Patent office drags its feet on the E-CAT despite being thoroughly tested by scientists. U.S. policy strikes again...
If the U.S. Patent Office does not grant these patents, there will be blood on their hands. They will be literally taking clean water out of the mouths of infants, stealing food off the plates of children, slapping poverty stricken people in the face, and contributing to the financial decline of the world.
I like all the concern over the US patent office despite Chinese notoriety for reverse engineering and stealing technology (which is acknowledged in the conversation). Also, someone posted a comment who claims to have a friend at the US patent office. He states that there is no particular hold up with that particular patent but that the patent office is backed up (typical of government offices). He mentions a means to petition to have that patent expedited.
The claims of the US deliberately suppressing this technology and saying they will have blood on their hands all seems entirely blown out of proportion. It's called beauracracy. It sucks, but it's nothing new, get over it.
If the U.S. Patent Office does not grant these patents, there will be blood on their hands. They will be literally taking clean water out of the mouths of infants, stealing food off the plates of children, slapping poverty stricken people in the face, and contributing to the financial decline of the world.
Nice quote TA. I think someone doens't know [what literally means].
Yeah I totally want technology that isn't completely with a self-destruct mechanism powering my home.
I like all the concern over the US patent office despite Chinese notoriety for reverse engineering and stealing technology (which is acknowledged in the conversation). Also, someone posted a comment who claims to have a friend at the US patent office. He states that there is no particular hold up with that particular patent but that the patent office is backed up (typical of government offices). He mentions a means to petition to have that patent expedited.
The claims of the US deliberately suppressing this technology and saying they will have blood on their hands all seems entirely blown out of proportion. It's called beauracracy. It sucks, but it's nothing new, get over it.
Actually they do have an unoficial 'ban' on anything related to cold-fusion. they basically put it in the 'cold-fusion' pile and it never gets patented. I think only 1 or 2 cold fusion devices have been patented in the U.S. since their discovery, and those have both been obsfucated with technobable to the point that you can't really tell what they do. You'll note that whether it works or not a cold fusion device should be patentable according to all laws. The patent office does not test the patent they merely make sure it is not a duplicate patent...
What a
ing idiot.
Nice quote TA. I think someone doens't know [what literally means].
It means gays will crush us all?
Man, I'm straight, but I want a Gayroller 2000... They just look like they're having so much fun!
Actually they do have an unoficial 'ban' on anything related to cold-fusion. they basically put it in the 'cold-fusion' pile and it never gets patented. I think only 1 or 2 cold fusion devices have been patented in the U.S. since their discovery, and those have both been obsfucated with technobable to the point that you can't really tell what they do.
Proof?
Didn't Microsoft just lose a patent case where they claimed that the patent they were accused of violating should never have been approved because there was already existing technology that used some of the same stuff the other company was trying to patent? I'm feeling too lazy right now to look it up. Maybe later.
Actually they do have an unoficial 'ban' on anything related to cold-fusion. they basically put it in the 'cold-fusion' pile and it never gets patented. I think only 1 or 2 cold fusion devices have been patented in the U.S. since their discovery, and those have both been obsfucated with technobable to the point that you can't really tell what they do.
Proof?
He would show you, but then government officials would come and kill you.
I think you've said enough. Come with us...Lets try again...
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) now rejects patents claiming cold fusion.[85] Esther Kepplinger, the deputy commissioner of patents in 2004, said that this was done using the same argument as with perpetual motion machines: that they do not work.[85] Patent applications are required to show that the invention is "useful", and this utility is dependent on the invention's ability to function.[143] In general USPTO rejections on the sole grounds of the invention's being "inoperative" are rare, since such rejections need to demonstrate "proof of total incapacity",[143] and cases where those rejections are upheld in a Federal Court are even rarer: nevertheless, in 2000, a rejection of a cold fusion patent was appealed in a Federal Court and it was upheld, in part on the grounds that the inventor was unable to establish the utility of the invention.[143][notes 2]
There is basically an obscure law that requires patented devices to be "useful". The though process is that cold-fusion is not useful, despite the evidence and proof behind this particular device...
This forum ate three consecutive posts...
Lets try again...
