
machine in public debate against anyone from the NBS or the
U.S. Patent Office or any university or anyone who claims to
know what he is talking about.
Newman has taken his Revolutionary Energy Machine on the
road, demonstrating it in the Louisiana Superdome and in
In each place he challenged an expert on physics to debate
his theories in public. Nobody showed up. Newman, who was
raised in Mobile, dropped out of high school and left home at
15, went in the armed services, roughnecked in the oil fields,
got a degree in accounting and economics, and decided - in his
early 20s, after casting around through several jobs - that he
wanted to be an inventor.
Over the course of the next two decades he registered patents
for several inventions --- a machine to pick oranges, plastic
barbells, a new type of knife --- and pursued his self-taught
odyssey into electromagnetics.
Etched in the concrete of Newman's workshop walkway is
"Question + Thinking = Truth." Newman says that because he is
not burdened by conventional teachings, his mind is free to
challenge questions without the constraints conventional
physicists place on themselves. Newman already has won over a
number of physicists, electrical
engineers and chemists who have seen his Revolutionary Energy
Machine and heard his explanation.
Dr. Roger Hastings, a physicist with Sperry-Univac Corp., has
conducted hundreds of tests on Newman's machine. His opinion?
"The future of the human race may be drastically uplifted by
the large-scale commercial development of this invention," he
And Nicholaos Tsoupas, a physicist who works at Brookhaven
Laboratory in New York and once taught at Yale University,
said, "I know for a fact that many scientists consider his
invention unorthodox and unacceptable, possibly because his
theories do not fully comport with today's university
However, Mr. Newman has demonstrated that his invention works
the way it claims. The Patent Office should not have denied
him a patent." But the Patent Office did.
Newman applied for a patent for his machine March 22, 1979.
In January 1982 the Patent Office denied him the patent,
claiming his invention "smacked of perpetual motion." Newman
appealed the ruling and in 1983 filed suit against the Patent
Federal District Judge Thomas Jackson, who was hearing the
case, appointed a special master to evaluate Newman's machine.
The special master, William Schuyler Jr., a former
commissioner of the U.S. Patent Office, concluded that the
machine did what Newman claimed and recommended that a patent
Jackson, in an action that many people familiar with similar
patent cases claim was almost unheard of, refused to accept
the recommendation of Schuyler and sent the issue back to the
Patent Office for more study.
In October 1985, Jackson ordered Newman to turn his machine
over to the NBS for testing. Jackson's order also prevented
Newman or any of his representatives from attending the tests.
But when the 30-day period passed and the machine had not been
tested, Newman's attorney, John Flannery, attempted to
retrieve the machine. Jackson ordered it impounded.
After finally testing it, the Patent Office on June 26 issued
a report claiming that the machine does not do what Newman
says it will. "The Bureau of Standards is coming into this
tainted," Newman says, noting that he still has not recovered
the machine the NBS has had since 1985. "I have spent 21 years
working on this machine and seven trying to get it patented. I
am devoted to this."
Why give away a billion-dollar theory?
So devoted is he that he has written a book outlining the
secret of his machine. The red-covered, hard-bound book is
titled in gold: "Joseph Newman's Revolutionary Energy
Inside, the pages are packed with diagrams, equations,
theories and philosophies on the power of electromagnetics.
"Anyone with any knowledge of electromagnetic energy can read
this book and build a machine," Newman says.
They also can study Newman's theories about how the weather
can be controlled by directing electromagnetic energy and how
Newman believes the present educational system trains
originality out of children.
Why would someone develop a theory that he claims will change
the world, a theory worth billions of dollars, and then give
it away in a book? "Because the technical process is 10,000
times more important than the machine itself," Newman says.
He points to his head. "If I keep the knowledge up here, what
will happen to it if something happens to me? If you
understand the technical process, then you don't just copy
what I have done, you can apply it in many different ways."
Newman's machine, if it works, truly could change the face of
the world. Energy would be dirt cheap and non-centralized.
Multinational oil cartels would be restructured or collapse.
Utility companies that have invested billions in nuclear
energy would see the plants as costly millstones, dragging
them into bankruptcy.
Great stockpiles of coal, as well as the companies that mine
it, would lie almost useless. So it is little wonder that
Newman, who says he has gotten mysterious, anonymous
threatening telephone calls lately, thinks there is a
tremendous conspiracy, worldwide in scope, to prevent his
invention from coming into widespread usage.
"My machine is a threat in terms of changing the financial
structure and the power structure of the world," he says
calmly. "I believe this conspiracy goes all the way to the
Newman has written every president since Lyndon Johnson
stating that this new energy technology was on the horizon.
Most of his letters went unanswered, presumably ignored.
However, in 1983 Newman sent Reagan a package of material
about his machine. In a letter he asked the administration's
help "for the people of the world."
Included in the package was a videotape of the machine that
had aired on a New Orleans television news show. Newman got
the package back with a form letter indicating that it had not
But when he opened the package to file the material, Newman
found something he had not included. "There was a video review
sheet from an office in the White House," Newman says, showing
the sheet. "It indicated that not only had the package been
looked at, but it had been looked at rather closely."
The review sheet states, among other things: "Some scientists
believe this invention could change the world."
"When I called to find out what the review sheet was all
about, the fellow at the White House was furious that I had
seen it," Newman says. "They wanted to know how I had gotten
hold of a copy of that sheet."
A White House spokesman said hundreds of videos are received
by the White House annually and that many of them are reviewed
"What is on the review sheet is not the opinion of anyone on
the White House staff," the spokesman said. "It is merely a
review of whatever is on the tape."
`People are trained not to accept change' ---
But Newman is sure that a conspiracy exists. He leans back in
a chair in his workshop and ruminates. "It's strange that they
are capping all these oil wells now," he says. "The reasons
they are giving, the dropping prices and such, are the same
ones you've heard for three, four years. I don't see one
factual piece of evidence for this to be happening.
"I'll bet in the last two years, if you could find out who's
buying the copper mines, who's buying material for magnets. .
. I'd bet you anything that when the wash is out, the oil
companies have bought them."
Newman says his machine is not a perpetual motion machine and
that it does not create energy, two claims that have hurt its
Instead, it is a new way of tapping the electromagnetic
energy field that is already there. Very simply put, the
machine works like this:
Power is used to rotate two magnets wrapped in copper wire.
The rotating magnets and the atoms that align within the
copper wire create an electromagnetic field that can be
The revolutionary aspect of the machine is that the amount of
energy needed to align the atoms and rotate the magnets
creating the energy field is less than the energy created. So
there is a net gain in power created.
Theoretically, with Newman's technology you could produce an
unlimited, self-perpetuating source of pollution-free energy.
"I expect to have one of these machines running a car within
six months," Newman says matter-of-factly. The fight for a
patent for the Revolutionary Energy Machine has become more
than a fight to get an invention patented.
Newman says the battle with the government has given him a
new insight into the way people are taught to think in this
The battle has defined for Newman a philosophy. "People have
been trained, are being trained, not to accept change," he
says. "My powers of reason are greater than many people's
because my feet are not bound by traditional thought.
Newman sits back and looks out the window of his workshop,
past his Revolutionary Energy Machine, out into the pine
trees. "To be a good scientist, you have to be a humble
person. You have to believe that you don't know everything,"
[ Unknown Title / Publication ]
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
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
"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 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
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
The bureau said the efficiency of Newman's machine ranged
between 27 percent and 67 percent, depending upon the test
Never did the energy coming out of the machine exceed the
battery power going into the device to get it running, the
A Description of the Newman Motor
Roger Hastings, Ph.D.
