ANGELS DON‘T PLAY THIS HAARP Advances in Tesla Technology

Chapter Fifteen
THE TWELVE PATENTS OF APTI TECHNICALLY TESLA
APTI held twelve patents, all of which were linked to Star Wars defense systems. APTI
was the main contractor on the first phase of the HAARP project. These patents represented
technologies which were inconsistent with the normal activities of ARCO, the parent
organization of APTI. In ARCO‘s 1994 annual report, no mention of APTI OT the HAARP
contract was found. Apparently ARCO was not in the kind of technology and military
construction contracting business suggested by this technology. APTI was an anomalous
subsidiary of ARCO, with ARCO having no real expertise, outside of APTI, for developing
these kinds of patents.
This writer believes that ARCO did not want to be involved in the defense industry
development of these patents. After all, they were just looking for a market for natural gas.
Gas on the North Slope of Alaska was the issue for ARCO. The cost of a pipeline and related
facilities needed to move the gas to southern Alaska was estimated at more than $20 billion,
pricing the gas out of the market. So APTI acquired the twelve patents and a potentially
lucrative market.
The patents originally held by APTI are described below.
United States Patent Number 4,686,605 Issued: August 11, 1987 Invented by: Bernard J.
Eastlund Titled; Method and Apparatus for Altering a Region in the Earth’s Atmosphere,
Ionosphere, and/or Magnetosphere.
This patent was filed on January 10, 1985. On April 11, 1986, the Office of Naval Research
Code 308 in Arlington, Virginia sealed the patent application under a ―Secrecy Order‖ which
forbade further work or any disclosure of information on the patent. This, no doubt,
concerned Dr. Eastlund and APTI. The order was a standard form letter stating provisions of
the National Security Act that allowed the Defense Department to seal the information. The
penalties for disobeying it were spelled out in the document, and included fines and long
prison terms.
Patent examiner Salvatore Cangialosi of the U.S. Patent Office rejected the application on
November 28, 1986. According to the Summary of Action, ―Claims 1-38 are rejected under 35
U.S.C. 101 because the invention as disclosed is inoperative and therefore lacks utility‖.
On December 9, 1986 Dr. Eastlund and his attorney met with the patent examiner to
discuss the rationale behind the decision to reject it. On January 14, 1987, an amendment
was filed which reduced the number of claims and provided documentation to prove that the
invention would work. The file notes say it was reviewed again in early February 1987. In late
March, the Secrecy Order was lifted.
The Eastlund patent was different than technologies of ionospheric heaters already
operating around the world. The first significant difference was the way the RF radiation was
concentrated. The energy was focused to a point in the ionosphere, with a wide base of the
energy at the transmitter site.
The other antenna designs operating around the world radiated RF in the opposite way,
so that it was like a cone with the point at the transmitter and the wide end in the
ionosphere. In other words, the Eastlund invention concentrated the power in the
ionosphere, while the others spread it out over an increasingly larger area as the energy
moved further away from the transmitter.
This difference allowed a significant concentration of energy into the ionosphere. The
Eastlund device would allow a concentration of one watt per cubic centimeter, compared to
others only able to deliver about one millionth of one watt. This was a huge difference, which
was, ―sufficient to cause movement of a plasma region along said diverging magnetic field
lines to an altitude higher than the altitude at which said excitation was initiated‖.