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) now rejects patents claiming cold fusion.[85] Esther Kepplinger, the deputy commissioner of patents in 2004, said that this was done using the same argument as with perpetual motion machines: that they do not work.[85] Patent applications are required to show that the invention is "useful", and this utility is dependent on the invention's ability to function.[143] In general USPTO rejections on the sole grounds of the invention's being "inoperative" are rare, since such rejections need to demonstrate "proof of total incapacity",[143] and cases where those rejections are upheld in a Federal Court are even rarer: nevertheless, in 2000, a rejection of a cold fusion patent was appealed in a Federal Court and it was upheld, in part on the grounds that the inventor was unable to establish the utility of the invention.[143][notes 2]
There is basically an obscure law that requires patented devices to be "useful". The though process is that cold-fusion is not useful, despite the evidence and proof behind this particular device...
So basically to get the patent, they have to prove that it actually works, due to a past of people that tried to patent devices that were questionable at best. I read one of the linked articles that was the source for that blurb and it mentioned how "successful" cold fusion experiments achieve "fleeting bursts" of energy and have yet to reliably power even the most basic electronic devices. Hell, even one of the scientists who has devoted his career towards researching cold fusion admits that they tend to get the fringe guys and none of the upper echelon respectable scientists. In light of all of that, I don't think it's wrong for the patent office to be a little skeptical. Not to mention that the person who applied for the patent can take the case to court if he disagrees with the office's ruling.
This forum ate three consecutive posts...
Lets try again...
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) now rejects patents claiming cold fusion.[85] Esther Kepplinger, the deputy commissioner of patents in 2004, said that this was done using the same argument as with perpetual motion machines: that they do not work.[85] Patent applications are required to show that the invention is "useful", and this utility is dependent on the invention's ability to function.[143] In general USPTO rejections on the sole grounds of the invention's being "inoperative" are rare, since such rejections need to demonstrate "proof of total incapacity",[143] and cases where those rejections are upheld in a Federal Court are even rarer: nevertheless, in 2000, a rejection of a cold fusion patent was appealed in a Federal Court and it was upheld, in part on the grounds that the inventor was unable to establish the utility of the invention.[143][notes 2]
There is basically an obscure law that requires patented devices to be "useful". The though process is that cold-fusion is not useful, despite the evidence and proof behind this particular device...
So basically to get the patent, they have to prove that it actually works, due to a past of people that tried to patent devices that were questionable at best. I read one of the linked articles that was the source for that blurb and it mentioned how "successful" cold fusion experiments achieve "fleeting bursts" of energy and have yet to reliably power even the most basic electronic devices. Hell, even one of the scientists who has devoted his career towards researching cold fusion admits that they tend to get the fringe guys and none of the upper echelon respectable scientists. In light of all of that, I don't think it's wrong for the patent office to be a little skeptical. Not to mention that the person who applied for the patent can take the case to court if he disagrees with the office's ruling.
Which would be fine in most cases. In this case Rossi has had his E-CAT device independently verified on multiple occassions. He even demonstrated it one time in front of the DoD. So its not a question of 'if it works'. Its a question of whether the U.S. is going to benefit or if Italy is going to become a world power...
Sure, and I've had people verify my Utopia(tm) tinfoil hats to greatly enhance someone's telekinetic powers. The patent office won't take it though, it's like they want Greenland to become a major world power.
Yeah, I'm sure you got major universities like the University of Bologna with the leader of the skeptics society to verify your hat. At this point it just makes them look bad...
Sure, and I've had people verify my Utopia(tm) tinfoil hats to greatly enhance someone's telekinetic powers. The patent office won't take it though, it's like they want Greenland to become a major world power.
Yeah, I'm sure you got major universities like the University of Bologna with the leader of the skeptics society to verify your hat. At this point it just makes them look bad...
Yep, I got exactly as many credible people to back up my claim as he does. You did hear about the creationists list of scientists who supposedly aggreed with it, evers en though most were lawyers or actors, and the rest were on the record against it, or didn't exist
Also, did you know the Arora is the government experimenting with time travel, right?
Nice... try to tie a legitimate scientific undertaking that has been verified to some conspiracy theory stuff with no evidence... nice... start throwing around links to facts and we can talk otherwise your just wasting everyone's time...