This document is intended to provide information regarding
the energy device invented by Mr. Joseph Newman of Lucedale,
Mississippi. I have prepared the material in response to
numerous requests for information. The number of these
requests has increased dramatically since Newman's public
demonstration of his motor at Washington, D.C., in May, 1985.
This paper provides a personal history to date of my
involvement with Newman, presents data which was taken at the
Washington demonstration, provides an analysis of the data,
and presents my current thoughts regarding a mathmatical
description of Newman's motor.
I first met Mr. Newman in September, 1981. Newman is an
inventor, and he had travelled to Minnesota to present a toy
invention to Tonka Toys Corp. My brother, John, was at the
time in charge of new products for Tonka, and he interviewed
Newman. John and Joe wound up discussing their respective
theories of matter and energy, and Joe's motor. At that time,
Joe was looking for people to verify the operation of his
motor for the patent office. He invited John to Lucedale, but
John said that his brother (me) had a Ph.D. in physics, and
therefore better credentials to offer for the testing of a
My first reaction to the news of Newman's energy producing
motor was quite negative. I had been a professor for four
years, and had encountered several people with "world saving"
energy devices which they wanted evaluated by the University.
In all cases such devices had proven to be inoperative as net
energy producers. Newman offered to fly me to Lucedale to test
his motor, and I responded that he would be wasting his money
and our time because I would certainly prove him wrong. He
insisted, and I complied.
The motor that I saw on that first visit was a monument to
Rube Goldberg, and to an incredible personal effort at
building such a large device. It consisted of five thousand
pounds of #5 gauge wire wound as a solenoid. Within the
solenoid, a 600 pound ceramic magnet rotated on questionable
bearings. The bearings were mounted in a wooden structure. On
the shaft of the rotor was a mechanical commutator consisting
of three home made wheels, and brushes whose tension was
adjusted with rubber bands. The commutator received its power
from a bank of six volt lantern batteries. As the huge magnet
rotated, the whole structure creaked and groaned. At that
time, Newman was taking energy output from a secondary coil
wrapped around the motor primary solenoid. I measured the
voltage and current input simultaneously on an oscilloscope.
The output load was a resistor, and I similarly measured the
output voltage and current. Multiplying voltage and current to
find power, I determined that the motor was about 90%
Newman claimed that his motor was not performing up to par on
that day, and said that he would ask me back when he had the
device tuned up properly. Although I had proven that the motor
at that time was not producing a net energy gain, several
aspects of Newman and his motor were fascinating. First, the
motor was not designed efficiently. Large mechanical losses
were evident, and a 90% efficiency seemed highly unusual.
Second, the huge magnet was rotating at some 60 RPM with an
input power of only a few watts. Finally, Newman himself,
while unconventional, seemed highly intelligent, definately a
creative thinker, and intensely dedicated to his scientific
work. He informed me that he had evolved his theory and filed
for a patent before he had built a prototype motor. (I will
discuss his theory later.)
I travelled again to Lucedale and indeed Newman had tuned up
his motor. From that point foreward I consistantly measured
efficiencies in excess of 100%. At this point I began an
effort to attract scientific interest in Newman's motor, and
to aid him in obtaining a patent. I wrote several affidavits
and documents describing my measurements and generally
supporting Newman's efforts. I have spent countless hours of
my spare time over the past four years on this effort, withour
renumeration. It takes little immagination to understand the
benefit to the human race which would result from an
economical device which generates energy with no external
input. In my opinion, Newman's motor has performed well enough
that the scientific community should be showing great
Over the years, a number of generic questions have repeatedly
been asked. Is there a hidden energy source? The device can be
viewed from all sides, and there are no external connections.
The motor has been transported across country, and works
equally well at all locations. The motor has been duplicated
by at least one other person, who claims that it works. Newman
would not be acting in his own self interest to simultaneously
invite publicity and commit fraud. It is generally known that
Newman is sincere and honest.
Why isn't the motor running itself without the need for
batteries? While in concept the motor should be capable of
running itself without batteries, the technological problems
not been solved which would allow such operation. In a sense,
however, the motor does run itself. The motor has shown the
capacity to charge up the batteries which provide voltage to
the motor. Tests have been run in which up to 15 amp-hours of
output have been drawn from the motor, and in which the six
volt lantern batteries powering the motor have shown no
evidence of an energy loss (the battery condition was verified
in the labs of Ray-O-Vac Battery Co.). Tests have been run in
which apparently dead batteries have been connected to the
motor. The motor has charged up these batteries to the point
where they can power other devices. The same batteries can be
drained down (e.g. through a resistor), then be re-connected
to the Newman motor and be charged up while they run the
Why isn't Newman's motor powering a home or auto? In my
opinion such a demonstration would convince all skeptics, and
create a great demand for the motor. Newman has proceeded in
this direction. He has built at least four prototype motors to
study the effect of varying motor parameters. He has steadily
improved upon his large prototype, and has succeded in
generating up to about 200 watts of power. By contrast, an
average home requires one to three thousand watts on the
average, with peak demands of up to 20 thousand watts. In this
regard, it would be extremely helpful for establishments with
high tech capabilities to aid Joe in scaling up the motor
output. His approach has been to reduce the physical size of
the motor to make it economical, and the output power. His
greatest technical problem has been high voltage switching.
Why does Newman keep his technical process a secret? This
question was answered at Washington in May, when Newman
revealed the construction details of his motor to the public.
He has published a book ("The Energy Machine of Joseph
Newman", available from Newman Publishing, Rt. 1, Box 52,
Lucedale Mississippi 39452), in which he describes his theory
and his motor. Joe had kept the process secret to avoid patent
infringement. Although his patent is still pending in the
U.S., it has issued in other countries. Presumably his patent
rights will be protected in the U.S., although it should be
noted that his motor is being copied by others, so that
issuance of his patent in the U.S. is of immediate importance.
Garland Robinnett of CBS news in New Orleans has run a number
of reports on Newman's struggle with the U.S. Patent office.
I do not fully understand why the scientific community in
this country has not shown more interest in Newman's motor. He
has had support from about 30 independent scientists and
engineers, most of whom own their own engineering or
consulting firms. He has also received some financial support
from investors, who represent a range of interests, including
oil and electrical power interests. I know of no one who has
observed Newman's motor and taken measurements who has been
able to show that his claims are invalid. On the contrary,
most observers come in as skeptics, and leave as believers.
Over the years my colleagues have consistantly provided me
with arguments questioning the validity of my measurements. I
have responded to these questions by modifying the measurement
proceedures and creating new tests. In all cases the Newman
device has passed the tests to my satisfaction. In my opinion,
Newman has at least discovered some interesting and unusual
new phenomena, and at most has discovered a process which will
end man's dependence upon limited and polluting energy
Roger Hastings, Ph.D.
Transcribed By George W. Dahlberg P.E.
I do not intend to recapitulate the theory presented in
Newman's book, but rather to briefly provide my interpretation
of his ideas. Newman began studying electricity and magnetism
in the mid-1960's. He has a mechanical background, and was
looking for a mechanical description of electromagnetic
fields. That is, he assumed that there must be a mechanical
interaction between, for example, two magnets. He could not
find such a description in any book, and decided that he would
have to provide his own explanation. He came to the conclusion
that if electromagnetic fields consisted of tiny spinning
particles moving at the speed of light along the field lines,
then he could explain all standard electromagnetic phenomena
through the interaction of spinning particles. Since the
spinning particles interact in the same way as gyroscopes, he
called the particles gyroscopic particles. In my opinion, such
spinning particles do provide a qualitative description of
electromagnetic phenomena, and his model is useful in
understanding complex electrical situations (note that without
a pictoral model one must rely solely upon mathematical
equations which can become extremely complex).
