Posts by jpav

Quote from eros

In real world exist patents. Patent is right to use invention max 20years, price is to puplic explain invention briefly. Without patent system only way to protect invention is keep it secret. Secret is heavilly against open. There is not clear black/white border.
Me365 maybe have something and don't like patents, big corporations etc. Can't tell methods/reciepe because someone can patent it after or modify slight and patent.
Which situation is more worse:
Me 365 secret/silence (during someone else can invent same and patent) or Me365 file his invention to patent?

When patent is filed it go 12-18 month office secret. But inventor can publish it next day and still have protection. Once patented it can't patent anymore anywhere.
If Me365 want share and open GPL like all what he knows and deny further patenting he needs write all what he know to patent paper (too much is better than little) file one country patent, and pay one year licence feeds then abandon it. It cost less than 1000$.
He can during 12month secret period add more papers to included such patent. They come public as patent go public. And everything what is told public can't patent.

Secret without patenting give win for big corporations because they have money to patent everything during secret time.
Me365 if you have open mind and can keep it future too go and file patent then give it public. System is posible to win only patenting. Later things depends how you use your rights.

Display More

In real life a patent is only as good as your ability to defend it and that takes a lot of money......so with tech like this you a strong monied partner or perfect timing as you go to market

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So the premise is that IH wrote a check or bunches of checks amounting to $11.5 M for which there were no intermittent deliverable's or other metrics of progress. That would make them dumber than dirt, which is doubtful.
This project easily would yield many billions to the owner of the IP.... that's real money.

To me the litigation process is IP positioning.

If Rossi stopped trusting them he was correct to bail.

I've been watching this epic unfold for years now and there continues to be discussion regarding Rossi's integrity. "IF" he was trying to swindle someone it should of happened long ago and so far there has really been no real money moving around.
Since the Fleischmann–Pons claims in 1989 there have been number positive experiments showing COP above chemical reaction energies, While these experiments were not always reproducible (due a lack of thorough understanding of the science) there was no denying the basic data.
It is also reasonable that Rossi and others would want to thoroughly understand the phenomena at least from a control and safety standpoint before offering the public a potentially risky tool to provide energy. His personal liability is enormous.
The actual science may never come but if you consider how little we really know about many forces we live with (gravity, light, magnetism.....) that would and should not be the argument for not proceeding.....

Quote from Peter Ekstrom

Indeed. But you also have to explain away a lot of empirical results. Theories come and go.

True that and DOE is an art.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

As we know there are elements of physics that remain essentially unexplained. Where we are still only looking through the big picture window.
Take any of the intrinsic forces of the universe and all we have are observations and distillations of phenomenon into ad hoc rules. Albeit highly dependable distillations.... however, physics as it exists today is a long way from explaining all the phenomenon of the universe.
In the end, phenomena rules.....

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

The real beauty in this is the open universal sharing of the work and science moving hopefully towards 'critical mass' and a Moore's Law like development curve......this will put the pressure on Rossi et al to get their collective acts in gear if they want to stay in the game.
Are we truly heading for a technological Tsunami?

Quote from Zephir_AWT

/* Remembering that threshold initiation temperatures are exceedingly common in many chemical reactions and always impacted by co constituents */

Well, exactly - in chemical reactions operating at the eV scale - but not nuclear reactions, which run at the MeV scales. Their thresholds occur at the million Kelvin scales.

fusion yes but not fission and then assuming that those are the only types of internuclear reactions that occur in the universe. Evidently not.....and not to be limited by our semantics. Chemical, nuclear....?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Quote from Zephir_AWT

/* I don't think many on this forum will agree with that statement. I realize you have your own personal theory, and... */

The majority just asks for occupation so that it tends to ignore every progress, which would threat the perspective of further research. Because once the final solution is accepted, then the research ends, as Robert Wilson expressed clearly in his final speech to APS community

http://i.imgur.com/oencp2J.gif

The mainstream physicists don't give a sh*t about progress and perspective of human civilization, they just care about perspective of their own research. This pluralistic ignorance attitude is very subliminal and widespread and we can observe it even at this liberal forum (which opposes the mainstream in essence): most of people here prefer to twaddle about nonsenses rather than think about real explanations. It's their free will and decision indeed - but exactly the same attitude has lead into one century standing ignorance of cold fusion, antigravity and overunity findings.

Many people simply love mysteries more than their rational explanations. We should always put the question, if we don't like the asking more than listening of answers.

/* However the rest of your LENR theory is I think: Conjecture. If you can prove it, then: "Great, congrats!" */

I already provided at least three experiments proving this conjecture, but you simply don't read and listen (yea, I know - it's not your fault, the pluralistic ignorance just strikes again). Just the fact that LENR is so affected by changes of temperature speaks for it. You may for example rise the theories about shielding with electrons, about boson condensates etc. - but why just heating above 1000 °C leads into runaway and escape of electrons? The alternative mechanisms proposed are way less sensitive to temperature.