Verification by professionals
Back on track... The patent office in the U.S. is dragging its feet irregardless of the DoE and the verification that it works by several independent skeptical third parties. This is the reason we won't see it anytime soon. Unless we change our stand Italy is going to be rich...
Back on track... The patent office in the U.S. is dragging its feet irregardless of the DoE and the verification that it works by several independent skeptical third parties. This is the reason we won't see it anytime soon. Unless we change our stand Italy is going to be rich...
Is there any actual evidence that they are dragging their feet on this? Or are people just kicking and whining when beauracracy does not bend to their whims? That's pretty much what it sounds like to me.
Dude, the only "verification" there was a "free energy" conspiracy theory site, and this "Ny Teknik," of which the only thing I could dig up on google was them getting about as much electricity as a static shock from an hour of tests. ITS AMAZING! Now all we need is a million or two balloons, and all our energy needs are gone.
The only almost borderline kinda, sorta credible source was FOX, that pointed out how: They don't know how it works (translation: it doesn't), how the designer is a smuggler, scam artist, and otherwise a criminal, and that it generated some tiny amount of electricity. THE FUTURE IS HERE, amirite?
Wow... just wow... please do us all a favor and do some research!
From here
Bologna, January 2011 demonstration
Held in Bologna, January 14, 2011, the demonstration was monitored by independent scientific representatives of Bologna University, including a researcher in physics, Giuseppe Levi.
Ny Teknik, a Swedish technology magazine, reported that, "For about an hour it produced approximately 10 kilowatts of net power, loaded with one gram of nickel powder pressurized with hydrogen.
Unless you are talking about a lightning bolt its way more than a static shock... Here's some help for you to visualize what a kilowatt is.
A desktop computer uses about 65 watts and a central air conditioner uses about 3,500 watts.
10 kilowatts of power is what it takes to run your desktop computer, your central air unit, your hot water unit, all the lights in your house, your TV... etc etc.. you start to get the point.
The E-CAT does this with an input of 300 watts...
I have no clue why the big six haven't touched the story, maybe because one of them is GE(General Electric), naw that couldn't be the reason...
Its all over the news in Italy though. They did daily articles in all the major outlets when the news broke...
Patent office drags its feet on the E-CAT despite being thoroughly tested by scientists.
It is true that Rossi's Energy Catalyzer was tested by the University of Bologna in the sense that they tested it and found that it did not emit neutron radiation.
This is not the same thing as testing to establish whether it actually produces energy. As far as the scientific community is concerned, it almost certainly does not work; it might output energy for a time because of a chemical reaction, but that would just make it an expensive battery.
Things like this belong in the category of perpetual motion machines and flying saucers - not to be taken seriously.
If the problem of producing energy by cold fusion reactions is solved, there will be a lot of science done openly by means of which the possibility of doing so is established before a practical device to make use of those principles is invented.
Patent office drags its feet on the E-CAT despite being thoroughly tested by scientists.
It is true that Rossi's Energy Catalyzer was tested by the University of Bologna in the sense that they tested it and found that it did not emit neutron radiation.
This is not the same thing as testing to establish whether it actually produces energy. As far as the scientific community is concerned, it almost certainly does not work; it might output energy for a time because of a chemical reaction, but that would just make it an expensive battery.
Things like this belong in the category of perpetual motion machines and flying saucers - not to be taken seriously.
If the problem of producing energy by cold fusion reactions is solved, there will be a lot of science done openly by means of which the possibility of doing so is established before a practical device to make use of those principles is invented.
Once again it has been tested and proven to take 300 watts and output 10+ kilowatts. Please stop with your misinformation unless you can provide links to facts. In fact one of the Bologna professors that did the test put out an article on it explicitly saying it produced more than 10 kilowatts of power. Physically this can't be a chemical reaction. The power output could only be explained by a neuclear reaction.
IN fact businesses over there are getting really interested and after demonstrations they are investing in it....
Its real and its been tested, verified, and all that's left is the international patent and the U.S. patent. He's already got it patented in Italy...
is hidden crap at Roswell and area 51.
There is hidden crap here, but folks still come here it...stupid folks >_<
blather...blather...blather...