Given that electromagnetic fields consist of matter in
motion, or kinetic energy, Joe decided that it should be
possible to tap this kinetic energy. He likes to say "How long
did man sit next to a stream before he invented the paddle
wheel?". Joe built a variety of unusual devices to tap the
kinetic energy in electromagnetic fields before he arrived at
his present motor
design. He likes to point out that both Maxwell and Faraday,
the pioneers of electromagnitism, believed that the fields
consisted of matter in motion. This is stated in no uncertain
terms in Maxwell's book "A Dynamical Theory of the
Electromagnetic Field". In fact, Maxwell used a dynamical
model to derive his famous equations. This fact has all but
been lost in current books on electromagnetic theory. The
quantity which Maxwell called "electromagnetic momentum" is
now refered to as the "vector potential".
Going further, Joe realized that when a magnetic field is
created, its gyroscopic particles must come from the atoms of
the materials which created the field. Thus he decided that
matter must consist of the same gyroscopic particles. For
example, when a voltage is applied to a wire, Newman pictures
gyroscopic particles (which I will call gyrotons for short)
moving down the wire at the speed of light. These gyrotons
line up the electrons in the wire. The electrons themselves
consist of a swirling mass of gyrotrons, and their matter
fields combine when lined up to form the magnetic lines of
force circulating around the wire. In this process, the wire
has literally lost some of its mass to the magnetic field, and
this is accounted for by Einstein's equation of energy equals
mass times the square of the speed of light. According to
Einstein, every conversion of energy involves a corresponding
conversion of matter. According to Newman, this may be
interpreted as an exchange of gyrotrons. For example, if two
atoms combine to give off light, the atoms would weight
slightly less after the reaction than before. According to
Newman, the atoms have combined and given off some of their
gyrotrons in the form of light. Thus Einstein's equation is
interpreted as a matter of counting gyrotrons. These particles
cannot be created or destroyed in Newman's theory, and they
always move at the speed of light.
My interpretation of Newman's original idea for his motor is
as follows. As a thought experiment, suppose one made a coil
consisting of 186,000 miles of wire. An electrical field would
require one second to travel the length of the wire, or in
Newman's language, it would take one second for gyrotons
inserted at one end of the wire to reach the other end. Now
suppose that the polarity of the applied voltage was switched
before the one second has elapsed, and this polarity switching
was repeated with a period less than one second. Gyrotons
would become trapped in the wire, as their number increased,
so would the alignment of electrons and the number of gyrotons
in the magnetic field increase. The intensified magnetic field
could be used to do work on an external magnet, while the
input current to the coil would be small or non-existant.
Newman's motors contain up to 55 miles of wire, and the
voltage is rapidly switched as the magnet rotates. He
elaborates upon his theory in his book, and uses it to
interpret a variety of physical phenomena.
RECENT DATA ON THE NEWMAN MOTOR
In May of 1985 Joe Newman demonstrated his most recent motor
prototype in Washington, D.C.. The motor consisted of a large
coil wound as a solenoid, with a large magnet rotating within
the bore of the solenoid. Power was supplied by a bank of six
volt lantern batteries. The battery voltage was switched to
the coil through a commutator mounted on the shaft of the
rotating magnet. The commutator switched the polarity of the
voltage across the coil each half cycle to keep a positive
torque on the rotating magnet. In addition, the commutator was
designed to break and remake the voltage contact about 30
times per cycle. Thus the voltage to the coil was pulsed. The
speed of the magnet rotation was adjusted by covering up
portions of the commutator so that pulsed voltage was applied
for a fraction of a cycle. Two speeds were demonstrated: 12
R.P.M. for which 12 pulses occured each revolution; and 120
rpm for which all commutator segments were firing. The slower
speed was used to provide clear oscilloscope pictures of
currents and voltages. The fast speed was used to demonstrate
the potential power of the motor. Energy outputs consisted of
incandescent bulbs in series with the batteries, flourescent
tubes across the coil, and a fan powered by a belt attached to
the shaft of the rotor. Revelent motor parameters are given
Coil weight : 9000 lbs.
Coil length : 55 miles of copper wire
Coil Inductance: 1,100 Henries measured by observing the
current rise time when a D.C. voltage was applied.
Coil resistance: 770 Ohms
Coil Height : about 4 ft.
Coil Diameter : slightly over 4 ft. I.D.
Magnet weight : 700 lbs.
Magnet Radius : 2 feet
Magnet geometry: cylinder rotating about its perpendicular
Magnet Moment of Inertia: 40 kg-sq.m. (M.K.S.) computed as one
third mass times radius squared
Battery Voltage: 590 volts under load
Battery Type : Six volt Ray-O-Vac lantern batteries connected
A brief description of the measurements taken and distributed
at the press conference follows. When the motor was rotating
at 12 rpm, the average D.C. input current from the batteries
was about 2 milli-amps, and the average battery input was then
1.2 watts. The back current (flowing against the direction of
battery current) was about -55 milli-amps, for an average
charging power of -32 watts. The forward and reverse current
were clearly observable on the oscilloscope. It was noted that
when the reverse current flowed, the battery voltage rose
above its ambient value, varifying that the batteries were
charging. The magnitude of the charging current was verified
by heating water with a resistor connected in series with the
batteries. A net charging power was the primary evidence used
to show that the motor was generating energy internally,
however output power was also observed. The 55 m-amp current
flowing in the 770 ohm coil generates 2.3 watts of heat, which
is in excess of the input power. In addition, the lights were
blinking brightly as the coil was switched.
The back current from the coil switched from zero to negative
several amps in about 1 milli-second, and then decayed to zero
in about 0.1 second. Given the coil inductance of 1100
henries, the switching voltages were several million volts.
Curiously, the back current did not switch on smoothly, but
increased in a staircase. Each step in the staircase
corresponded to an extremely fast switching of current, with
each increase in the current larger than the previous
increase. The width of the stairs was about 100 micro-seconds,
which for reference is about one third of the travel time of
light through the 55 mile coil.