Display More

Remembering that threshold initiation temperatures are exceedingly common in many chemical reactions and always impacted by co constituents

Quote from jpav

Solid balanced advice

Quote from AlainCo

Sorry guys, it seems there is something running bad with Hank Mills down voted regularly...
I read too fast to understand really (maybe I don't want to understand too).
It would be an idea to move all debate about IP sharing to a specific thread, letting technical data here.

beside that about divulgation and community and self interest I will state my position.
I would find it good that people get benefit from their efforts on LENR, whether it is Rossi, Me356, Celani, Weaver, Darden, Godes, Storms, McKubre, Jed, and even David, barty and me...
I've worked for free software while being paid by my boss for local projects. Me and my companies were paid back because our problems were solved, our bug were fixed, maintenance was done for free, and our ego were flattered by thanks and citation. That is a business model. Forget the "Free software is for humanity"... it was well understood mutual self interest.

I understand that people like rossi, and why not some scientists and hobbyists want to get paid back as they deserve with the IP model. in short it cannot work. forget it. patent or secrecy won't work.

The second is that inventors should understand that the biggest job in innovation is not technology. capitalist take risk with their own skin, if not their own money, at least their own future as VC. Commercial efforts, industrial infrastructure design and building, are very hard too.
Good news is that there is room for inventors and many LENR actors to have a modest business model... There is also room for people who simply are aware of LENr and prepare applications... If you cannot dig gold , sell the shovel, the balance, or manufacture coins or jewelry.

Finally for people like me356 my advices is to share data with people who share data, who are helpful for you, and to try to write some deal so that if one of the replicator find something, the others can use it under some conditions, and that if one make money with LENR, the others who shared honestly while the weather was bad, will get a share of the benefit of the lucky guy who worked hard too...
Do that quickly, fully, courageously, and you will run faster like a wolfpack against a wild cat.

I don't like the pure charity model as there is often hidden payback and hidden incentive, that may be bad, or good... If people play like I did with free software the charity model, why not, but let make it clear what is the payback...

having fun, changing the future of your family, having a fantastic CV on linkedin to be hired by wealthy company, having you name on Internet and many fan, reducing the heating bill of your house, creating a LENR bike manufacturing company,... choose what is your payback, but be clear at least in private.

what will work is when your motivation meet someone else motivation in a positive way.
Since LENr will be on average positive, mutual self interest are not impossible to find.

Now I find it good that me356 cross check his data, and share it with people he trust, before facing the extreme skeptics.

By the way, thanks, and sorry not to participate more, I do what I do best, watching...

Display More

Its way too bad we can't get ME365 an assistant to take notes start writing the narrative.
This the problem for scientists....really a tendency to chase the fox and let the notes write themselves.

Rossi is now in the zone where he tells assistants what to do and also who record the data. He then interprets the results, and designs the next foray.
In this protocol someone needs to be thinking about if and when to launch. Hopefully it is someone.

At some point Jobs & Wozniak decided to build a machine to sell......the first sale shuts down a lot of extraneous arguments.

A very difficult undertaking, Gas sampling is not easy. Unless the gas output were hooked directly to the MS......

So either you tune the reactor/reaction to bring coherence to the output or you surround the reactor with a fractally architectured rectenna.....

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Me365:
so the Rossi patent of layered reactors may be exactly what you are talking about wrt to a RF cascade effect?
open ?s
is there an efficient way to crevert RF back to electrical energy? Heat is great but direct electrical production is more useful. Whatever the COP is, whenever it is finally converted back into power or work the efficiencies will be critical.
Given that your current output spans a significant spectrum of energy frequencies it would be important to be able to narrow that output to a specific output range. This is why your examination of RF output vs run conditions can be so important.

My assessment is that the savings/profit incentive will be the key drivers....
Prime markets for accelerated conversion are:

• early adoption of residential heating and electricity
• Transportation (autos, trucks, rail, ocean shipping)
• Energy intensive manufacturing (All metals, basic chemicals [H2SO4, Cl, NaOH, HCl], cement, fertilizer, plastics.....)
• Petro-energy futures crashing, along with total market disruption to the new equilibrium.

Longer term trends

• Grid dependency decreasing exponentially over 5 -10 years.
• Petro-energy supply chain dependency decreasing
• Vertical growth of petrochemical sources....up to and potentially past VCM production.
• Refitting all residences and business points with the new energy paradigm.
• Restructuring of infrastructure to take advantage of low cost energy (public lighting, Water, Wastewater)
• Significant growth of engineering, manufacturing and construction areas to accommodate all the above.
• Percent of labor in material cost increasing.

Sectors Less effected

• Health care
• Food production (except for fertilization and logistics)
• Entertainment
• Technology
• Mining?
• Low energy dependent manufacturing

The answer is relatively straightforward. You would short current energy stock like crazy. While the implementation and launching of any technology will take time the futures on energy will respond immediately......WRT to options timing becomes a critical element. However, followers of LENR should be able to recognize the impending success or failure of this highly disruptive technology as soon as someone actually markets and sells a working unit.