Room-temperature superconductivity?

[johanfprins]

Of all the places for a researcher to 're-discover' your work and not be able to progress it to commercialisation - China defintely isn't it!!!
If a China-University based research group cannot exploit their findings, then you are well and truly shafted!

You keep on jumping to conclusions. I have NOT said that China has reproduced my results on superconduction. All they have shown is that my claim in 1999, before I generated a superconducting phase, that implanted oxygen can form donor centres in diamond is correct. And this fact has been consistently blocked by the Western Diamond Physics Community; and is still being blocked since it is not what they want to believe. So when experimental facts sre not in line with dogma, they are suppressed. I have found that this has become the rule, especially in physics.

[chrismb]

Of all the places for a researcher to 're-discover' your work and not be able to progress it to commercialisation - China defintely isn't it!!!
If a China-University based research group cannot exploit their findings, then you are well and truly shafted!

You keep on jumping to conclusions. I have NOT said that China has reproduced my results on superconduction.

Incredible!

You are jumping to conclusions, I am merely saying that if n-doped diamond isn't something exploitable in China then it is likely that it isn't exploitable at all. OK, there is some assumptiveness in that statement [arising from my own experience of the Chinese, which others who have commented do not seem to have had the benefit of] but it isn't a conclusion.

But I am not going to accept your silly critiques about jumping to conclusions anyway because there is nothing wrong in jumping to conclusions. When our ancestors were sitting up their banana tree munching away, one of them must've jumped to a conclusion that there was something better than sitting up a tree. Making assumptions are what engineers and scientists do, before progressing down a course of action.

That's why the critique is false. The reason the critique is silly is that;
a) you are progressing a conversation yet are being economical with the facts that you are discussing [inevitably inviting your readers to make assumptions]
b) you are positively accepting assumptions which favour your position, but decry those that make it look tenuous.

Just come clean with the facts or stop carrying the thread on - but if you do neither then you have to let people make assumptions else it isn't a conversation you are trying to have here, but to purvey a sermon.

[chrismb]

Aren't new materials patentable? Teflon, Freon, nylon, all these patented materials involved a "discovery" how to make them. But the MATERIAL is what is patented, no?

er....quick check..yes, they have been patented in the US.

35 USC 101 says "Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor.."

So I withdraw my statement above as a general statement.

I am not so sure that this is true for other administrations though, and perhaps the cross-jurisdiction issues of patenting substances are why Prof. JFP struggled with the PTC system. The UK system, for example, does not give an explicit right to a patent on materials so a grant would appear to be at least somewhat dependent on its utility rather than the substance itself. It is therefore possible that he might have found it easier just to progress the patent on to the National stages rather than listen too hard to the pre-advice, and those like the US that specifically issue patents for 'compositions of matter' would grant, while others might raise issues for him.

I don't really know much about materials' patents as I am not a materials engineer, so I will withdraw my comment above and now assume you can patent materials... but that there may be caveats...

[icarus]

chrismb:

Just come clean with the facts or stop carrying the thread on - but if you do neither then you have to let people make assumptions else it isn't a conversation you are trying to have here, but to purvey a sermon.

I think 'striptease' was the word you were after there, to lure the punters in ... step right up folks, amazing physics, right here, buy the book!.

And on it goes ... 43 pages and counting.

[johanfprins]

Just come clean with the facts or stop carrying the thread on - but if you do neither then you have to let people make assumptions else it isn't a conversation you are trying to have here, but to purvey a sermon.

The way you are distorting any discussion would have made you a valuable colleague of Joseph Goebbels, if you were alive at that time.

I have come clean with all the facts except my invention which, on the advice of my patent attorney's I am keeping under wraps. Who would not have done the same. Really you are just wasting everybodfy's time since you are totally out of touch with reality.

[johanfprins]

Not following, Chris.

Johan, what would be the top schools here in the US that do diamond and related materials science? I'm just wondering where else you might look for an advocate. If you find someone in a lab that already has the equipment needed to do a validation study, it might not be outside the realm of possibility they'd sign an NDA to do a replication, so long as they have the right to publish in the future.