Mechanical losses in the rotor were measured as follows: The
rotor was spun up by hand with the coil open circuited. An
inductive pick-up loop was attached to a chart recorder to
measure the rate of decay of the rotor. The energy stored in
the rotor (one half the moment of inertia times the square of
the angular velocity) was plotted as a function of time. The
slope of this curve was measured at various times and gave the
power loss in the rotor as a function of rotor speed. The
result of these measurements is given in the following table:
Rotor Speed Power Dissipation Power/(Speed Squared)
radian/sec --- watts --- watts/(rad/sec)^2
4.0 --- 6.3 --- 0.39
3.7 --- 5.8 --- 0.42
3.3 --- 5.0 --- 0.46
3.0 --- 3.5 --- 0.39
2.1 --- 2.0 --- 0.45
1.7 --- 1.2 --- 0.42
1.2 --- 0.7 --- 0.47
The data is consistant with power loss proportional to the
square of the angular speed, as would be expected at low
speeds. When the rotor moves fast enough so that air
resistance is important, the losses would begin to increase as
the cube of the angular speed. Using power = 0.43 times the
square of the angular speed will give a lower bound on
mechanical power dissipation at all speeds. When the rotor is
moving at 12 rpm, or 1.3 rad/sec, the mechanical loss is 0.7
When the rotor was sped up to 120 rpm by allowing the
commutator to fire on all segments, the results were quite
dramatic. The lights were blinking rapidly and brightly, and
the fan was turning rapidly. The back current spikes were
about ten amps, and still increased in a staircase, with the
width of the stairs still about 100 micro-seconds. Accurate
measurements of the input current were not obtained at that
time, however I will report measurements communicated to me by
Mr. Newman. At a rotation rate of 200 rpm (corresponding to
mechanical losses of at least 190 watts), the input power was
about 6 watts. The back current in this test was about 0.5
amps, corresponding to heating in the coil of 190 watts. As a
final point of interest, note that the Q of his coil at 200
rpm is about 30. If his battery plus commutator is considered
as an A.C. power source, then the impedance of the coil at 200
rpm is 23,000 henries, and the power factor is 0.03. In this
light, the predicted input power at 700 volts is less than one
MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF NEWMAN'S MOTOR
Since I am preparing this document on my home computer, it
will be convenient to use the Basic computer language to write
down formulas. The notation is * for multiply, / for divide, ^
for raising to a power, and I will use -dot to represent a
derivative. Newton's second law of motion applied to Newman's
rotor yields the following equation:
MI*TH-dot-dot + G*TH-dot = K*I*SIN(TH) (1)
where MI = rotor moment of inertia
TH = rotor angular position (radians)
G = rotor decay constant
K = torque coupling constant
I = coil current
In general the constant G may depend upon rotor speed, as
when air resistance becomes important. The term on the right
hand side of the equation represents the torque delivered to
the rotor when current flows through the coil. A constant
friction term was found through measurement to be small
compared to the TH-dot term at reasonable speeds, but can be
included in the "constant" G. The equation for the current in
the coil is given by:
L*I-dot + R*I = V(TH) - K*(TH-dot)*SIN(TH) (2)
where L = coil inductance
I = coil current
R = coil resistance
V(TH) = voltage applied to coil by the commutator which is a
function of the angle TH
K = rotor induction constant
In general, the resistance R is a function of voltage,
particularly during commutator switching when the air
resistance breaks down creating a spark. Note that the
constant K is the same in equations (1) and (2). This is
required by energy conservation as discussed below. To examine
energy considerations, multiply Equation (1) by TH-dot, and
Equation (2) by I. Note that the last term in each equation is
then identical if the K's are the same. Eliminating the last
term between the two equations yields the instantaneous
I*V=R*I^2 + G*(T,-dot)^2 + .5*L*(I^2)-dot
If this equation is averaged over one cycle of the rotor,
then the last two terms vanish when steady state conditions
are reached (i.e. when the current and speed repeat their
values at angular positions which are separated by 360
degrees). Denoting averages by < >, the above equation
<IV> = <R*I^2> + <G*(TH-dot)^2> (3)
This result is entirely general, independent of any
dependences of R and G on other quantities. The term on the
left represents the input power. The first term on the right
is the power dissipated in the coil, and the second term is
the power delivered to the rotor. The efficiency, defined as
power delivered to the rotor divided by input power is thus
always less than one by Equation (3). This result does
require, however, that the constants K in equation (1) and
equation (2) are identical. If the constant K in equation (2)
is smaller than the constant K appearing in equation (1), then
it may be varified that the efficiency can mathmatecally be
larger than unity.
What do the constants, K, mean? In the first equation, we
have the torque delivered to the magnet, while in the second
equation we have the back inductance or reaction of the magnet
upon the coil. The equality of the constants is an expression
of Newton's third law. How could the constants be unequal?
Consider the sequence of events which occur during the firing
of the commutator. First the contact breaks, and the magnetic
field in the coil collapses, creating a huge forward spike of
current through the coil and battery. This current spike
provides an impulsive torque to the rotor. The rotor
accelerates, and the acceleration produces a changing magnetic
field which propagates through the coil, creating the back
emf. Suppose that the commutator contacts have separated
sufficiently when the last event occurs to prevent the back
current from flowing to the battery. Then the back reaction is
effectively smaller than the forward impulsive torque on the
rotor. This suggestion invokes the finite propagation time of
the electromagnetic fields, which has not been included in
Equations (1) and (2).
A continued mathmatical modeling of the Newman motor should
include the effects of finite propagation time, particularly
in his extraordinary long coil of wire. I have solved
Equations (1) and (2) numerically, and note that the solutions
require finer and finer step size as the inductance, moment of
inertia, and magnet strength are increased to large values.
The solutions break down such that the motor "takes off" in
the computer, and this may indicate instabilities, which could
be mediated in practise by external pertubations. I am
confident that Maxwell's equations , with the proper
electro-mechanical coupling, can provide an explanation to the
phenomena observed in the Newman device. The
electro-mechanical coupling may be embedded in the Maxwell
equations if a unified picture (such as Newman's picture of
gyroscopic particles) is adopted.
Science (10 Feb. 1984), pp. 571-572
Newman's Impossible Motor
The patent office does not believe that Joseph Newman
has built a generator that is more than 100 percent
efficient, but New Orleans does.
At least one physicist in Louisiana swears that the CBS News
anchorman Dan Rather was smiling on 9 January when he reported
that an inventor near New Orleans has built a generator that
defies the second law of thermodynamics. Others did not see
any smile. What they did see, to their surprise, was an
earnest but fantastic news story that has been running on New
Orleans' biggest television channel being repeated over the
The story is about an inventor, a self-educated Missisippian
named Joseph Wesley Newman. He was pleased with the CBS
broadcast because it make help him in a fight with the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office, which has denied him a patent on
the grounds of his latest invention, "smacks of a perpetual
motion machine", meaning by definition it cannot do what it
claimed. On 25 June, the U.S District Court for the District
of Columbia will hear a suit Newman has brought against the
patant office arguing that his device does not aim at
perpetual motion but converts mass to energy in a finite but
very efficient manner. He simply wants a patent.
Newman's invention is hard to describe, partly because its
behavior seems to be at odds with the laws of physics and
partly because the details are being kept secret while the
ligation goes on. Newman says his own theory of magnetism is
"10,000 times more important" than the invention itself, which
be built to demonstrate the concept. He claims to have
discovered the mechanical principles of a gyroscopic particle
of matter that orbits in a magnetic field much as an electron
orbits in an atomic shell. Several readers of his theory say
it is incomprehensible and would not get attention were it not
for the illustrative devices. The patent Newman seeks is for
an "Energy Generation System Having Larger Output than Input".
Those who have seen it say it is a crude direct current motor
powered by a bank of lantern batteries with a heavy, rotating
magnet at its center.
Readings of the machine's performance, like those of Dan
Rather's expression, depend on the reader. As a result of the
TV coverage, the people of New Orleans may be convinced that
Newman has invented a simple device that produces more energy
than it consumes and could end the world's energy sqabbles if
only an arrogant scientific community would pay attention.
That is Newman's message. It has been taken up and broadcasted
in a sort of crusade by Garland Robinette, the evening news
anchorman at the CBS affiliate in New Orleans, WWL-TV.
Last autumn Robinette aired an eight-part series on Newman's
device, charging that jealous academics and frightened
executives tried to stifle information about it. Robinette
concedes that his intense coverage of Newman's began on a slow
news day when he was looking for a cute show-closer. He claims
he was skeptical at first and saw Newman's invention as a
curiosity. But the story soon grew into a "monster that I
couldn't let go" when New Orleans viewers, facing a 200
percent increase in utility rates, demanded to know more.
Furthermore, a Missisippi state energy offical and a credible
scientist had recently vouched for Newman's claims. Robinette
says that since he began reporting on the invention, no one
has come forward to rebut Newman. He challenges people to come
to "get this story off my back".
