Return to the INE Main Page


By: Patrick Bailey, Toby Grotz, and James Hurtak

An updated and revised version of a paper originally submitted in June 1998 to the 1998 Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, the 33rd IECEC, held August 3-7, 1998, in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Another previous version of this paper was also submitted in July 1998 to the 1998 Institute for New Energy Symposium, the 1st INE Symposium, held August 14-15, 1998, in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Posted to the INE Website with the permission of authors.


Patrick G. Bailey
Institute for New Energy
P. O. Box 201
Los Altos, CA 94023-0201

Toby Grotz
Wireless Engineering
760 Prairie Avenue
Craig, CO 81625

James J. Hurtak
Academy for Future Science
P.O. Box FE
Los Gatos, CA 95031


A methodology is presented to collect, document, and summarize the findings of the various experiments, motors, generators, devices, and demonstrations in the innovative energy conversion areas that have been reported in the past several years to produce very high-efficiency or so-called over-unity operation. The concepts of free-energy and over-unity devices are not new, and many examples of such devices have been built utilizing various forms of potential energy within the last 100 years, such as hydro-electric dams and nuclear reactors. As many such devices and experiments are currently being reported, it has become very important and necessary to collect the data available on each, cross-check the data with other researchers, and maintain an accurate and truthful accounting of the status of each device and experiment. The INE Database has become an internationally recognized summary of such data. This paper presents a complete description of this database, its location on the publicly available internet, provides detailed instruction on how to add new devices and experiments to this database, and also explains how to modify and update any of the existing data. Selection criteria based upon technical interest, and also on commercialization interest, allow these data to be easily ranked for comparison and reference.


'Energy' cannot be created or destroyed - it exists throughout space and within matter - and energy conversion allows the form that we perceive the energy to be in change. 'Perpetual Motion' does not exist - and long lasting motion is easily observable, such as planetary spin and planetary orbits. Several researchers, including past well-known researchers Henry T. Moray, Walter Russell, and Nikola Tesla, have designed equipment and have performed various and repeated experiments that have demonstrated new and hitherto unknown forms of energy conversion to advance scientific understanding. [1,2,3]

'Free Energy' is a term that can have two meanings: either (1) the additional energy that can be obtained from a device at little or no additional cost, so the additional energy is essentially free; or (2) more output energy appears to be available than the input energy, so it looks like some energy is being created, such as in the case of the detonation of an atomic bomb.

'Over-unity Devices' are those systems which appear to produce more energy than they use. In analyzing such systems, a box is drawn around the device and energy balances are formulated to measure the amounts of energy coming into and going out of that box. Whether or not the device is termed an 'over-unity' device will depend upon the size of the box as drawn. When the box is drawn large enough, all systems or devices will have a net energy transfer of zero. On the other hand, when the box is drawn just small enough, the device will seem to produce energy out of nothing, and can be said to be an 'over-unity' device - and any intelligent person or any physicist will know better. The additional energy will always from some "potential energy source", such as the batteries in a flashlight.

From this point of view, examples of existing so-called 'free-energy' and 'over-unity' devices abound: such as Hoover Dam! So then is any battery, generator, or any nuclear reactor: by way of a 'potential energy' source. More energy certainly comes out of a dam than went in to making it (by us, at least). And any dam engineer will tell you that it will produce more energy than it cost to build, and that it will last forever (or at least until his kids get out of college). So it is seen that these generators can be thought of as 'free-energy' or 'over-unity' devices, while they are really only energy conversion devices, and obviously not perpetual motion machines. People who insist that they actually are "perpetual motion machines", are either very ignorant or very devious. In such cases, it is important to examine the person's true motives. Another 'free-energy' system which has been carefully studied in refereed scientific journals is the radiation that emanates from a hydrogen atom, as classical physics would indicate that the electron would eventually radiate away all of its energy. [4,5]

These technical concepts, with their advantages and limitations, and examples of such devices that have been said to demonstrate these concepts, have been reported in previous IECEC papers. [1,2]


As in any scientific discipline, accurate data are required to be studied before any theory can be made, and before any conclusions can be drawn. The original classical "Scientific Method" first requires the data, then an examination of the data, then a conclusion from the data, and then independent validation by other researchers of the data, and then finally a mathematical theory is formally suggested to explain the data.

In any new or rapidly growing technical field, newly reported data is commonly refused and ignored by scientists who may not be aware of all of the developments in that new field. This condition is best described by the oft-heard political conclusion:

"I will not review your data because it does not fit into my theory!"

