Talk-Polywell.org

Hmm, well just wanting to be supportive of Skip's effort here, I'll post one of the reasons I'm not a ZPFer. I have seen a handful of serious objections to ZPF theory none of which have ever been answered by any of the ZPF theorists, I'm talking here now about PhD Physicists who hold to ZPF theory. ...

I'm confused. Are you saying that all manufacturers of digital video recorders pay royalties to TiVo?

" You do not have a right to own an idea." This is correct but almost mistakenly so. You cannot stop someone from thinking your original idea after you, but you can stop them from profiting from it instead of you. This is essentially what copyright, trademark and patent are for. "Own an idea" is the...

Ideas never fall into the category of "intellectual property."

Patents exist to protect intellectual property.

Dave, you can find a few ZPF designs that can indeed be very small here: http://www.amazon.com/Frontiers-Propulsion-Progress-Astronautics-Aeronautics/dp/1563479567/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276815750&sr=8-1 This is because one of the editors, Dr. Eric Davis (whom I count a friend) is a strong ...

Yes well, I should admit to you that the bulk of speculative physics being done in energy and propulsion is embracing ZPF. Fact is, those who have voiced concerns that the ZPF model must be wrong have been ostracized to some extent. There most certainly are able and accomplished physicists supportin...

I'll follow your lead. The subject always interests me.

Just because Chris was right to ask for evidence, I'll post the following. Sorry for being this lazy but it's example enough of free energy devices: http://labvirus.wordpress.com/2010/04/04/dr-frank-meads-zero-point-energy-patent/ I should mention that I have met Frank on a couple occasions and he i...

Chris, no joke; free energy devices have been getting patents for more than a century. The plethora of them applying at present is just because for about 15 years, physicists have been reexamining the ZPF issue. I don't want to be understood as saying ZPF is silly. Guys like Hal Puthoff are amongst ...

As a response, the applicant may be asked to present a working example as cast-in-iron proof that it is viable. However, as far as I read US law, an examiner doesn't have the power to obligate a working example - but, clearly, that in itself must cast a doubt because why would someone seeking comme...

Skip, there's a world of difference and a continuum of distinctions nested between an "idea" and a working model. This is where US patent law varies according to topic but in general, no one EVER gets a patent for an "idea". There must be something much more regardless of the field. There is all sor...

Thanks, Skip. As you were posting I was editing my response because I realized I had overstated my case. You are in general correct. However, the role of trade secret is a real issue. No patent writer puts more detail in the application than necessary. I'm sure the reasons are obvious. We weren't ta...

I feel as I ought to answer this one issue above because it goes to a working knowledge of how IP law works: Another requirement is that yout patent teaches how to fully and completely make the thing so that anyone else can make it. This is called 'enablement'. No. The requirement you're speaking of...

It's very unlikely this sort of thruster will ever be able to lift spacecraft from the surface of the Earth. I stand corrected. Snipped from a note from a NASA buddy: ". . .if fully integrated with a high power P-B11 Polywell reactor in the 1.0+ GW output power range, while utilizing direct alpha p...

Chris, you are correct in your post 2 above though, it is good to recognize there are thousands of patents for inventions that do not work. You absolutely can patent things that do not work. Who claimed "you can't own words"? I dunno. Was earlier in the thread and honestly, I don't see any reason to...