Newman has benefited from the television coverage and from
several weighty endorsements. For example, the television
engineers watched him. Last year, Robinette dragged two
reluctant engineers on WWL-TV staff to Newman's garage in
Lucedale, Missisippi., about 2 1/2 hours from New Orleans.
They werde sceptics at first, but, after looking at
oscilloscope readings and watching the machine recharge
batteries, they agreed with their anchorman that the claims
Engineer Ralph Hartwell described the tests he ran. When he
arrived at Newman's House, he connected some weak penlight
batteries he had brought along to a small conventional motor
in Newman's back yard. It was allowed to run until the
batteries were drained of power, taking about 1 minute. He
then moved the dead batteries over to the smallest of Newman's
demonstration motors, connected them as a power source, and
started this motor spinning. It ran until it was time for the
camera crew to leave, for something between 1 ans 2 hours.
Finally, the batteries were taken fram Newman's machine back
to the conventional motor and reconnected. This time the motor
ran for about 3 minutes. Hartwell ran annother experiment on a
large device and concluded that it also appeared to generate
more power than it used. Other measurements were taken with
oscilloscopes and current meters, but these readings have been
questioned. After signing a confidential pledge, Hartwell was
allowed to examine the machine's inner wiring. He is certain
that there is no hidden source of energy. Although he feels
uncomfortable about it, he says he could not disprove Newman's
claim and would like to see a universtity run a controlled
Newman's key endorsement comes from Roger Hastings, a
solid-state physicist for the Sperry Univac Company in
Minneapolis. A colleague who knew him as a postdoc fellow at
the University of Virginia says Hastings was regarded as an
adventurous and excellent theorist. Hasting's brother, a
screener for new ideas for Tonka Toys, met Newman when he
submitted an invention to Tonka. Although sceptical, Hastings
(the physician) was persuaded to make a trip to Lucedale. "I
used to teach physics at North Dakota University", says
Hastings, "and we would get three or four people a year who
had some kind of device that was going to save the world. I
assumed it was the same." Newman talked Hastings into fly down
for a visit anyway. He returned five times, testing and
retesting the motors, until he was satisfied that he had made
no mistake. He eventually signed an affidatvit describing the
invention in detail and stating unequivocally that it runs at
greater than 100 percent efficency, producing more power than
it consumes. "I'm sticking my neck out," he says, "because
this is an important issue that should be resolved."
Endorsements such as this are essential for the credibility
of the patent application. Although Newman has read the works
of the great electrical thinkers Michael Faraday and James
Clerk Maxwell, he is not proficent in math or physics.
Newman is collecting seval more endorsements. He claims to
have won the backing recently of, a Geman aerospace engineer
and a liaison officer between the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA) and the European space consortium.
Gerald Miller, a mechanical engineer, student of advanced
physics, and electical industiy consultant in California, has
inspected the devices and says, "I saw things that I cannot
explain in conventional terms." He found that the device
produced more energy than it used, adding, "I am absolutely
certain that there is no hidden energy source. Milton Everett,
a mechanical Engineer and director of the biomass program for
the Missisippi Department of Energy and Transportation, says,
"I think Joe has discovered something that the world is going
to benefit from. It's nor a perpetual motion machine; it
converts mass to energy." Excluding inverstors, Newman claims
to have about 27 such endorsers.
But there have been and continue to be prominent doubters.
Oddly, TV anchorman Robinette has given little attention or
credence to the only thorough analysis ever performed on
Newman's device. It was aranged by Everett (before he became a
full convert to Newman's cause) and was paid for by the
Missisippi energy department. Two electrical engineers from
Missisippi State University (MSU), --- Karl Carlson and Donald
Fitzgerald --- tested one of the Newman's devices last March.
The conditions were unfavourable, because the motor kept
breaking down every "couple of minutes," says Carlson, as a
huge spark from the induction coil shorted out a switch on the
commutator. Thus, while it war fairly easy to measure the
power going in, it was not easy to tell what was coming out.
Newman has built a smaller, less quirky motor since then.
The pattern on the oscilloscope at the output end of a cycle
was difficult to read because as one observer says, the
discharge spark appeared as "a bright flash" or "a mess" on
the face of the screen. Newman sweeps this point aside as a
quibble, saying it merely indicates his machine's tremendous
power. The efficiency claimed for this device is anywhere from
the impossible (slightly over 100 percent) to the fantastic
(800 percent and up). A normal electric motor may be 80
percent efficient, Carlson says, and transformers are
generally in the 90's. Carlson and Fitzgerald found that
Newman's machine was between 55 and 76 percent efficient,
based on their reading of the most favourable oscillograms.
They wrote that they found "an output which is definitely
less than the input." However, they hedged by saying it was
impossible to measure the mechanical energy lost in the
machine, which could affect the rating. They declined to call
Newman's invention a breakthrough but reported that it was
remakably efficient given its "obvious crude configuration."
In a standard tag line, they wrote that "further investigation
is in order." Newman reads this qualified rejection as a
qualified endorsement, explaining when it comes to praising
new discoveries, academisc are mean. He speaks of Carlson and
Fitzgerald with harsher adjectives.
The physics faculties of Loyola and Tulane Universities, both
in New Orleans, have protested Robinette's reports. Daniel
Purrington, Tulane's physics chairman, says: "We all dispute
it. A number of us have told him [Robinette] we think what
he's doing is irresponsible. I talked to him for about 2 hours
about the principles involved." Carl Brans, a theorist at
Loyola, wrote Robinette a two-page letter of protest. "It's
just sensational journalism. In our opinion, it's not worth
the cost," to try to take the measurements that would end the
David Keiffer, an experimental physicist at Loyola, along
with other faculty member, offered to check Newman's device if
he would bring it to the laboratory. (Newman's patent attorney
is a physics graduate of Loyola.) But in the preliminary
talks, Keiffer says, Newman insisted that he be present during
the entire procedure. Then he and Keiffer got into an
argument. Newman packed up and left, never to return. The
Loyola physicist also sought to advise WWL-TV's engineers on
testing the device, but this proved to be a touchy
proposition, because WWL is owned by Loyola and was originally
founded by Loyola's physics department. No one wanted the
advice to be interpreted as pressure.
"I have a fairly good reputation here," Robinette says of his
science reporting, "and this thing just has the potential to
make me look like an absolute ignoranmus. So I've tried
desperately to disprove this and all I've done so far is get
more and more people who are convinced."
What about the negative conclusion reached by the MSU
engineers? Robinette maintains (like Newman and Everett) that
while the engineers were testing the machine, they agreed that
it was producing more energy than it used. But "when they went
back, they wrote an ambigous response that didn't say it
didn't work and didn't say it did." Robinette mentions that
the MSU engineers are retired, as though to diminish their
reliability. He finds it "very surprising that they never
called to challenge his report, which gave the Newman-Everett
version of events.
Some who might otherwis voice scepticism seem to sypathize
with Newman because of the way the patent office rebuffed him.
In court filings, the patent office concedes that Newman is
correct that it rejected his claims without fully reading the
documents he submitted; that his application was handled by an
examiner --- Donovan Duggan --- who seems to specialize in
rejecting perpetual machines; that Duggan said he would not
allow a patent on Newman's device, no matter how much
supportive evidence was submited; that the office officials
never tested the Newman device for efficacy and refused to
observe oscilloscope readings of its input and output; and
finally, that the office issued a patent 1979 to a man
named Howard Johnson for a perpetual motion machine that
Johnson since then agreed is inoperable.
