Overunity.com Archives

How come the US Patent Office has granted patents for perpetuum mobile while the mainstream Science says it?s impossible. Either the US Patent Office are non-scientific or there is something wrong with mainstream Science (which is a public secret).

See the latest US patent for a perpetuum mobile that I know of: http://www.google.com/patents?id=LREWAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=6,867,514#PPA1,M1

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 09:26:35 AM
How come the US Patent Office has granted patents for perpetuum mobile while the mainstream Science says it?s impossible. Either the US Patent Office are non-scientific or there is something wrong with mainstream Science (which is a public secret).

See the latest US patent for a perpetuum mobile that I know of: http://www.google.com/patents?id=LREWAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=6,867,514#PPA1,M1

You are quick to criticize the USPTO for something that is not its responsibility.

While it is true that the patent office has been reluctant to issue patents on perpetual motion machines, it has never been the primary purpose of the patent office to verify functionality of the applicants' inventions.  The purpose of patents is to provide protection for the inventor, and so the patent office works primarily to verify that there is no prior art.  And if the inventor ends up with a patent on an unworkable device, well, he is still protected at least, so the patent does its job.

Anyway, does this thing even claim to be perpetual motion?  I did not read it in entirety.

@shruggedatlas,

QuoteThe purpose of patents is to provide protection for the inventor

So you seem to call ?inventor? even someone who would propose nonsense. Unworkable devices are nonsense, correct?

And, it seems to be OK with you that such creators of nonsense are protected by the US Government?

I don?t believe that US Patent Office would agree that its primary business is to protect just anything, nonsense or not.

QuoteAnyway, does this thing even claim to be perpetual motion?  I did not read it in entirety.

Read the claims, Read the description of the proposed examples.

Read this: ?There are many instances where a motor action is required and no source of external power is available. Accordingly, a motor which relies solely on the energy stored in permanent magnets would be useful.? Do you still doubt that it?s a patent for perpetuum mobile?

There should be a way to smoke out the creators of nonsense who use the gullibility of some clerk to get the umbrella of the US Government.And, if it isn't nonsens there should be a way to make them prove it. These underhanded games are not in the best interest of the American people, don't you agree?

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 10:40:16 AM
There should be a way to smoke out the creators of nonsense who use the gullibility of some clerk to get the umbrella of the US Government.And, if it isn't nonsens there should be a way to make them prove it. These underhanded games are not in the best interest of the American people, don't you agree?

First of all, I want to tell you that I respect your intentions.  Honesty and integrity are noble goals.

However, what you must realize is that the American people do not look to the patent system as a validation system, only a protection system.  If someone has an unworkable patent, who does he hurt besides himself?  There are private scientific journals and organizations for those who want to share proven theory - the patent office is not the place for that, and everyone knows it, at least everyone who needs to know.

In the end, what you propose is prohibitively expensive and time consuming.  It already takes years and thousands of dollars to get a patent approved, and that is only with the examiners doing prior art searches.  Can you imagine how much more costly and time consuming patents would be if the examiner had the burden of establishing beyond doubt that the invention actually works?  Would you be willing to pay 5 times more for a granted patent?

As far as I know, the American system is not unique but is fairly typical.  WIPO (www.wipo.int), for example, does not verify function.  How does it work in your country?

withdrawn (misclick)

What about the ?broadness? of a patent.
I.e., someone says they have a free energy device. patented of course.
It has a coil of wire and a magnet bobbing around ?somewhere?
inside with a mess of other parts.

Someone else then invents a ?Real? free energy device,
It too has a coil of wire and a magnet bobbing around in it, but
none of the ?other parts?.

The first person says ?hey the bobbing magnet and coil part is the free energy source?
So your patent infringes on mine.

yes or no?

Ps, I think there?s lots of ?free energy? patents with coils and magnets.

I am trying to reproduce this recent patent, and from my recent FEMM simulations at the end of the thread, it should work:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2963.0

What bothers me about the patent is that it is so broad it actually covers some of the way an SEG works.

If you look at http://www.searlsolution.com/evidence2.html or download the PDF paper at http://www.searlsolution.com/documents/russianseg.pdf and read it, you will see that V. V. Roschin and S. M. Godin used a similar magnetic configuration when they did their verification experiments at Institute for High Temperatures, Russian Academy of Science when testing John Searl's SEG.  (see http://youtube.com/watch?v=a-O7WNvKSvY and http://youtube.com/watch?v=46gRnzI2os0&mode=related&search= for a prototype that was used as a testing mechanism in April of this year)

It is known that John Searl uses a 'magnetic wave effect' imprinted on his SEG plates and rollers.  This coupled with his high frequency current superimposed on top of the standard direct current while magnetizing his neodynium magnets produces a similar nnn-nns-ssn-nss-snn wave effect that appears to be taken advantaged of in the patent mentioned in this thread.

But I say 'screw patents'... bring on the SEG! 

It's time has come.

FB

Thanks a lot for your reply. For once, to meet an intelligent person to discuss these important matters.

First off, my country is the United States and, therefore, I?m most concerned with the system there.

