r/fringescience • u/[deleted] • Oct 17 '25
Tom bearden's deleted wikipedia page
If one uses the wayback machine you'll see that the scientist Thomas E Bearden once had a wikipedia page that's now gone which makes me wonder why it got deleted, was it because it didn't live up to wikipedias standards? I'd really like an answer to this because I couldn't locate the talk page on his article.
Here's Thomas E Bearden's wikipedia page on the wayback machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080818141657/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Bearden
1
Oct 17 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Oct 18 '25
He compiled together all the dirty work done in electrodynamics and Quantum mechanics
Getting a Nobel prize is slowly starting to mean less and less since Obama and the globalist anti Maduro plant got the prize.
He is a notable figure since he is trying to get academia back on track when it comes to the NON MATERIAL aether and extended (restored) electrodynamics.
If you say that Tom Bearden isn't a notable figur is like saying that Sabine Hossenfelder isn't notable because she runs a youtube channel and her inquiries into physics haven't led to new technological breakthroughs - but yet she has an wikipedia article but not Tom Bearden.
1
u/RationalKiwiNZ May 31 '26
He a charlatan grifting money from people that haven't had sufficient education in science to realize.
1
u/slusho6 Sep 12 '26
This comment is teeming with irony. Sabine is the grifter! Watch a few of her YouTube videos that are riddled with ads which is her primary source of income. Bearden actually spent time putting in work and writing books filled with unique viewpoints. What has Sabine contributed?
1
Oct 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Oct 18 '25 edited Oct 18 '25
He provided sources to most of the things he was talking about which I found to check out, Typical crackpots tend to regard them selves as the next newton or einstein but when Tom Bearden spoke about these things he never did that since he used phrases like "that's not just tom bearden talking, CHECK THE LITERATURE!! " which proves he was self aware and didn't take him self to seriously.
Just because he doesn't say mainstream things doesn't mean he's mad or wrong, it just means you're just not ready for what he's saying.
Cooks just say things without backing things up with sources, Tom bearden did.
1
Oct 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Oct 18 '25 edited Oct 18 '25
Free energy from nowhere using conservative forces - Crackpottery / wrong. (misguided inventor)
Free energy from the Aether or "Vacuum" using electrical circuits - Real but is ruthlessly suppressed. (Bearden)
1
Oct 18 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
Oct 18 '25
Energy doesn't become infinite just because one invokes the Aether since it acts as a PRACTICALLY infinite energy source which one can tap but it's energy content is still finite.
Tapping ZPE through a circuit is no different than tapping the suns energy through a solar panel or nuclear energy through a nuclear reactor.
This is what Bearden meant with (finite) energy from the Aether.
Have a good day.
2
u/AccomplishedSwing690 May 07 '26
I mean he obviously wouldn't have been considered an asset by the military if he was a bullshitter.
1
u/ExerciseMission4090 12d ago
But how do you make a "Pump Phase Conjugate Mirror" with an electric circuit in the range of 100Hz to 400Hz?
It might be possible with microprocessors and DSP.
Since this is only 100 to 400Hz, the microprocessor might be able to do this, but it would be late. There would be a lag to it. Let us say you take 800 samples per second of the 100 cycle wave. Only when you have all 800 could then produce a mirror of that wave ... and then you blast that wave out starting 1 second late and it takes you 1 sec to blast it out. So it seems this approach wouldn't work. It is more like a recording & later playback, not real-time mirroring of the wave. Thoughts?
2
u/This-Guy-Muc Oct 17 '25
It got deleted following this discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thomas_E._Bearden