Have you looked around for advocates whom you might make such an agreement with?

Yes I have. I also know the main players personally since the 1980's; but since I have claimed that I can generate a superconducting phase by extracting electrons from a modified diamond substrates, they have treated my like a leper.

They have consistently blocked me from publishing anything since 2003 and even silenced me in the most rude manner when I tried to attend conferences in order to bring my point across. They, and the cranks in charge of superconductor research, as well as the so called "theoretical physicists' doing QFT do not like the implications of what I have found and do not want it to be true. There is just too much money involved. Think: Higgs' boson, LIGO and quantum computing.

[johanfprins]

Would you care to politely expound upon that for a bit?

Because it is a discovery. he even uses that word himself.

He could patent a particular means to manufacture it, but it sounds like it could be made by any implantation process already known, so if he devised a new way to do it, then people would just make it by known means.

Aren't new materials patentable? Teflon, Freon, nylon, all these patented materials involved a "discovery" how to make them. But the MATERIAL is what is patented, no?

Thanks KitemanSA: You see when it comes to legal descriptions, the terms are always chosen by lawyers in such a manner that it can lead to court disputes: This iw here they make their money even though it means that your small inventor is excluded by this dishonesty of really protecting his IP.

Consider the two main requirements for an invention: It must not be a "discovery" and it must not be "obvious". for it not to be "obvious" you must "discover" something new which nobody has known before. So if your invention does not entail a discovery it is rejecterd as being obvious. If it is not obvious it is rejected as being a "discovery". If it rests on a new physics insight, which in most cases it surely must not to be obvious, it is rejected because you are trying to "patent a theory". Can you believe such a schizophrenic system? A theory or model is usually an algorithm which is rejected as not patentable: But computer software which consist of algorithm's can be patented. No wonder Jesus called lawyers "whitewashed graves full of skeletons".

[GIThruster]

Johan, what would be the top schools here in the US that do diamond and related materials science? I'm just wondering where else you might look for an advocate. If you find someone in a lab that already has the equipment needed to do a validation study, it might not be outside the realm of possibility they'd sign an NDA to do a replication, so long as they have the right to publish in the future.

Have you looked around for advocates whom you might make such an agreement with?

Yes I have. I also know the main players personally since the 1980's; but since I have claimed that I can generate a superconducting phase by extracting electrons from a modified diamond substrates, they have treated my like a leper.

So don't approach people doing studies in superconductivity. Approach the people who do materials science research in diamond and related materials, who have access to the kinds of equipment you need to extract the electrons. Didn't you say that you did your PhD in Virginia? Well, does that university have access to the equipment needed?

Someone must have it. What you need is an advocate--someone willing to repeat your work and publish on it once your rights are secured.

I hate to be pessimistic and generally leave that to the trolls here, but I don't think you're ever going to get the attention of places like Intel, until you have a handful of replications to point to. Even then, it's an uphill battle.

[Stoney3K]

I can assure you that to continue to underestimate the Chinese industrial skills shall be the Western world's undoing in the early part of the 21st century.

(...)

But they learn, boy do those guys learn! They make me think of the US in the 60's - a real 'have a go' spirit, not afraid of making their fair share of mistakes to get ahead, and so willing to suck up the tech. Now the product out of this factory shows technical understanding and discipline that should make Western manufacturers [what there is left of them] fearful....

So would it be reasonable to consider the possibility that China has a working Polywell stashed somewhere already, or at least something in similar stages of development?

[chrismb]

I can assure you that to continue to underestimate the Chinese industrial skills shall be the Western world's undoing in the early part of the 21st century.

(...)

But they learn, boy do those guys learn! They make me think of the US in the 60's - a real 'have a go' spirit, not afraid of making their fair share of mistakes to get ahead, and so willing to suck up the tech. Now the product out of this factory shows technical understanding and discipline that should make Western manufacturers [what there is left of them] fearful....

So would it be reasonable to consider the possibility that China has a working Polywell stashed somewhere already, or at least something in similar stages of development?

I am tempted to say that if Polywell could be made to work, they would, indeed, have one already....