I already said that I don?t believe that the US Patent Office would agree that it would be used to protect nonsense. On the contrary, I think that a US patent is something serious and no one should take it lightly if there is even the slightest trace of fraud. Especially when not just any claim but an earth-shaking claim such as a perpetuum mobile which isn?t real is to be protected. I?m sure there must be a way to require from the Patent Office to withdraw its protection if this particular claim cannot be sustained by the ?inventor?. If he can sustain it all power to him, otherwise it would be a travesty of the system to concede that such situation is normal. It puts into question the integrity of the whole system and in this respect I don?t think that such ?inventor? is only hurting himself. This hurts my interests as well as yours. Never mind how expensive it may get, a system must have protective fuse against fraud. Keeping an army, police, prisons etc. is also expensive for us the tax-payers but these do exist to maintain the integrity of a country. Other US institutions also take their business seriously and, I guess, the US Patent Office should be one of them.

I wonder what you mean by private scientific journals and organizations who want to share proven theories. As far as I know all countries, US included, have academies of sciences and governmental institutions deciding ultimately the fate of scientific matters. Private enterprises doing business with science are only extensions of the core organizations which are governmental. If the British Royal Society doesn?t have the final say on important matters of science and allows private cuckoo-organizations to take over with bogus theories this will ultimately weaken the country and its rival, say France, will celebrate. I don?t think the British ruling class will be happy with that. It most certainly won?t and that?s the reason there?s British Royal Society, not a sect or a private think-tank, deciding on what is or isn?t in science. This was just an example.

I?d like to find out how the truth will prevail both in Science (which also has similar problems) and in the US Patent Office which should not be in disparity.

Interesting discussion.  I have only had two brushes with the US Patent office, the first, when my Father and I attempted to patent out ceramic springs, and 6 years later, to invalidate a patent on the ceramic springs that claimed we were infringing.

They turned our application down because they said it was not a "significant improvement" over the current metal springs available. (Which is stupid based upon the properties of the partially stabilized zirconium oxide they were made from...nonmetallic, nonmagnetic, not affected by acids, can perform at high temps, 3,000 f, stable spring rate over vast temp. ranges, and not subject to metal fatigue, to name a few.)  At the time of the application, we were told we had to submit working samples.  We did.  It was turned down.  Another corporation, a very large one, was one of our customers at the time.  They ordered 6 springs from us as they could not make them, we were the only ones in the world at that time who could.  They submitted them to the Patent office and got their patent using our springs as working samples.  We beat the "cease and desist" order easily for several reasons.

Anyway, I tell you this because it was my understanding that you could not just patent an idea for a device, you had to build the device and provide records of it's intended performance as outlined in the patent.  The patent attorney told us that someone could not just submit a broad idea for an invention without first producing at least 3 working devices that would be inspected.  So how are these people now just obtaining patents on wild ideas that may or may not ever work?

My experience was about 20 years ago or so.  Have the Patent laws changed since then so you no longer have to provide a working model? If so, then I think patents are even more useless than I did previously.

Bill

G'day Bill,

The US patent office, since its inception has granted patents for the most idiotic and unworkable devices. Have a look at how many permanent motor designs have been patented over the years. None of them work. The Jesse Mc Queen patent is another case in point. Pure speculative gibberish.

see:   http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3130.0/topicseen.html

The common misconception is that you require a working prototype in order to get a patent. This is not so, in fact it never was. The truth is that the patent office MAY require the applicant to furnish a prototype in order to get the patent.

This is only very rarely done, usually only to people whose application is so patently idiotic that it is clear it will never work. It is one way to refuse a patent without having to refuse it. (Like in the case of the Robert Jackson applications where, according to Jackson, they DID ask to be shown a working prototype.)

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 04:01:20 PM
G'day Bill,

The US patent office, since its inception has granted patents for the most idiotic and unworkable devices. Have a look at how many permanent motor designs have been patented over the years. None of them work. The Jesse Mc Queen patent is another case in point. Pure speculative gibberish.

see:   http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3130.0/topicseen.html

The common misconception is that you require a working prototype in order to get a patent. This is not so, in fact it never was. The truth is that the patent office MAY require the applicant to furnish a prototype in order to get the patent.

This is only very rarely done, usually only to people whose application is so patently idiotic that it is clear it will never work. It is one way to refuse a patent without having to refuse it. (Like in the case of the Robert Jackson applications where, according to Jackson, they DID ask to be shown a working prototype.)

Hans von Lieven

Who are you to challenge the decision of the US Paten Office? Nobody.

Until the US Patent Office revokes that and the rest of the perpetuum mobile patents, or a judge decides against them you shoud stop spewing nonsense against the US Patent Office.

The decisions of the US patent office have been overruled by the Courts on hundreds of occasions over the years. It is a matter of public record.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 04:35:05 PM

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 04:01:20 PM
G'day Bill,

The US patent office, since its inception has granted patents for the most idiotic and unworkable devices. Have a look at how many permanent motor designs have been patented over the years. None of them work. The Jesse Mc Queen patent is another case in point. Pure speculative gibberish.

see:   http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3130.0/topicseen.html

The common misconception is that you require a working prototype in order to get a patent. This is not so, in fact it never was. The truth is that the patent office MAY require the applicant to furnish a prototype in order to get the patent.