Examples of this absurd conclusion abound, such as: "Voices cannot travel over wires"; "Heavier than air machines will never fly"; "So-called 'low-energy' nuclear reaction experiments do not work"; "There is no water on the moon"; and so on.

The data must come before the theory, of course - and, the data must be reviewed with an open mind, and not just casually rejected!

Thus we have an absolute need to collect accurate data from which to form any new conclusions and make any new or significant advances!

The Institute for New Energy (INE), a non-profit organization, was formed to build a bridge between the conventional scientific establishment and the general technical community. The INE is interested in collecting and documenting the details and data from devices and experiments that would advance our current understanding of science, and that would lead us in breakthroughs into new sciences and new technologies. [1,2]

This goal is the same for the NASA "Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program", as NASA Lewis Research Center currently calls one of their current breakthrough efforts, whose objectives are to obtain fuel from "empty" space and also to travel at a speeds that appear to be faster than the speed of light. [3]

Another large organization of interest with similar goals is the Society for Scientific Exploration, whose Journal of Scientific Exploration, edited by Bernhard Haisch, states: [5]

"As science has developed, it has become increasingly compartmentalized. This may make the operation of each discipline more efficient, but we run the risk that the profession may not be responding to challenges that do not fit neatly into the matrix of present-day mainstream science."

It is therefore important that the researchers and investigators in these new areas document and report their data for others to see and review. This will cause interest, investigation, and eventually support for those new technologies that will be developed. For those experiments and devices with a positive future, this is an absolutely necessary step in their development, review, maturity, and acceptance. For those experiments and devices that may not turn out, or that have a negative future, this is also a necessary step in order to document their status and the reasons that those investigations did not turn out as hoped.

By reporting and collecting these data, the successful results will be catapulted into the watchful eyes of the established scientific community, while the unsuccessful results will also be made available in order to avoid and not promote "overt fraudulent research" or so-called "pathetic science". [6,7,8]

It is the responsibility of the researcher to contribute his data to this quest.

To the researcher, the benefits are very large, and the liability is very low.

Several active researchers have shown supportive interest in this INE Database. They have contributed several new innovative devices, experiments, and data for inclusion and review. More data is needed in these and other areas.


Efforts to validate the data are as equally important as the initial efforts to summarize and report the data.

Validation may occur in different phases or sequential steps: (1) Validation by a non-technical witness, such as a member of the press; (2) Validation by a technical witness who will affirm the data; (3) Validation by repeating the experiment again under the same or different conditions, without and with witnesses; (4) Validation by a completely separate and independent researcher; and (5) Validation by several independent researchers.

All of these different levels of validation can and should be reported.

During such validation efforts, it must be remembered that the conditions of the experiment and the materials used in the experiment must be the same or as identical as possible to those used in the experiment that is being validated. A good example is trying to start a car engine when the spark is not tuned to a few degrees just before top-dead-center (of the pistons): unless the timing is adjusted to be very accurate, the car will not start, even though someone else's car does. Similar instances can be cited where one experiment appeared to be successful, while a repeat or another validation effort was unsuccessful - because something (that turned out to be of major importance) was changed in the latter experiment.

Cross-referencing and feedback provide the means to allow communications between the various researchers to resolve any and all differences of opinion or results that may occur during this research and reporting process. It is hoped that all differences in the experiments, materials, and the results can be resolved in this manner. However, in cases where research results differ, these data and comments should also be reported as feedback and made available to all other researchers to see and reference. Future discussions may then be able to resolve these differences.


The INE Database is being collected and maintained by the Institute for New Energy. Volunteers from the general public are wanted and needed that can assist in this effort.

The INE Database is being made completely available to the interested scientific community on the public internet, through the use of website
HTML files, at:

The Institute for New Energy has created the INE Database in the following three formats:

1. An Excel Spreadsheet with All of the Data for All of the Devices (one Excel file)

2. A Listing of all of the Data (one text file)

3. An HTML File for Each Device (many HTML text files)

The "Excel Spreadsheet" is a large spreadsheet with each experiment, device, or reported finding (hereafter called a "device") identified within one unique row of that spreadsheet. All of the data regarding that "device" is then contained in the various separate columns in the spreadsheet within that row, in a consistent format. Any new or modified data, as well as all comments and references, are also included in that particular row.

A "Listing" can be automatically made from the spreadsheet for any "device" of interest. This listing contains the label for each column in the spreadsheet, and the data that row contains for that "device". The listing format is the same as that given for the database data, as shown below. The listing can be output as a text file for one device or for all of the devices contained in the database, and can be printed for reference.