If there were an association of militant patent rejectees,
Newman's battle with the patent office could be its rallying
cause. But there is no such association. However, Newman has
done reasonably well attracting attention by himself,
especially in New Orleans. In a few months, he will get his
day in court.
Science (16 Nov. 1984), p. 817
An Endless Siege of Implausible
R. Jeffrey Smith
In the modern world of commerce, the U.S. patent and
trademark office is a street-corner cop with the power to
arrest the development of any product that promises the
impossible. Its book of statutes contains the basic laws of
physics, the axioms of mathematics, the fundamental principles
of mechanical engineering. With particular enthusiasm, its
employees serve as guardians of the public in a never-ending
battle against mechanical devices allegedly capable of
This, at least, is how they see themselves. Inventors such as
Joseph Newman are more apt to view them as "a bunch of
narrow-minded people who have conducted themselves outside the
federal law and the human race". For more than 5 years,
Newman, 48, has been frustrated in his efforts to obtain a
patent for an "Energy System Having Higher Output Than Input".
In 1982, the patent office told him that because such a device
is simply infeasible, his application was denied after
something less than a comprehensive, time-consuming review (Science,
10 February 1984, p. 571).
Recently, however, with the help of some unexpected
scientific endorsements, Newman persuaded the U.S. District
Court in Washington, D.C., to order that his application be
granted a full review by an examiner --- in short, a second
chance. Newman believes that the decision is a slap in the
face for the patant office and a partial vindication of his
claims. Actually, the dispute reveals how easy it can be for
inventors to jerk the patent office around. The ruling, made
by Judge Thomas Jackson on 31 October, places the office in
the difficult position of determining whether Newman's "energy
generation system" -- a powerful electric motor -- is
adequately described in his application, and whether it is
similar or identical to motors with existing patants. Neither
topic was given serious consideration on the first go-around,
for reasons the patent office believes obvious.
The decision resulted from an unusual hearing in which a
phalanx of attorneys in Newman's employ repeatedly cited
patent case law, while Jere Sears, deputy solicitor in the
patent office, repeatedly invoked the second law of
thermodynamics. In its essence, that law states that the
energy produced by a mechanical device such as Newman's will
always be less than the energy needed to operate it. In
addition to basing the case on "all of recorded science", as
Sears put it, he relied heavily on an affidavit from Jacod
Rainbow, a former chief research engineer at the National
Bureau of Standards and well-known debunker of perpetual
motion machines. Rainbow has several objections to the patent
application, but his primary claim is that the motor's output
of energy has been measured incorrectly. Although he has not
seen the device or tested himself, he is willing to bet "any
money" that it operates at well under 100 percent efiicency.
As strong as the gouverment's argument was, it was sharply
undercut by two affidavits. One was written by Mort Zimmerman,
the president of Commercial Technology, Inc., in Dallas.
Zimmerman said his 400-person firm "has independently ...
constructed, operated, and tested several crude prototype
devices based on the Newman invention, and has confirmed for
itself that these prototype devices which embody the Newman
invention operate and produce power as claimed by Newman" at
more than 111 percent efficiency. Zimmerman was enthusiastic
enough to purchase an option for the right to manufacture and
sell Newman's motor in north Texas. (Recently, he told Science
that the motor "needs further development for practical
utilization, and we're not completely convinced that we can
The second affidavit was prepared from Lawrence E. Wharton, a
physicist in the Laboratory For Atmospheric Sciences at the
Goddart Flight Space Center in Maryland. Initially, Wharton,
who volunteered his services to the patent office as a sceptic
of Newman's claims, vigorously attacked Zimmerman's statement.
Shortly before the court hearing, however, he recanted some of
his arguments, and declared that the motor's efficiency "is in
substantial excess of 100 percent" and perhaps as high as 600
percent, if Newman's measurements are correct. The change of
heart came, he said, after Newman argued with him in a long
Both of these statements apparently made a strong impression
on William Schuyler, an attorney and one-time commissioner of
U.S. patents who was appointed by the judge as a "special
master" to help resolve some of the technical disputes. In his
report, Schuyler agreed that the operation of Newman's motor
"seems clearly to conflict with recognized scientific
principles relating to thermodynamics and conservation of
energy." But he insisted ther was an "overwhelming" evidence
that the motor's output energy exceeded the external input
energy, adding that "there is no contradictory factual
evidence." He went so far as to state that Newman was entitled
to a patent as long as it did not conflict with any existing
All of this came as a great shock to Sears. It was he, not
Newman, who nominated Schuyler. "We felt reasonably safe with
a person of his background," he explains. In a final pleading
to the judge, Sears asked, "Why are we still paying power
bills if Newman has actually achieved his claims? The Court
should exercise some common sense and refrain from joining
those who apparently believe in the tooth fairy... Manifestly,
this court has no power to abrogate a natural law."
In his ruling, Judge Jackson accepted the major points of
Schuyler's report, but said he was unwilling to conclude as
yet that Newman has produced a "truly pioneering invention."
That decision awaits aanother hearing, now set for January.
Sears denies that this decision has any implications for the
general patent review process. But one effect may be to bar
the office from dealing summarily whith such unusual claims in
the future -- a development that could sharply increase the
examination delays experienced by inventors with more
To Newman, the dispute has become a crusade. Having spent
thousands of dollars already in lawyer's fees, consulting
fees, and court costs, he will soon pay to publish a book
describing both his invention and the patent fight. He says
that "the world is fortunate that I'm not afraid of a ruckus,
I intend to fight this untill hell freezes over."
Science (July 11, 1986), Vol. 233
Newman's " Energy Output" Machine Put to
What's a device with a battery pack, a magnet, and a coil
For the past 6 years, Joseph Newman, an inventor from
Mississippi, has been loudly proclaiming that it's a
revolutionary machine which produces more power than it uses.
The National Bureau of Standards recently issued its own
verdict after analyzing Newman's machine: "In none of tests
did the device's approach 100%.... Our results are clear and
unequivocal," the bureau said.
Newman has gone to great lengths to try to win a patent on
his energy output machine. When the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office indicated in 1984 that the device did not work, Newman
sued the agency. He hired a publicist, and the media often
portrayed him as an underdog pitted against the scientific
establishment. Then the court ordered Newman to submit the
machine to the National Bureau of Standards for testing.
Newman reluctantly complied.
A physicist and two electrical engineers from the bureau
tested the machine in a variety of ways to measure its energy
input and output and used instrumentation that is common in
research engineering laboratories. The sole power source of
the device was 116 9-volt batteries. According to the test
results, the device's efficiency ranged from 27 to 67%,
depending on the voltage, the power drawn from the device, and
the condition of insulating tape on one of the parts. (The
tape kept burning from sparks generated by the machine, which
caused the efficiency to drop and had to be replaced
According to John Lyons, director of the bureau's National
Engineering Laboratory, the device basically converted direct
current to alternating current. He noted that there are
several machines already on the market that do the same thing,
but they run at 90% efficiency or higher.
Newman had court permission to observe the bureau's tests,
but never appeared for any of the experiments, which were
conducted between March and June. His spokesman Evan Soule
said Newman will ask the court to order the testing of the
test equipment. Newman said in an interview, "I have no
respect for the National Bureau of Standards. This is a
conspiracy against me."
The testing cost the bureau $75,000, which it hopes to recoup
from the patent office. The patent office will submit the
results to U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia,
which will try the case in December.
Measurement & Analysis of Joseph
Newman's Energy Generator
Dr. Roger Hastings, Ph.D.
The author has made numerous measurements on the Energy
Machines developed by Joseph Newman of Lucedale, Mississippi.