Once again do some research. Maybe try using a search engine other than Google. Also understand that you may have to search foreign sites because you know its happening over in Italy. Here let me do your work for you:
blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/19/rossi...
www.lenr-canr.org/News.htm
www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/IE96...
www.prwatch.org/news/2011/04/10661/media...
Translated from Italian translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev...
In case you forgot what a kilowatt is again: www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/...
I don't know what search terms you are using, but try "Rossi E-CAT" instead of say "Rossi hoax" you might learn something...
You'll note that the devices were left with the researchers at the University of Bologna to test. They will be opening the 'reactor chamber' in a month or two under controlled conditions and do tests on what's inside.
There's a plant scheduled to open in October of this year that will utilize the E-CAT. They have already produced 300 reactors for this plant.
If you don't believe it that's fine, but please don't waste everyone's time with out and out lies and fallacies.
When you consider something like Cold Fusion, which is considered by pretty much the entirety of the scientific community to be not feasible, the application must contain enough data to prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that the reaction is producing an excess of energy as a result of the fusion of the nickel and hydrogen. The application contains *no* data of the sort. None whatsoever. No matter how much "real world" evidence that there may be that this apparatus is providing cold fusion, without the data in the patent application, it will never be allowed, in my opinion.
Also, it entered the US Office from the National Office in September 2010. There is probably an 18-24 month backlog of applications before this application (or any application with a similar entry date) would be looked at by an examiner.
If this application is not allowed, it is not a failure of the US Patent and Trademark Office, it is a failure of the applicant to provide enough support in the way of data for the examiner to be sure that the alleged invention actually does what it says it does, and a failure of the Law Firm that submitted the Patent Application to tell the inventor that he needs the data.
*Note - I am from the Canadian Patent Office, not the american, but the principles on which we examine are extremely similar.
If you want some info from an actual patent examiner (raises hand) I can tell you the big problem with the application (going off of the internation PCT application). The application has no data in it. None whatsoever. When a patent application is examined to determine whether there is an invention present or not, one can only look at the data in the application, and see how it compares to the "state of the Art" (the state of the field at the time at which the application was filed, or August 4, 2008).
When you consider something like Cold Fusion, which is considered by pretty much the entirety of the scientific community to be not feasible, the application must contain enough data to prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that the reaction is producing an excess of energy as a result of the fusion of the nickel and hydrogen. The application contains *no* data of the sort. None whatsoever. No matter how much "real world" evidence that there may be that this apparatus is providing cold fusion, without the data in the patent application, it will never be allowed, in my opinion.
Also, it entered the US Office from the National Office in September 2010. There is probably an 18-24 month backlog of applications before this application (or any application with a similar entry date) would be looked at by an examiner.
If this application is not allowed, it is not a failure of the US Patent and Trademark Office, it is a failure of the applicant to provide enough support in the way of data for the examiner to be sure that the alleged invention actually does what it says it does, and a failure of the Law Firm that submitted the Patent Application to tell the inventor that he needs the data.
*Note - I am from the Canadian Patent Office, not the american, but the principles on which we examine are extremely similar.
If that's true its a massive failing of the patent process. The idea behind a patent is to protect your device from duplication. Whether the device works, how it works, or whatever is irrelevent. As long as he describes what goes into it and how its operated, it should be patentable. He shouldn't have to describe the microscopic internal workings and the science behind it to protect his IP from duplication. To circumvent this he's having to design a 'self-destruct' mechanism so that if it is tampered with the internal 'secret' catylist is destroyed. This way he can market it without a patent. So basically we are not going to see this device over here until the scientists find out and describe the minute microscopic process used to make it work, regardless of how much proof he produces that it does in fact work. Hmmm, maybe I need to look into moving to Italy...
If that's true its a massive failing of the patent process. The idea behind a patent is to protect your device from duplication. Whether the device works, how it works, or whatever is irrelevent. As long as he describes what goes into it and how its operated, it should be patentable. He shouldn't have to describe the microscopic internal workings and the science behind it to protect his IP from duplication. To circumvent this he's having to design a 'self-destruct' mechanism so that if it is tampered with the internal 'secret' catylist is destroyed. This way he can market it without a patent. So basically we are not going to see this device over here until the scientists find out and describe the minute microscopic process used to make it work, regardless of how much proof he produces that it does in fact work. Hmmm, maybe I need to look into moving to Italy...