This is only very rarely done, usually only to people whose application is so patently idiotic that it is clear it will never work. It is one way to refuse a patent without having to refuse it. (Like in the case of the Robert Jackson applications where, according to Jackson, they DID ask to be shown a working prototype.)

Hans von Lieven

Who are you to challenge the decision of the US Paten Office? Nobody.

Until the US Patent Office revokes that and the rest of the perpetuum mobile patents, or a judge decides against them you shoud stop spewing nonsense against the US Patent Office.

All hail the US Patent office!  1,2,3... let's bow down now.

Yes, they rule!  Yes, they have power!  Yes, they are our currently in charge of deciding who 'owns' something... (sic)

Bull Crap.

They are controlled by special interest just like any other governing body that has power and deals with people who have lots of money.

This same story line has been repeated so many times in human's history, it is amazing to me that we still find the plot interesting!

The US Patent office has done good... they've done bad... they're human... they screw up.

Because of this... they DESERVE to be challenged!

How many corporations have patented things that should not have been patented?

Amazon and their stupid one-click mess?

How about the company that patented our human genome?  (our DNA for kris's sake)

How about the crap the Joseph Newman has been going through?

Right... let's take up for our US patent office because they are infallible and cannot make mistakes.

I say, it's time to open source everything...

Let's make ALL knowledge OPEN SOURCE!!!!

FB

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 04:44:07 PM
The decisions of the US patent office have been overruled by the Courts on hundreds of occasions over the years. It is a matter of public record.

Hans von Lieven

You should stop with your nonsense. No one here needs your incompetent remarks. You will talk against this particular patent only when this particular patent is overruled by the courts. Until then it's a valid US patent and you should respect it and the fact that US Patent Office has recognized the viability of perpetuum mobile. Do you get it or I should repeat it for you as you seem not to understand even simple things such as this when said once? Don't clutter the forum with your nonsense.

QuoteBecause of this... they DESERVE to be challenged!

Good enough. Challenge them. Challenge them, however, where the challenge takes place, not here. Like I said, until a judge decides against the patent in question due to your challenge you must respect the fact that it has the backing of the US government, recognized as perpetuum mobile. Is that clear?

The US patent office has recognised many unworkable devices, their judgement is NOT definitive as to the workability of anything. Even an uneducated blithering idiot like you should see that.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 06:08:23 PM
The US patent office has recognised many unworkable devices, their judgement is NOT definitive as to the workability of anything. Even an uneducated blithering idiot like you should see that.

Hans von Lieven

Listen, you moron, you're a nobody and have no right to disrespect a federal agency such as the US Patent Office and its decisions. If you disagree there are courts and you may challenge the decisions of the US Paten Office there. Spewing utter crap in the forums only shows what a mean little twerp you are. Stop cluttering the interesting discussion with your politely arrogant gibberish.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 06:21:20 PM

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 06:08:23 PM
The US patent office has recognised many unworkable devices, their judgement is NOT definitive as to the workability of anything. Even an uneducated blithering idiot like you should see that.

Hans von Lieven

Listen, you moron, you're a nobody and have no right to disrespect a federal agency such as the US Patent Office and its decisions. If you disagree there are courts and you may challenge the decisions of the US Paten Office there. Spewing utter crap in the forums only shows what a mean little twerp you are. Stop cluttering the interesting discussion with your politely arrogant gibberish.

Everyone has the right AND the duty to challenge all decisions made by every decision making authority in this country.

This includes the US Patent Office.

It's called freedom... and in case someone has forgotten, it is our right here in this country to do so.

Having a 'shut up' and 'respect an institution above all else' attitude here does no one any good... including you!   

We MUST and SHOULD discuss rulings made here... 

If we stop discussing, then there can be no change... and there can be no improvement to the human condition.

FB

Quote from: ForeverBlissed on October 09, 2007, 01:37:05 PM
What bothers me about the patent is that it is so broad it actually covers some of the way an SEG works.

I think you and some others have raised valid criticisms of the current U.S. patent system.  However, having experience in the matter, in practice you would find that if you invented a working device and someone else has invented a nonworking device and patented it first, you would not have much trouble getting your patent approved.  You see, the thing that makes your device actually work would have to be different from the non-working model, so you could differentiate your invention based on that.

The way you lay your claims out is why this works out this way.  Let me give an example.  Suppose someone had patented a device involving a magnet coil and pendulum inside.  (Magnet coil on its own not being sufficient for the device to purportedly work.)  The claim would be

1.  Coiled magnet containing a pendulum.

The claims would NOT be separate:

1.  Containing a magnet coil
2.  Containing a pendulum inside the magent coil.

So you see, if you come in and invent a PPM device that has a hammer inside a coiled magnet, you would simply claim the hammer inside the coiled magnet.  Just because someone else used a coiled magnet does not prevent you from getting your idea patented.