An "HTML File" (HyperText Markup Language File) can also be automatically made from the spreadsheet for any or all of the "devices" of interest, containing the same data as the above listing. A large FORTRAN program has been written that processes each row of the database and creates a unique HTML file for each "device". Thus all of the data within the entire INE Database can be easily converted into many unique HTML files, uploaded and posted onto the internet, and made available to the international community.

Currently, over 110 "devices" are stored within the INE Database, and an HTML file is now available on the internet that shows the data that is available for each device. Although some of these files contain a great deal of data, other files contain very little data. More data is needed and requested in all of the files currently listed.

All of these HTML files are also available as links in other INE website summary files, that summarize all of the devices in one of the following four listing orders:

Device Name, Alphabetical;
Researcher Name, Alphabetical;
Interest Criteria, Highest to Lowest; and
Commercialization Criteria, Highest to Lowest.

These four file are also automatically created when the HTML device files are created, and each contains all of device files, just listed in a different order.

These summary files can be found at the following internet locations (URLs):

Device Name:

Researchers Name:

Interest Criteria:

Commercialization Criteria:


In order to rank each device against all the other devices in the database, various ranking criteria have been created to allow a fair and demonstrateable difference between all of the devices listed. These criteria and their results have been also reported in two previous IECEC papers. [1,2]


The criteria for performing the technical interest rankings has been published in the papers discussed above. [1,2] An updated and expanded
version of these criteria may be found at:

The objective of ranking by technical interest is to create an indication of how important each device or technology may be or would be (if the device is shown to be successful) to the general scientific community.

The current technology interest ranking criteria contains a 13 point ranking scale that is shown in Table 1.

Table 1.  Technology Interest Ranking Criteria

 N - No Information.
 M - Incomplete:  More Information is Needed.

 0 - Not Substantiated.
 1 - Evidence That It May Be Not Substantiated

 2 - Being Researched By Only One Person.
 3 - Something Unusual Was Demonstrated By
     One Person.

     New Physics, Small Impact; or:
 4 - That Something Was Again Demonstrated
     By One Person.
 5 - That Something Was Again Demonstrated
     And Witnessed By Others.

     New Physics, Large Impact;
 6 - That Something Was Replicated By Another.
 7 - The Operational Techniques And
     Measurements Are Being Refined.
 8 - The Phenomena Is Repeatable.

     New Physics, Great Impact; or:
 9 - The Device Seems To Be Scaleable To A
     Larger Size.
10 - A Larger Size Prototype Seems To Be


The criteria for performing the commercialization interest rankings has been published in the papers discussed above. [1,2] An updated and expanded version of these criteria may be found at:

The objective of ranking by commercialization interest is to create an indication of the current status for the commercialization, or the final development and distribution, of each device.

The current commercialization interest ranking criteria contains a 13 point ranking scale that is shown in Table 2.

Table 2.  Commercialization Interest Ranking Criteria

 N - No Information.
 M - Incomplete:  More Information is Needed.

 0 - Found To Be Not Substantiated.
 1 - Evidence That It May Be Not Substantiated.
 2 - Being Researched By Only One Person.
 3 - Something Unusual Was Demonstrated By
     One Person.
 4 - That Something Was Again Demonstrated
     By One Person.
 5 - That Something Was Again Demonstrated
     And Witnessed By Others.
 6 - That Something Was Replicated By Another.
 7 - The Operational Techniques And
     Measurements Are Being Refined.
 8 - The Device Works:  The Phenomena Is
 9 - The Device Can Be Scaled To A Larger Size.
10 - Proven Prototype.
     Commercialization Is Now Possible.


Researchers, investigators, and critics are encouraged to add new devices, experiments, and research results to the INE Database at any time.

There is no cost for this service, and there is no requirement to join any organization. All the data and all serious comments with integrity that are received will be included into the database.

Researchers are also encouraged to update their data, and to provide positive, supportive, and validation data to the results of others - as well as to provide negative, non-supportive, and non-validation data - as they are found.


The template to be used to communicate data to the INE Database is shown in Table 3. The template may be either in the form of a text file as shown below (with the colons) or as and Excel spreadsheet containing two columns. The items listed in this template form the column headings within the INE Database Excel Spreadsheet.

The items listed must not be changed, and must be in the order as listed in Table 3, as they are common throughout the entire INE Database.