I'm not too familiar with the intricacies of patents and paten laws, but isn't that what patents do? Aren't mean to protect the devices, the design of the device, and how the device works? How is he going to prove that some else stole his invention if he can't prove that the stolen tech works exactly the same as his? Wouldn't he need to provide the data that Muddbunny pointed out?
If that's true its a massive failing of the patent process. The idea behind a patent is to protect your device from duplication. Whether the device works, how it works, or whatever is irrelevent. As long as he describes what goes into it and how its operated, it should be patentable. He shouldn't have to describe the microscopic internal workings and the science behind it to protect his IP from duplication. To circumvent this he's having to design a 'self-destruct' mechanism so that if it is tampered with the internal 'secret' catylist is destroyed. This way he can market it without a patent. So basically we are not going to see this device over here until the scientists find out and describe the minute microscopic process used to make it work, regardless of how much proof he produces that it does in fact work. Hmmm, maybe I need to look into moving to Italy...
I'm not too familiar with the intricacies of patents and paten laws, but isn't that what patents do? Aren't mean to protect the devices, the design of the device, and how the device works? How is he going to prove that some else stole his invention if he can't prove that the stolen tech works exactly the same as his? Wouldn't he need to provide the data that Muddbunny pointed out?
Nope, all he would have to put in the patent is the materials and the blueprints of the device with maybe a short description of 'power goes in here and power goes out here'. If someone else does the same thing with different materials or a different configuration it would be perfectly legal, which is why we have 30 different phones out on the market. If the patent of cell phone technology relied on the 'transmission of radio waves at X frequency to towers which then re-transmit to another cell device' then guess what, we'd only have 1 cell phone company...
If that's true its a massive failing of the patent process. The idea behind a patent is to protect your device from duplication.
You only have it half right.
Whether the device works, how it works, or whatever is irrelevent.
Whether the device works or not is very vital to whether it is patentable.
A patent is, when you boil it down to its basics, an agreement between the inventor and the public. The inventor reveals the details of his invention. How it works, how to make it work, how to operate it, etc are provided to the public so that others may follow in his footsteps and innovate and improve it. In exhange, he is provided the exclusive right to determine who can use his invention for a given period of time. (Typically 20 years from the date of filing.)
As long as he describes what goes into it and how its operated, it should be patentable. He shouldn't have to describe the microscopic internal workings and the science behind it to protect his IP from duplication.
Actually, he does. The patent system is based also on the assumption that what is being protected by the patent improves on what is already out there. In this case, he is attempting to claim cold fusion. The opinion of the scientific community, due to lack of reproduceability of every prior claim towards cold fusion, is that cold fusion does not work, and that all claims to such are frauds and hoaxes. As a result, the burden of proof is on the inventor to demonstrate and provide evidence, in his patent application, that it works. And it must bedone in such a manner so that a person who has the required technical knowledge can, upon reading the patent, duplicate the work and have a reasonable expectation that identical results will be obtained.
What the hell are you doing in OTT, Mudbunny???
Did you see your earless alien-bunny hybrid brethren thread??
If the patent of cell phone technology relied on the 'transmission of radio waves at X frequency to towers which then re-transmit to another cell device' then guess what, we'd only have 1 cell phone company...
Perhaps you have heard of AM/FM radio?
The transmission of electromagnetic waves at a given frequency from one tower to another has been known since Marconi. Any patent that may have been established on it has *long* since expired.
BAH!
What the hell are you doing in OTT, Mudbunny???
Saw a complaint about someone complaining that an OTT thread had gone OT (which seems to me to be like complaining that water is getting wetter...) and noticed the complaint about the patent office. Seeing as how I actually work in a patent office, I figured I could hopefully clear things up.
Did you see your earless alien-bunny hybrid brethren thread??
Say what?
Those videos were only supposed to be released next week!! All part of the lead up to the end of the world according to the mayan calendar.
BAH!
What the hell are you doing in OTT, Mudbunny???