Of course, China is no different to Western countries in regards whose personal pet projects and sources of funding come from. If you can find someone with authority who'll advocate a particular project then, yeah, I think it is getting to be easier to do it there than anywhere. But that unlock mechanism is the tricky bit, as it always is. In JFP's case, this group he mentions is already switched on to the idea, so there are already advocates, the next question is merely if they have a route to influence over funding.

...and, incidentally, Polywell has already been funded by China, almost exclusively until recently......

...China Lake, that is.

[GIThruster]

I am tempted to say that if Polywell could be made to work, they would, indeed, have one already....

Chris, they really wouldn't.

Even though the Chinese are spending fantastic resources to develop their science, and their economy admits 40:1 engineers to work on aerospace as compared to places like the US; they have a severe cultural problem. Their engineers have a reputation that they can't work in groups. They're too taciturn. Too Grumpy. Too sexually frustrated, by the psychotic social engineering of their government.

China will be the economic power of this century, but the natural result of keeping the workers under the thumb of the government is, they're not very creative thinkers, nor happy workers.

The future still resides in the West.

[chrismb]

Their engineers have a reputation that they can't work in groups. They're too taciturn. Too Grumpy. Too sexually frustrated, by the psychotic social engineering of their government.

That's quite an opinion there!

What I was trying to say was that this 'impression' of working with the Chinese was, unfortunately, also re-inforced when I first started working with them, but don't let that fool you... the most cost effective way to do things is the right way of doing things. So their quest for cost-efficiency has already taken them down the road of quality and the next step is that the most cost-effective way of improving, once the quality is there, is to innovate. If that is not yet generally in their psyche, well, you may be right to a greater or lesser extent at this precise moment. But I think it is already in that direction - at a time when in the West engineers are largely slighted by society with poorly funded and dull careers, few see it as a career option, and Universities are closing down engineering and science courses.

I've also never considered the 'innovative' nature of Western engineers and scientists to be reflected in the makeup of most Asian cultures. But I think I have seen more than just the immediate stereotype, and I think the future is beginning to look different for their approach to things.

[johanfprins]

So don't approach people doing studies in superconductivity. Approach the people who do materials science research in diamond and related materials, who have access to the kinds of equipment you need to extract the electrons.

It has been exactly the latter people I have approached since I know most of them personally. If you go back in the literature on diamond you will find that I was one of the leading lights in this field. But as i have pointed out time and again on this forum these people are the exact same ones who excommunicated me and are ignoring me after a reported my initial experiment at the European Diamond Conference in Budapest during SEptember 2001.

Didn't you say that you did your PhD in Virginia? Well, does that university have access to the equipment needed?

They are also ignoring me since I have claimed superconduction at room temperature. It seems that the world-wide consensus is that I must be wrong and therefore they are not willing to waste their time on reproducing my results. After all, the "experts" on superconduction tell them that I must be a crank. So why waste valuable time and money on it?

Someone must have it. What you need is an advocate--someone willing to repeat your work and publish on it once your rights are secured.

They do but as I have pointed out they do not report back or even open my e-mails after they had agreed to do measurements on my substrates. How many time must I still tell you this. No wonder this forum is gettingh so long!

I hate to be pessimistic and generally leave that to the trolls here, but I don't think you're ever going to get the attention of places like Intel, until you have a handful of replications to point to. Even then, it's an uphill battle.

Obviously you are correct; but I cannot force other laboratories to do so if they obviously do not want to do so!

[mdeminico]

When our ancestors were sitting up their banana tree munching away, one of them must've jumped to a conclusion that there was something better than sitting up a tree.

Now who's the one jumping to conclusions? Assuming we "evolved" from monkeys sitting in banana trees, despite the fact that:

1) Bananas are a manmade hybrid plant. (Ok, this part was just funny)
2) There's mounds of evidence to the contrary about your assumption.

But please, let's not turn this into THAT debate for heaven sake.

[GIThruster]

Obviously you are correct; but I cannot force other laboratories to do so if they obviously do not want to do so!

So do you have an ETA on your patent process? You've given this to your lawyers and they don't see a way to get your old substrates back from those you sent them to, nor think it's worth pursuing them in any way?