What you do typically see is alot of "dependent" claims attached to "independent" claims, and this can lead to confusion, but always remember that if you can differentiate your independent claim, the claims that depend on it will not apply to you.  And with independent claims, each combination of dependent and independent claim is its own separate invention.  For example:

Claim 1:  Coiled magnet with pendulum inside.      (This is the independent claim.)
Claim 2.  Claim 1 above, in addition to which the entire apparatus is placed inside a sealed chamber filled with helium.

So based on above, if you invented a coiled magnet with a hammer inside, and then you decided to place the entire device inside a helium-filled chamber, you would not be barred from doing so, because the dependent claim must be considered in conjunction with the independent claim, and since your independent claim differs, the dependent claim does not apply to you.

Now all this is a gross oversimplification, but I hope you get the idea of how claims work.  You cannot just claim each component individually and prevent others from using your components.  You claim the entire device.

Shrugged:

In my example in an earlier post, the ceramic springs were part of an assembly.  The patent covered the assembly and all of the components such that we received a cease and desist order to stop manufacturing and selling our springs.  We beat it because they still could not make even one, and we provided proof that we made the ones they submitted to get the patent and, we had been making and selling them for 8 years prior to their application.

My point is, you said that they would not issue a patent on the parts of a device, just a device.  But, in this case they (Patent Office) did exactly that.  And our Patent attorney said that ALL people seeking patents for ANY technological device had to submit three working examples or the patent application would not even be considered.  I read what Hans said about not requiring that but was our attorney that misinformed?  He charged us over $10,000 to initiate the application process and that was back in the early 80's.  I would have hoped he knew what he was talking about, but, I work with attorneys all the time now and, if I ask three of them a question, I get three different answers. I'm just curious.  Thanks.

Bill

Quote from: Pirate88179 on October 09, 2007, 08:07:36 PM
Shrugged:

In my example in an earlier post, the ceramic springs were part of an assembly.  The patent covered the assembly and all of the components such that we received a cease and desist order to stop manufacturing and selling our springs.  We beat it because they still could not make even one, and we provided proof that we made the ones they submitted to get the patent and, we had been making and selling them for 8 years prior to their application.

My point is, you said that they would not issue a patent on the parts of a device, just a device.  But, in this case they (Patent Office) did exactly that.  And our Patent attorney said that ALL people seeking patents for ANY technological device had to submit three working examples or the patent application would not even be considered.  I read what Hans said about not requiring that but was our attorney that misinformed?  He charged us over $10,000 to initiate the application process and that was back in the early 80's.  I would have hoped he knew what he was talking about, but, I work with attorneys all the time now and, if I ask three of them a question, I get three different answers. I'm just curious.  Thanks.

Bill

I am not technically a patent attorney, and I have done no patent litigation and have not submitted any patents.  However, I have worked with other attorneys on analyzing specific patents for various purposes, and I have done infringement and prior art analyses, but there are many things I do not know.  Still, I have not heard of having to have a working prototype in order to get a patent.  Maybe this applies to perpetual motion devices only.

physical models or outside (patent office choice of people 'versed in the art') replication can be and sometimes is requested, by the patent office on what they may designate, after investigation... to be 'dubious claims'.

So, it specifically depends on if the USPTO thinks you are full of shit or not.

And I don't have to be psychic, Hans, to note that Omni seems to have taken a real shining to you. I'm not really seeing you be an asshole, here. I think Omni needs to go in for at least a small amount of therapy. First he must be willing to understand that he has obvious issues.

I can't imagine that any working models of this patent were produced:

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT5052638

An electromagnetic ramjet propulsion system is provided for accelerating high mass payloads through the upper atomsphere at orbital velocities. The propulsion system comprises a plurality of coplaner self-supporting superconducting dipole coils several hundred meters in diameter that is initially accelerated to high altitude and supersonic speed by magnetic repulsive forces generated by a plurality of superconducting field coils several kilometers in diameter embeded beneath the earth's surface. The ramjet is accelerated to orbital velocities by a multigigawatt microwave beam that is transmitted from the earth's surface. A reflecting grid of conducting wires is mounted inside the inner dipole which shock ionizes the low dentisy atmospheric gas passing through it. The frequency of the microwave beam is adjusted to produce electron cyclotron resonance with the free electrons passing through the magnetic field of the dipoles thereby accelerating them away from the dipoles by magnetic...

Quote from: ForeverBlissed on October 09, 2007, 06:43:11 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 06:21:20 PM

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 06:08:23 PM
The US patent office has recognised many unworkable devices, their judgement is NOT definitive as to the workability of anything. Even an uneducated blithering idiot like you should see that.

Hans von Lieven

Listen, you moron, you're a nobody and have no right to disrespect a federal agency such as the US Patent Office and its decisions. If you disagree there are courts and you may challenge the decisions of the US Paten Office there. Spewing utter crap in the forums only shows what a mean little twerp you are. Stop cluttering the interesting discussion with your politely arrogant gibberish.

Everyone has the right AND the duty to challenge all decisions made by every decision making authority in this country.

This includes the US Patent Office.

It's called freedom... and in case someone has forgotten, it is our right here in this country to do so.