Saw a complaint about someone complaining that an OTT thread had gone OT (which seems to me to be like complaining that water is getting wetter...) and noticed the complaint about the patent office. Seeing as how I actually work in a patent office, I figured I could hopefully clear things up.Did you see your earless alien-bunny hybrid brethren thread??
Say what?
Those videos were only supposed to be released next week!! All part of the lead up to the end of the world according to the mayan calendar.
Actually the mayan calendar thing is not the end of the world but a huge change to it. You'll notice it almost exactly lines up with the release of the E-CAT to the public... hmmm correlation here or what?
Actually the mayan calendar thing is not the end of the world but a huge change to it. You'll notice it almost exactly lines up with the release of the E-CAT to the public... hmmm correlation here or what?
Only if you forget to mention that the E-CAT gets eaten by the G-DOG.
I'm not too familiar with the intricacies of patents and paten laws, but isn't that what patents do? Aren't mean to protect the devices, the design of the device, and how the device works? How is he going to prove that some else stole his invention if he can't prove that the stolen tech works exactly the same as his? Wouldn't he need to provide the data that Muddbunny pointed out?
Nope. As I mentioned above, a patent provides the owner of the patent the exclusive right to determine who may and may not use his invention for the lifetime of the patent. No-one else is permitted to use it, and if they do, they may be taken to court and may be forced to pay damages. In return, the inventor must disclose how the invention works, provide evidence that it works, and demonstrate how it may be used. And this disclosure must be clear enough that someone would be able to duplicate their work and expect to get identical results. This ensures that other inventors may look at what has been invented and may improve on it.
Say what?
Those videos were only supposed to be released next week!! All part of the lead up to the end of the world according to the mayan calendar.
In case you haven't, there's a thread on it.
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Hey, Lokiare, I've got a cold fusion device that I designed. I just need a few thousand dollars to build a prototype. I already put in a patent claim, but the patent office is trying to bury the claim because my invention would topple the status quo. So I'm also going to need the R&D to build a self-destruct device into the machine so that if anyone opens it it'll destroy the contents. And because it's not safely patented I don't want to do any demo longer than five minutes, and I need to be personally present thewhole time. For security. And I can't tell anyone what kinds of principles it works off of. So just give me a few thousand dollars more to invent the self-destruct advice and you'll be one of the vanguard investors on a device that will revolutionize the world. Just think of how awesome it will be to get in on the ground floor of something so revolutionary, especially when the big power companies are all trying to keep it hush-hush! You'll be able to tell your grandchildren "yeah, I was smart enough to see things for what they really were, when The Man was trying to keep it down! We didn't need fancy degrees or laboratories, just good old injenuity! Why, it was like being best friends with Faraday! I don't actually know who Faraday is, because learning is for sheeple who buy into The System, and I'm all about bucking the system and being unique!" And after you tell that to your grand children you can tell them how I totally didn't take your money and move to Barbados.
I moved to St. Lucia.
In other words, if you want your process kept secret, don't get a patent. If you want a patent, you're not allowed secrets.
Thanks for that, Mudbunny. Classic signs of a hoax.
Hey, Lokiare, I've got a cold fusion device that I designed. I just need a few thousand dollars to build a prototype. I already put in a patent claim, but the patent office is trying to bury the claim because my invention would topple the status quo. So I'm also going to need the R&D to build a self-destruct device into the machine so that if anyone opens it it'll destroy the contents. And because it's not safely patented I don't want to do any demo longer than five minutes, and I need to be personally present thewhole time. For security. And I can't tell anyone what kinds of principles it works off of. So just give me a few thousand dollars more to invent the self-destruct advice and you'll be one of the vanguard investors on a device that will revolutionize the world. Just think of how awesome it will be to get in on the ground floor of something so revolutionary, especially when the big power companies are all trying to keep it hush-hush! You'll be able to tell your grandchildren "yeah, I was smart enough to see things for what they really were, when The Man was trying to keep it down! We didn't need fancy degrees or laboratories, just good old injenuity! Why, it was like being best friends with Faraday! I don't actually know who Faraday is, because learning is for sheeple who buy into The System, and I'm all about bucking the system and being unique!" And after you tell that to your grand children you can tell them how I totally didn't take your money and move to Barbados.
I moved to St. Lucia.