This template is also available on the INE website at:

Table 3.  The INE Data Base Input Template

Device Name:
Device Category:
Device Type:
Inventor Name:
Inventor Address:
Date First Demo:
Watts Generated:
Date Last Demo:
Watts Generated:
% O/U Claimed:
% O/U Measured:
% Weight Loss:
Date Witnessed:
Witnesses Name:
Witness Address:
Date Tested:
Tester Name:
Tester Address:
Researcher Contact:
Researcher Address:
Ranking, Interest:
Ranking, Commercial:
Last Ref. & Date:
File Name:
Date Last Modified:

Completed templates with data can be emailed, either from the website or directly, to:

The use of this data reporting procedure and this publicly available database should accelerate the arrival of new research and technology breakthroughs, as well as to identify, isolate, and publish any outright lies, failures, and near-misses. It also includes the ability to make known opposition and dissent, and offers the opportunity for those who feel they are under the threat of suppression to present their views - either personally or anonymously.

The INE is maintaining this database with the utmost integrity possible, and will not include any data that is submitted marked as "proprietary", "confidential", or "secret". All of the data in this database is being made available for public dissemination and public use.

The authors all feel that there is a much greater opportunity and a much greater probability of success for new breakthroughs when the researchers are working together - to share in the rewards of their success - than in working separately, apart, and under the restrictive covers of financial non-disclosure agreements. There are ways that such team-research groups can be formed and utilized. Such arrangements are outside of the scope of the INE or this paper.

We are also aware of major scientific breakthroughs that have been made by certain individuals, only to be lost in time because of organizational or financial constraints. 9 Examples of such works probably include: Nikola Tesla, T.. T. Brown, Otis Carr, Hans Coler, Royal Rife, and T. Henry Moray. We would prefer to see such new technical breakthroughs emerge, rather than for the individual researchers to remain constrained, restricted, or suppressed. 10 There are several ways to organize team research efforts that can be effective and that will achieve important results. The INE Database will be an assistance to these efforts.


The INE Database allows researchers world-wide to collect, document, and summarize the findings of the various experiments, motors, generators, devices, and demonstrations that they feel are of interest to the general scientific community. This database is particularly useful in new, innovative, advanced, and breakthrough energy conversion experimental areas, where the data reported may appear to be in conflict with the currently accepted theories and simplistic views of physics. This database is available free to the international public on the internet, and provides instruction on how to add new devices and experiments, and also how to modify and update the existing data. Selection criteria based upon technical interest, and also on commercialization interest, allow these device data to be easily ranked for comparison and reference. The review and modification process of the data reported will allow any new practical sciences and technologies to become easily identified and to emerge for possible commercialization in the international community.


The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of many other researchers, scientists, skeptics, and organizations that have contributed serious open research and documentation in these areas, including: the Institute for New Energy, New Energy News, the Fusion Information Center, the Society for Scientific Exploration, Hal Fox, Bernhard Haisch, Eugene Mallove, Ken MacNeil, and Tony Sutton.


1. P. Bailey, T. Grotz, T., and J. Hurtak, "Survey And Critical Review Of Recent Innovative Energy Conversion Technologies", 32nd IECEC, pp. 2283-2288, July-August 1997. [See also:]

2. P. Bailey, T. Grotz, T., and J. Hurtak, "Review And Status of Reported Innovative Energy Conversion Technologies, Contrasted Using A Consistent R&D Ranking Scale," 32nd IECEC, pp. 2277-2282, July-August 1997. [See also:]

3. M. Millis, "Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program", Program Description, NASA Lewis Research Center, June 1998. [See also:]

4. H. Puthoff, "Ground State of Hydrogen As A Zero Point Fluctuation Determined State," Physical Review D, Vol. 35, No. 10, May 15, 1987.

5. B. Haisch, "An Invitation to Explore the Frontiers of Knowledge," Journal of Scientific Exploration, Society for Scientific Exploration, June 1998.

6. G. Bennett, "The Pathological Science Syndrome: A Concern for Energy Science," 28th IECEC, pp. 2.335-2.340, August 1993.

7. A. Cromer, "Pathological Science: An Update," Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 17, pp. 400-407, 1993.

8. I. Langmuir, "Pathological Science," Physics Today, 42: 36-48, October 1989.

9. MacNeil, Ken, "Insights Into The Proprietary Syndrome", Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Non-Conventional Energy Technology, pp. 125-126, Sept. 1983. [See also:]

10. "Security Order (Title 35, United States Code (1952), Sections 181-188), 1952. [See also:]

Return to the INE Main Page
Sep. 9, 1998.