Having a 'shut up' and 'respect an institution above all else' attitude here does no one any good... including you!   

We MUST and SHOULD discuss rulings made here... 

If we stop discussing, then there can be no change... and there can be no improvement to the human condition.

FB

You are proposing anarchy and anarchy isn?t freedom. Read above, did I propose not to challenge decisions made by decision making authorities in this country, including the US Patent Office? Of course not. There?s a way, however, to challenge such decisions in a country such as ours which isn?t governed by anarchy. Politely arrogant self-proclaimed experts such as @hansvonlieven cowardly try to belittle decisions of the US decision-making authorities in a forum like this where it is safe to do so. He  must face the reality, however. The US Patent Office has protected machines which are a perpetuum mobile and that fact cannot be erased by anyone popping-up in a forum, no matter how uncomfortable this is for him. If this really bothers @hansvonlieven he should amend it where it?s done?in the courts and not subversively try to undermine the legal status of this problem.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 11:35:17 PM

Quote from: ForeverBlissed on October 09, 2007, 06:43:11 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 06:21:20 PM

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 06:08:23 PM
The US patent office has recognised many unworkable devices, their judgement is NOT definitive as to the workability of anything. Even an uneducated blithering idiot like you should see that.

Hans von Lieven

Listen, you moron, you're a nobody and have no right to disrespect a federal agency such as the US Patent Office and its decisions. If you disagree there are courts and you may challenge the decisions of the US Paten Office there. Spewing utter crap in the forums only shows what a mean little twerp you are. Stop cluttering the interesting discussion with your politely arrogant gibberish.

Everyone has the right AND the duty to challenge all decisions made by every decision making authority in this country.

This includes the US Patent Office.

It's called freedom... and in case someone has forgotten, it is our right here in this country to do so.

Having a 'shut up' and 'respect an institution above all else' attitude here does no one any good... including you!   

We MUST and SHOULD discuss rulings made here... 

If we stop discussing, then there can be no change... and there can be no improvement to the human condition.

FB

You are proposing anarchy and anarchy isn?t freedom. Read above, did I propose not to challenge decisions made by decision making authorities in this country, including the US Patent Office? Of course not. There?s a way, however, to challenge such decisions in a country such as ours which isn?t governed by anarchy. Politely arrogant self-proclaimed experts such as @hansvonlieven cowardly try to belittle decisions of the US decision-making authorities in a forum like this where it is safe to do so. He  must face the reality, however. The US Patent Office has protected machines which are a perpetuum mobile and that fact cannot be erased by anyone popping-up in a forum, no matter how uncomfortable this is for him. If this really bothers @hansvonlieven he should amend it where it?s done?in the courts and not subversively try to undermine the legal status of this problem.

Since I am the one that wrote the paragraphs, I am certain that I know what I was discussing.

And I can ASSURE you that I am NOT discussing anarchy.

I'm talking about thinking and not following blindly.  I'm talking about questioning authority.   I'm talking about using our brains for something other than a 'me too' device.

Since when does thinking and questioning equate to anarchy?

You clearly are not following my point.

FB

Quote from: ForeverBlissed on October 09, 2007, 11:56:24 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 11:35:17 PM

Quote from: ForeverBlissed on October 09, 2007, 06:43:11 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 09, 2007, 06:21:20 PM

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 09, 2007, 06:08:23 PM
The US patent office has recognised many unworkable devices, their judgement is NOT definitive as to the workability of anything. Even an uneducated blithering idiot like you should see that.

Hans von Lieven

Listen, you moron, you're a nobody and have no right to disrespect a federal agency such as the US Patent Office and its decisions. If you disagree there are courts and you may challenge the decisions of the US Paten Office there. Spewing utter crap in the forums only shows what a mean little twerp you are. Stop cluttering the interesting discussion with your politely arrogant gibberish.

Everyone has the right AND the duty to challenge all decisions made by every decision making authority in this country.

This includes the US Patent Office.

It's called freedom... and in case someone has forgotten, it is our right here in this country to do so.

Having a 'shut up' and 'respect an institution above all else' attitude here does no one any good... including you!   

We MUST and SHOULD discuss rulings made here... 

If we stop discussing, then there can be no change... and there can be no improvement to the human condition.

FB

You are proposing anarchy and anarchy isn?t freedom. Read above, did I propose not to challenge decisions made by decision making authorities in this country, including the US Patent Office? Of course not. There?s a way, however, to challenge such decisions in a country such as ours which isn?t governed by anarchy. Politely arrogant self-proclaimed experts such as @hansvonlieven cowardly try to belittle decisions of the US decision-making authorities in a forum like this where it is safe to do so. He  must face the reality, however. The US Patent Office has protected machines which are a perpetuum mobile and that fact cannot be erased by anyone popping-up in a forum, no matter how uncomfortable this is for him. If this really bothers @hansvonlieven he should amend it where it?s done?in the courts and not subversively try to undermine the legal status of this problem.

Since I am the one that wrote the paragraphs, I am certain that I know what I was discussing.

And I can ASSURE you that I am NOT discussing anarchy.