[snaark]All I can say is he must be a great hoaxer because he's buying companies for production and he's making deals left and right. He's building a 300 unit plant which will come online in October. He got a patent in Italy. He's tricked the head of the skeptics society who happens to also be a physicist as well as many other scientists at the University of Bologna. He's so good he left his device there and let them play with it and even open the reactor chamber and test the stuff in it. So yeah, he must be a master con-man...[/snark]
I'm reminded of stories of inventors who deliberatly avoided patents because that requires giving up their secrets, choosing instead to bank on no one else being able to figure out their device to protect them.
In other words, if you want your process kept secret, don't get a patent. If you want a patent, you're not allowed secrets.
Yeah, I think he's going ahead with some distribution to businesses, but he's having everyone sign contracts to the effect that they are not allowed to touch the device so that he can avoid reverse engineering...
All I can say is he must be a great hoaxer because he's buying companies for production and he's making deals left and right. He's building a 300 unit plant which will come online in October. He got a patent in Italy. He's tricked the head of the skeptics society who happens to also be a physicist as well as many other scientists at the University of Bologna. He's so good he left his device there and let them play with it and even open the reactor chamber and test the stuff in it. So yeah, he must be a master con-man...
Just because it is a hoax doesn't mean that people won't buy it. See the number of places that sell magnetic bracelets/rings/necklaces/etc that claim to cure lots of things.
Magnet Therapy
See also homeopathy and chiropractors who claim that adjusting the spine does anyting other than adjust your spine.
All I can say is he must be a great hoaxer because he's buying companies for production and he's making deals left and right. He's building a 300 unit plant which will come online in October. He got a patent in Italy. He's tricked the head of the skeptics society who happens to also be a physicist as well as many other scientists at the University of Bologna. He's so good he left his device there and let them play with it and even open the reactor chamber and test the stuff in it. So yeah, he must be a master con-man...
Just because it is a hoax doesn't mean that people won't buy it. See the number of places that sell magnetic bracelets/rings/necklaces/etc that claim to cure lots of things.
Magnet Therapy
See also homeopathy and chiropractors who claim that adjusting the spine does anyting other than adjust your spine.
Your link to homeopath goes to the magnet therapy. Here is the proper entry.
Sure, but all of those have been tested and proven false or misleading. This has been tested and all the evidence (directly related to the E-CAT, not generally to cold-fusion or alternative energy) so far shows positive results. That's like defamation based on association...
All I can say is he must be a great hoaxer because he's buying companies for production and he's making deals left and right. He's building a 300 unit plant which will come online in October. He got a patent in Italy. He's tricked the head of the skeptics society who happens to also be a physicist as well as many other scientists at the University of Bologna. He's so good he left his device there and let them play with it and even open the reactor chamber and test the stuff in it. So yeah, he must be a master con-man...
Just because it is a hoax doesn't mean that people won't buy it. See the number of places that sell magnetic bracelets/rings/necklaces/etc that claim to cure lots of things.
Magnet Therapy
See also homeopathy and chiropractors who claim that adjusting the spine does anyting other than adjust your spine.
Your link to homeopath goes to the magnet therapy. Here is the proper entry.
Sure, but all of those have been tested and proven false or misleading. This has been tested and all the evidence (directly related to the E-CAT, not generally to cold-fusion or alternative energy) so far shows positive results. That's like defamation based on association...
When you have cold fusion proof after proof get shown to be a hoax or not actually work, then you need to present a little more data if you want people to actually believe what you are trying to sell.
Giving it to someplace like MIT or a well-known university would be a good start. Publishing a paper in a well-respected peer-reviewed journal (like JACS or the equivalent) is also a good way to do it.
All I can say is he must be a great hoaxer because he's buying companies for production and he's making deals left and right. He's building a 300 unit plant which will come online in October. He got a patent in Italy. He's tricked the head of the skeptics society who happens to also be a physicist as well as many other scientists at the University of Bologna. He's so good he left his device there and let them play with it and even open the reactor chamber and test the stuff in it. So yeah, he must be a master con-man...
Just because it is a hoax doesn't mean that people won't buy it. See the number of places that sell magnetic bracelets/rings/necklaces/etc that claim to cure lots of things.