The machines are large, air core, permanent magnet motors. The
most important design rule specified by the inventor is that
the length of wire in the motor coil be very long; preferably
long enough so that the switching time between current
reversals is shorter than the time required for propagation of
the current wavefront through the coil. Various models contain
up to 55 miles of wire, with air core coil inductances of up
to 20,000 Henries. The permanent magnet armatures have very
large magnetic moments. Thus the motors exhibit high torque
with low current inputs. The motors generate large back
current spikes consisting of pulsed rf in the 10-20 MHz
frequency range. These spikes provide large mechanical
impulses to the rotor, energize fluorescent tubes placed
across the motor, and tend to charge the dry cell battery
pack. The total generated energy --- consisting of mechanical
work, mechanical friction, ohmic heating, and light --- is
many times larger than the battery input energy.
Newman's theories and machines will be described.
Measurements indicating net energy gain from the devices will
be presented. A phenomenological mathematical description of
the motor will also be presented. Finally, the author will
present his personal impressions of Newman's work.
Newman's Theory ---
Joseph Newman is an inventor who lives and works at his home
in Lucedale, MS. He became interested in electromagnetic
energy some 25 years ago, and began a self-study program.
After searching standard texts for a mechanical description of
electromagnetic interactions, he concluded that no such
description existed. Newman decided that he would have to
generate his own mechanical theory of electromagnetism, and
over the following several years he evolved his gyroscopic
particle theory. This theory, or model states that all matter
and energy is composed of a single elementary spinning
particle which always moves at the speed of light. The
gyroscopic particle has mass, and it can neither be created or
destroyed. All energy conversions, in this theory, involve an
exchange of gyroscopic particles. E = mc^2 is the expression
of this concept, and simply represents an accounting of
gyroscopic particles during an energy conversion.
Electric and magnetic fields consist of gyroscopic particles
flowing at the speed of light along the field lines. When an
electric or magnetic field is created, the particles initially
come from the materials which energized the field. For
example, when a battery is connected to a wire, gyroscopic
particles flow at the speed of light down the wire, and they
tend to align the gyroscopic particle flow fields of the
electrons in the wire. The electricgyroscopic particle flow
field extends outside the wire creating the circumferential
magnetic field of the wire. The energy in the magnetic field
is Nmc^2, where N is the number of particles in the field, and
m is the mass of an individual particle. This energy, or these
particles, came from the electrons of the copper.
Thus, Newman considers the current flowing in the wire to be
a catalyst which energy to emanate from the atoms of the wire.
He claims that he has developed a mechanism whereby field
energy can be pumped out of the copper atoms in the wire,
thereby reducing their mass without consuming the voltage
source which has supplied the catalytic current flow. Since
the mass is consumed totally, there is no pollution in this
process. One gram mass, if totally consumed,could supply
enough energy to power a home for one thousand years. Newman
describes his theory and its applications in his book, THE
ENERGY MACHINE OF JOSEPH NEWMAN .
Description of Newman Motors ---
Newman's motors may be described as two-pole, single phase,
permanent magnet armature, DC motors. That is, the armature
consists of a single permanent magnet which either rotates or
reciprocates within a single coil of copper wire. The coil is
energized with a bank of dry cell, carbon zinc batteries. In
the rotating models, which will be emphasized in this paper,
the battery voltage to the coil is reversed each half cycle of
rotation by a mechanical commutator attached to the shaft of
the rotating armature. Motor operation is sensitive to the
angle at which the voltage is switched, and this is optimized
experimentally. On some models, the commutator also interrupts
the voltage several times per cycle, creating a pulsed input
to the coil.
The coils are constructed with a very large number of turns
of copper wire. In all models, the coil inductive reactance is
much larger than the coil resistance at operating speed.
However, the coil resistance is large enough so that even in
the locked rotor condition, very little current flows through
the coil. The motors typically draw less than ten milliampere
so that small capacity batteries (e.g., 9 volt transistor
batteries) can be used in series for the power supply. Self
resonant frequencies (frequency at which the coil inductive
reactance equals the coil distributed capacitive reactance)
are typically on the order of the armature rotation frequency.
The permanent magnet armature is very strong, and TIGHT
COUPLING TO THE COIL is emphasized in Newman's later models
[emphasis added]. His early models used up to 700 pounds of
ceramic magnets, while later models used smaller armatures
made with powerful neodymium-boron-iron magnets. The
commutator is protected by fluorescent tubes placed across the
motor. Enough tubes are placed in series so that the battery
voltage will not break them down. When the coil is switched,
the tubes are lit by the resulting high voltage, minimizing
arcing across the commutator.
Newman's motors exhibit the following extraordinary
1) High torque is realized with very little input current and
very little input power. The battery input power is typically
several times smaller than the measured frictional power
losses occurring when the armature rotates at its operating
speed. His motors are at least ten times more efficient than
commercial electric motors (perform the same work with one
tenth the input power.)
2) The batteries last much longer than would be expected for
the current input. It has been demonstrated that "dead" dry
cell batteries will charge up while operating a Newman Motor,
and subsequently be able to deliver significant power to
normal loads (e.g., lights). The batteries fail by internal
shorting rather than be depletion of their internal energy.
3) Significant rf power is generated by the motor (primarily
in the ten to twenty megahertz range). The rf is a high
voltage relative to ground, and will light fluorescent or neon
tubes placed between the motor and ground in addition to
lighting the tubes placed across the motor coil. The rf
current flows through the entire system, and has been measured
calorimetrically to have an rms value many times larger than
the battery input current.
A large amount of data has been collected by many individuals
on the various Newman Motors. While Newman's most recent
prototypes are perhaps the most interesting because of their
reduced volume, I will present data on his original prototype
large machine which has been more extensively investigated.
Measured motor parameters are listed below:
Weight ........................... 9,000 pounds
Copper Wire Length ...... 55 miles
Coil Inductance ............. 1,100 Henries
Coil Resistance .............. 770 Ohms
Coil Inside Diameter ...... 4 feet
Coil Height .................... 4 feet
Rotor Weight ..................... 700 lbs. ceramic magnets
Rotor Length ..................... 4 feet
Moment of Inertia .............. 40 Kg-sq.m.
Magnetic Moment ............. 100 Tesla-cu.in
Battery Type ..................... 6 Volt Ray-O-Vac Lantern
Total Series Voltage .......... 590 Volts
Torque Constant ................ 15,400 oz. in./amp
Drag Coefficient ................. 0.005 Watts/sq.rpm.
Q at 200 rpm ..................... 30
Power Factor, 200 rpm ...... 0.03
The torque constant was measured at DC and agrees with
calculations. The drag coefficient was measured by plotting
the motor speed versus time after disconnecting the batteries.
It was found that the decay is exponential with the drag
torque being proportional to the angular speed. With the motor
operating at 200 rpm, the following measurements and
calculations were obtained:
RESULTS: 200 RPM at 590 VOLTS
Battery Input Current ............ 10 milliampere
Battery Input Power .............. 6 Watts
Rotor Frictional Losses .......... 200 Watts
RF Current (rms) ................. 500 milliampere
RF Ohmic Losses in Coil .......... 190 Watts
Additional Loads ................. Fluorescent Tubes
Fan (belt driven)
The frictional losses are computed from the measured drag
coefficient. The ohmic losses are computed from the coil
resistance. Without considering the additional loads, it is
seen that the output energy of the machine exceeded the input
by a factor of 65!