I'm talking about thinking and not following blindly.  I'm talking about questioning authority.   I'm talking about using our brains for something other than a 'me too' device.

Since when does thinking and questioning equate to anarchy?

You clearly are not following my point.

FB

No, you're not following my point. Don't follow blindly, question authority but abide by the law. Otherwise it's anarchy. Legal matters such as whether US Patent Office should recognize perpetuum mobile, as it obviously does, should only be questioned in court and not by violating the laws of the country, subversively and cowardly belittling the decisions of USPO in a forum such as this as  @hansvonlieven does. Violation of the laws isn't freedom. Otherwise criminals would be the freest people around.

QuoteViolation of the laws isn't freedom. Otherwise criminals would be the freest people around.

Apparently violation of the laws is freedom and the biggest criminals are free. Just look at your government.

Quote from: acp on October 10, 2007, 04:23:34 AM

QuoteViolation of the laws isn't freedom. Otherwise criminals would be the freest people around.

Apparently violation of the laws is freedom and the biggest criminals are free. Just look at your government.

PRove it in court. Until then no one is a criminal.

It already has. Take the U.S backed Israel programs of annexation and cantonization of land and resources which is breaking up Palestinian territories into unviable cantons. These actions have been condemned by the UN security council and termed illegal by the world courts. Does it make any difference? No. They are free. There are endless examples.  About the only thing worrying the americans at the moment is China, because they refuse to be intimidated by the U.S, unlike, practically the rest of the world.

Quote from: acp on October 10, 2007, 04:48:52 AM
It already has. Take the U.S backed Israel programs of annexation and cantonization of land and resources which is breaking up Palestinian territories into unviable cantons. These actions have been condemned by the UN security council and termed illegal by the world courts. Does it make any difference? No. They are free. There are endless examples.  About the only thing worrying the americans at the moment is China, because they refuse to be intimidated by the U.S, unlike, practically the rest of the world.

UN's jurisdiction doesn't apply to the US. Neither do jurisdictions of other countries. You seem to forget that. The US politicians proclaimed by the US courts to be criminals are all in jail. The US politicians who haven't been found guilty in a court of law are not in jail and you mustn't call them criminals. OK? As for China, Chinese system today is a creation of the US, China is an appendage to the US business, depends on it entirely ideologically and financially and is as much of a threat to the US as any mastodon business structure getting out of control is a threat to the US.

QuoteUN's jurisdiction doesn't apply to the US. Neither do jurisdictions of other countries.

The U.S doesn't answer to anyone, I Believe Chomsky is quite correct in his assertion that "what the U.S say goes. Just look at what Bush1 said after the first invasion of Irak, This is the start of a new world order, what we says goes"


China holds about a trillion dollars of U.S debt at the moment, and has massive investments in U.S bonds. Although they rely on U.S at the moment for exports, who knows if that will change, they are busy clinching trade deals with a lot of important countries. The recent test by the Chinese when they blew out one of their own antimissile satelites caused enormous unrest amongst the U.S administration.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 10, 2007, 05:02:09 AM

Quote from: acp on October 10, 2007, 04:48:52 AM
It already has. Take the U.S backed Israel programs of annexation and cantonization of land and resources which is breaking up Palestinian territories into unviable cantons. These actions have been condemned by the UN security council and termed illegal by the world courts. Does it make any difference? No. They are free. There are endless examples.  About the only thing worrying the americans at the moment is China, because they refuse to be intimidated by the U.S, unlike, practically the rest of the world.

UN's jurisdiction doesn't apply to the US. Neither do jurisdictions of other countries. You seem to forget that. The US politicians proclaimed by the US courts to be criminals are all in jail. The US politicians who haven't been found guilty in a court of law are not in jail and you mustn't call them criminals. OK? As for China, Chinese system today is a creation of the US, China is an appendage to the US business, depends on it entirely ideologically and financially and is as much of a threat to the US as any mastodon business structure getting out of control is a threat to the US.

I hardly know you, dude. But some things are obvious. You are rabid, you offend, and your morals and ethics are obviously skewed via animalism tied to your logic. You understand little, or you project garbage to push your emotionally based point of view.

It would be very difficult to say that you are here on this forum for humanity's sake. Your post stinks of racism and bigotry.

Get thee to a doctor.

.

@Prophmaji,

Mind your own business and don't mess with me.

Omnibus is right, but calling the bush administration the US is not very accurate. This new world order peeps plan on using the us army to slaughter China and the Russian army to do the same in the US while the army is away. This was all known before 1980. The Iraq part of the plan was spot on. The FEMA camps are already build.

However, Free energy would change their whole agenda. They would want to see what the effect is. If we manage to salve the problems ourselves they don't need to prune the globe.

There are quite a few patents disclosing improvements of electric motors. If you read those you see they avoid saying their machine is making energy.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=9NQiAAAAEBAJ
D.C. electric motor - Google Patents

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/troy-reed
magnetmotor: Troy Reed

This is his old stuff.