Magnet Therapy
See also homeopathy and chiropractors who claim that adjusting the spine does anyting other than adjust your spine.
Your link to homeopath goes to the magnet therapy. Here is the proper entry.
Sure, but all of those have been tested and proven false or misleading. This has been tested and all the evidence (directly related to the E-CAT, not generally to cold-fusion or alternative energy) so far shows positive results. That's like defamation based on association...
When you have cold fusion proof after proof get shown to be a hoax or not actually work, then you need to present a little more data if you want people to actually believe what you are trying to sell.
Giving it to someplace like MIT or a well-known university would be a good start. Publishing a paper in a well-respected peer-reviewed journal (like JACS or the equivalent) is also a good way to do it.
Cold fusion doesn't have proof after proof. What they have is the inability to reproduce the experiments on a reliable basis. This has gone from only reproducing the results in 20% of the reproductions to somewhere in the range of 70% of the reproductions. If you'll look at your history the transistor was pretty low in its reproducability because they didn't understand why it worked. That didn't stop them from ushering in the computer age and the electronic age. The University of Bologna is a pretty big well respected university. He hasn't published a paper in a journal because he would be giving up his patent rights before he got a patent. Once his patents are granted he may go ahead and publish a paper. The thing that everyone is overlooking is that he gave the University of Bologna his E-CAT to work with and test in any way they want. He's back in Italy working on his power plant and they still have the device and are still examining it. There would be no way to perpetrate a hoax of this nature unless he took the equipment with him when he left.
Cold fusion doesn't have proof after proof.
Sorry., That should have been "proof" after "proof"
He hasn't published a paper in a journal because he would be giving up his patent rights before he got a patent.
Doesn't work that way. As soon as he has filed his patent application, he can publish in journals all he wants. But, like I said above, his patent application, seeing as how it contains *no* data whatsoever, is unlikely to be accepted anywhere significant. (Note that Italy is *not* considered a major player in patents. US, European Union, Japan, Australia and England are considered the big Patent offices).
The thing that everyone is overlooking is that he gave the University of Bologna his E-CAT to work with and test in any way they want. He's back in Italy working on his power plant and they still have the device and are still examining it. There would be no way to perpetrate a hoax of this nature unless he took the equipment with him when he left.
Sure there is. 3 of the "advisors" on his Journal...errr...blog are from the University of Bologna. It would be trivial for them to be influencing the results or manipulating the output data (or the way that it is interpreted) in order to provide the results that look best for him. Until he provides a working sample to a testing facility that doesn't have direct links to him, any claims will be suspect at best.
[snaark]All I can say is he must be a great hoaxer because he's buying companies for production and he's making deals left and right. He's building a 300 unit plant which will come online in October. He got a patent in Italy. He's tricked the head of the skeptics society who happens to also be a physicist as well as many other scientists at the University of Bologna. He's so good he left his device there and let them play with it and even open the reactor chamber and test the stuff in it. So yeah, he must be a master con-man...[/snark]
Good news, lucky investor! I just recieved a huge donation from a philanthropist who wants to remain anonymous, but it's given us the capital to put together a manufacturing plant that will be able to produce 700 units per month once we clear up some minor legal hurdles. It seems like The Man really wants to stand between you and cheap, nigh-infinite energy! On the plus side the self-destruct device is coming along well, and soon we'll be able to take pre-orders. Anyone who is an existing investor or business owner will recieve two units for the price of one when they pre-order as my way of saying "thank you" for showing faith in a future owned by the common man.
Also, yes, he could publish in a journal without giving up his patent. For starters he could publish a paper talking about the various difficulties that need to be overcome, or a specific principle involved, that's an extension on existing knowledge, without revealing the overall working of his mechanism. In fact publication in peer reviewed journals tends to strengthen a patent application because it provideds further proof of the novility of the idea along with a time frame of invention. I work with scientist and chemists who are frequently publishing while patents are pending. Hell, I watched the head of a (small) pharmaceutical company talk to an audience of three hundred doctors and chemists about a drug they had just developed and had a pending patent on. He even showed them the molecular structure and gave them a handout with synthesis information.
Here's something to think about: if it's a working device then it must be incredibly complex, and if that's the case then why is there only one near-empty patent application and not twenty?