Oscillograph photos show that the current waveform is
dominated by the very large spike which occurs when the
magnetic field of the coil collapses. The leading edge of this
spike is shown in Figure 1. The staircase current rise is
typical of the Newman Motors, with the width of the stairs in
all cases being approximately equal to the length of the coil
winding divided by the speed of light. Although the average
current in the spike is at DC, the actual current waveform
under the stairs is pulsing at a frequency of about 13
megahertz. The time average current in the waveform agrees
with the calorimeter measurement of the rf current.
Figure 1 [Not shown]. Reproduction of oscillographs
showing Newman Motor switching current spike. Spike leading
edge is shown with the magnified time base in second and third
oscillograph. Rotor speed was 120 rpm.
A phenomenological theory of operation is suggested here,
which involves the following sequence of events:
1) The battery is switched across the coil and a current
wavefront (gyroscopic particles) propagates into the coil at a
speed determined by the coil's propagation time constant.
2) Before the wavefront completes its journey through the
coil, the battery voltage is switched open. At this point the
coil contains a charge equal to the current times the on-time.
3) When the switch is opened, all of this charge leaves the
coil in a very short time, creating a very large current pulse
in the coil.
4) The magnetic field generated by this current pulse
(gyroscopic particle flow) propagates out to the permanent
magnet armature, and gives it an impulsive torque.
5) The magnet accelerates, and the resulting magnetic field
disturbance of the permanent magnet is propagated back to the
coil, creating a back-emf. However, by the time this occurs,
the switch is open so that the back emf does not impede the
current flowing in the battery circuit.
These notions agree qualitatively with the measured
waveforms. After one-half cycle of rotation, a charge on the
order of 0.01 Coulombs will be contained within the coil. From
the oscillograph this is seen to be dumped in a few
milliseconds, creating a current of several amps. This current
continues to flow for some ten milliseconds before decaying to
Newman's Motor can be described by the following set of
(1) J? + F(?) = K(sub t)I sin (?)
(2) LI = RI = V(?) - K(sub i)? sin (?)
J = Rotor Moment of Inertia
F = Friction and Load Torque
K(sub t) = Torque Constant
I = Coil Current
L = Coil Inductance
V = Applied Voltage
K(sub i) = Induction Constant
? = Rotation Angle
The first equation is Newton's second law applied to the
rotating magnet, the second is the coil current circuit
equation. The voltage is the value applied to the coil within
the commutator. If the first equation is multiplied by ? and
the second equation is multiplied by I, and both equations are
averaged over one cycle, the sum of the resulting equations
(3) <IV> = <?F> + <I^2R> + (K(sub i) -
K(sub t) <?Isin ?)
where the brackets indicate a time average over one cycle of
The term on the left is the power input. The first two terms
on the right represent the mechanical power output (combined
frictional losses and load power), and the ohmic heating in
the coil windings. The last term is zero if the torque
constant is equal to the induction constant, as would be the
case in a conventional motor. However, as postulated above, if
the induction constant is smaller than the torque constant,
the last term supplies the negative power.
To view this another way, assume that the input voltage,
through the commutator action varies as V = V(sub o)sin (?).
If we also assume that the rotor angular
speed, ?, is nearly a constant, w, the following expression
applies for the motor efficiency:
<wF> K(sub t)w<Isin ?> K(sub t)w
(4) E = ______ = __________________ = ___________
<IV> V(sub o)<Isin ?> V (sub o)
The following two equations can now be solved for the
presumed constant motor speed:
(5) LI + RI = (V(sub o) - K(sub i)w)sin(wt)
(6) <F(w)> = K(sub t)<I sin(wt)>
The solution depends upon the details of the mechanical load
function, F(w). If, however, the torque constant and voltage
are both very large (as they are in Newman's Motor), then the
angular speed is approximately :
w apr.= __________
and the expression for the efficiency becomes:
E apr.= __________
If the torque and induction constants are equal, the motor is
nearly one hundred percent efficient. If the torque constant
exceeds the induction constant, the efficiency* exceeds 100%.
[*Note: the PRODUCTION efficiency can exceed 100% the
CONVERSION efficiency cannot exceed 100%]
Joseph Newman has demonstrated that his Theory is a useful
tool by which predictions of circuit function can be made
without mathematics. For example, his gyroscopic particles
interact as spinning particles (through the cross product of
their spins), and this qualitatively describes magnetic
induction. In complicated electromagnetic systems, exact
solutions to Maxwell's equations may be difficult or
impossible to obtain, while a phenomenological mechanical
picture can be visualized to give qualitatively correct
results. Mechanical models of electromagnetic interactions
were considered essential by scientists of the 19th century.
Maxwell originally derived his famous equations by using a
mechanical model of the electromagnetic field, and stated the
"The theory I propose may therefore be called a theory of the
electromagnetic field because it has to do with the space in
the neighborhood of the electric or magnetic bodies, and it
may be called a dynamical theory because it assumes that in
that space there is MATTER IN MOTION, by which the observed
electro-magnetic phenomena are produced .... In speaking of
the energy of the field, I wish to be understood literally:
ALL ENERGY IS THE SAME AS MECHANICAL ENERGY.." [Emphasis
Regarding Joseph Newman's Motor, I have no doubt about its
performance or about the profound importance of its future
**AT THIS TIME IT APPEARS THAT THE FIRST APPLICATIONS WILL BE
REPLACEMENTS FOR EXISTING ELECTRIC MOTORS. [Editor: Emphasis
Regarding a rigorous mathematical description of the
underlying phenomena, it is clear that much effort, both
theoretical and experimental, will be required to achieve this
 THE ENERGY MACHINE OF JOSEPH NEWMAN, Joseph W. Newman
author, Evan Soule, editor. Joseph Newman Publishing Company,
Rt 1, Bx 52, Lucedale, MS 39452 [1st Edition published in
 The precise condition for this approximation to be valid
is that the locked rotor torque be much larger than the
applied mechanical torque at speed multiplied by one plus the
square of the ratio of inductive reactance and resistance.
This condition applied to some of Newman's Motors, and in
particular to the most recent small volume devices. In the
larger motors the voltage is applied with a phase shift chosen
to optimize efficiency, and it can be shown that Equation 8
still applies in the limit of large inductance.
 A DYNAMICAL THEORY OF THE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELD. James
Clerk Maxwell, T.F. Torrance, ed., Scottish Academic Press
Ltd., Edinburgh (1982). [From Maxwell's Presentation to the
Royal Society, 1864).
The above was written by Dr. Roger Hastings, Ph.D., in 1987
for apresentation before a National Conference of the
International Tesla Society.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Dr. Roger Hastings has a Ph.D. in Physics, University of
Minnesota, 1975; MS in Physics, University of Denver, 1971; BS
in Physics, University of Denver, 1969.
Dr. Hastings was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of
Virginia, 1975-77 with research in organic superconductors and
the physical properties of solutions of macro-ions and
viruses. Currently, Dr. Hastings is a Principal Physicist with
the UNISYS Corporation. As a consultant, Dr. Hastings also
designs electric motors for other corporations.
*The latest commutator design enables higher voltages to be
Note: The above article was written several years ago.
The principles described above are generally applicable
"across the breadth of the technology." However, considerable
improvements to the commutator design have been made in the
recent past. These improvements are intended to actually
reduce the intensity of the sparking by distributing the
physical connections over a wider area. The reader should bear
in mind that there are TWO totally different design systems
(but many sub-configurations within each basic design): there
is one commutator design when the energy machine is intended
to function as a GENERATOR and a totally different commutator
design when the energy machine is intended to function as a
MOTOR. The latest design improvements to the commutator system
apply to the machine operating as a MOTOR. Subsequent torque
can be utilized for mechanical systems or can be used in
conjunction with a conventional generator.