The motor designs with plastic magnets filled with nano iron is potentially a quick way to overunity. You can begin making these youself, in terms of testing. Nano-iron is easily available, and so is the idea of casting plastics. Your homework assignment is to add that pair to charging the structure during the casting process. Very high permeability combined with interesting dielectric and polarization considerations. With interestingly low inductive reactance thrown into the mix as well, as that is a mass based consideration, not really perfectly tied to the magnetics. The magnet version of the nano-gold impregated super capacitor.

As for the rest of it, It goes back a long ways.(for those of us without the capacity to understand the truth existent around the history of approximately the last 100 years) If it is the way you like to think it is...then..Putin may be ruining the game. With approximately 8 attempts on his life so far, it's difficult to say who's pocket he is in.

@Prophmaji,

Did you know what the State of Missouri is--'Show Me" state. Otherwise yours are empty words and wishful thinking.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 12, 2007, 12:18:39 PM
@Prophmaji,

Did you know what the State of Missouri is--'Show Me" state. Otherwise yours are empty words and wishful thinking.

No-one has to show you anything. You know that. I can't be bothered.

But, I feel this is nessesary: I apologize.

My slight rant was colored by a a thread on whether you should be banned or not; usually I don't fall for the preconceived notion crap. I stated in that thread that folks who continually cause grief on a forum should be given one..two..three...strikes..and then banned with extreme prejudice and zero warning. I had no experience with you beforehand. But..the thread colored my expectations. I have re-read my post/response..and it was a bit over the top. To balance a bit, you seem to come on pretty strong in a very 'America first'  way and with some preconceived bias - that much is definitely argueable. It should be noted that America has been killing it's citizenry literally, from day 1. So like most countries, there is little that is truly noble about America. Only the odd realistic and humane citizen, just like everywhere else.

If you are speaking of the nano-particles in plastic, do your own work. I don't have the time.  I propose the idea, from understandings that I have, you do the research if you want to. I don't owe you squat.


If you speak on Putin, that is pulled from Russian newspaper reports and interviews with Putin. When and where, I've no exact recollection.

As for Missouri....It also has a donkey/mule for a state mascot, does it not?

Quote from: Prophmaji on October 12, 2007, 10:13:09 PM
It should be noted that America has been killing it's citizenry literally, from day 1. So like most countries, there is little that is truly noble about America. Only the odd realistic and humane citizen, just like everywhere else.

A little bit of a backhanded apology there.  I do not know why it is so damn fashionable to bash America.  I also do not know what you mean by "killing its citizenry."  The humane american is not an oddity but the norm, and I will now list some noble acts that maybe you missed.

We rescued Europe in WW2.

After WW2, if it was not for the U.S., all of Western Europe and god knows what else would be communist now.  I am not joking, and if you know anything about Soviet world domination goals of the late '40s through the '70s, you would realize that this is true.  If you really think the Soviet tanks would have stopped at Berlin, had Americans not been there to meet them, you are sadly mistaken.  And I am speaking as a former Soviet citizen, who now lives in the U.S.

In any U.N. mission, U.S. is first in funding and first in supplying military personnel.

We spend enormous amounts of money on foreign aid, both privately and through federal funding.

I could go on, but it's late.  I do not know if you are a self-loathing american or an american-loathing non-American or what, but I thought your off-handed statement warranted a response.

@All,

I spoke with an examiner and will pursue this thing further. Amazingly, the patentee has brought several models to the US Patent Office but none of them had been a working model, just experiment "demonstrating" that potentially such motor can be built. And this is how the examiners were convinced of its viability!? Interestingly, although the very title says "Permanent Magnet Motor" the examiner tried to persuade me that the patent had been issued solely for the partiular construction of the magnet device. When I pressed him he said that the approval of this patent has passed several levels of scrutiny and the final decision hasn't been only his. Of course, I have no intention of harming anybody at the patent office while recognizing that we're all humans and mistakes are made. This is a serious mistake (not to require proof positive for such an important claim of far-reaching consequences), however, and it must be corrected. The examiner insisted that I should contact Frank Fecera himself. Aside from the fact that I did that and all my attempts to speak to him were in vain (I hear only a message on his answering machine, not to say that it was very difficult to get his telephone number) I think that it's US Patent Office's duty to require a demonstration if they want to save face. This patent is on public record and no excuses with NDA's and private companies' rules hold any water this time. Steorn, Torbay, Perendev etc. may escape from such scrutiny. This one cannot. Besides, Steorn would be out of their minds to demonstrate anything before Fecera proves that his device is viable, otherwise Steorn will be infringing on Fecera's patent and Fecera will own everything Steorn demonstrates. This is the status of this important inquiry as of today.

Does anyone know how a review process of an already issued patent can be initiated in the US Patent Office by a third party?

Shrugged:

I could not agree with you more. Prophmaji must not know his history or lives in another country where history is not available.  We have our flaws here in America, but no country in the history of the planet has done more for the people of the world than we have.  Have we always done the correct thing?  Of course not.  But who does the world come to when they need money for a disaster, or aid for their failed government.  Us, yes US.  This is not a political forum so I will hold the rest of my thoughts for now, except to say that anyone that lives here that thinks the way Prophmaji does thinks needs to leave, we won't stop him. (One of our freedoms)  and if he already lives in another country...good stay there, we don't need you.

Bill

G'day all,

The only way for a third party to get a review of a patent is in COURT.

If you have the money to do it go ahead, if not, get stuffed.

It is called democracy.

Hans von Lieven

Your opiniion isn't needed. You're semi-educated scientifically and you don't understand democracy. Just, stay away from this discussion.

He may be semi-educated.  Could be he doesn't understand democracy.  No doubt at all that he's surly and quite shockingly ugly.  But, dear sir, I believe you will find that, on this particular matter of challenging the validity of a granted US patent, he may actually be correct.  God forbid!

Omnibus, you have insulted so many people here that I'd be surprised if anyone who knew the answer for certain would still be on speaking terms with you!  I say that based entirely on statistical probabilities.   If it is any consolation, I agree with you that the patent should be nullified, along with probably several hundred others. 

I believe that the reason most bogus patents are not challenged is that, until there is someone who has a financial interest sufficient to warrant the legal expense comes along, and wishes to claim the falsely-claimed IP territory with a working invention, there is just no incentive to mount the legal battle.  Unworkable patents bother many of us terribly, especially when they are paraded about as some kind of proof that the invention must be workable. 

I know of no procedure outside of a legal challenge filed in a court of jurisdiction to accomplish the task, though.  I'm sure if there were one, there would be far fewer bogus patents still standing.

Linda

Quote from: linda933 on October 13, 2007, 03:50:23 AM
He may be semi-educated.  Could be he doesn't understand democracy.  No doubt at all that he's surly and quite shockingly ugly.  But, dear sir, I believe you will find that, on this particular matter of challenging the validity of a granted US patent, he may actually be correct.  God forbid!

Omnibus, you have insulted so many people here that I'd be surprised if anyone who knew the answer for certain would still be on speaking terms with you!  I say that based entirely on statistical probabilities.   If it is any consolation, I agree with you that the patent should be nullified, along with probably several hundred others. 

I believe that the reason most bogus patents are not challenged is that, until there is someone who has a financial interest sufficient to warrant the legal expense comes along, and wishes to claim the falsely-claimed IP territory with a working invention, there is just no incentive to mount the legal battle.  Unworkable patents bother many of us terribly, especially when they are paraded about as some kind of proof that the invention must be workable. 

I know of no procedure outside of a legal challenge filed in a court of jurisdiction to accomplish the task, though.  I'm sure if there were one, there would be far fewer bogus patents still standing.

Linda

You should know that I have no friends other than the truth. Truth is my only friend and anybody either politely arrogant or whatever who violates the requirement to defend the truth or pushes his or her incompetence and clutters the forum so the truth cannot prevail will meet with my fair criticism, no matter how insulted he or she may feel.

As for the US Patent Office, it is absolutely unacceptable that we as taxpayers whould tolerate a federal agency which protects nonsense. That isn't to be challenged in court. There must be levers within the agency itself to prevent from losing face before the public. Legal actions are only required if there is some financial gain to be had in connection with a patent. In this case this is a purely idealistic pursuit with no financial gain so courts are irrelevevant in this case.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 04:11:16 AM

Quote from: linda933 on October 13, 2007, 03:50:23 AM
He may be semi-educated.  Could be he doesn't understand democracy.  No doubt at all that he's surly and quite shockingly ugly.  But, dear sir, I believe you will find that, on this particular matter of challenging the validity of a granted US patent, he may actually be correct.  God forbid!

Omnibus, you have insulted so many people here that I'd be surprised if anyone who knew the answer for certain would still be on speaking terms with you!  I say that based entirely on statistical probabilities.   If it is any consolation, I agree with you that the patent should be nullified, along with probably several hundred others. 

I believe that the reason most bogus patents are not challenged is that, until there is someone who has a financial interest sufficient to warrant the legal expense comes along, and wishes to claim the falsely-claimed IP territory with a working invention, there is just no incentive to mount the legal battle.  Unworkable patents bother many of us terribly, especially when they are paraded about as some kind of proof that the invention must be workable. 

I know of no procedure outside of a legal challenge filed in a court of jurisdiction to accomplish the task, though.  I'm sure if there were one, there would be far fewer bogus patents still standing.

Linda

You should know that I have no friends other than the truth. Truth is my only friend and anybody either politely arrogant or whatever who violates the requirement to defend the truth or pushes his or her incompetence and clutters the forum so the truth cannot prevail will meet with my fair criticism, no matter how insulted he or she may feel.

As for the US Patent Office, it is absolutely unacceptable that we as taxpayers whould tolerate a federal agency which protects nonsense. That isn't to be challenged in court. There must be levers within the agency itself to prevent from losing face before the public. Legal actions are only required if there is some financial gain to be had in connection with a patent. In this case this is a purely idealistic pursuit with no financial gain so courts are irrelevevant in this case.

So I guess you could write to your congressman or maybe to the Commisioner of Patents or something.  I agree that "there ought to be a way".  Of course, you have to play the devil's advocate and realize that if all it took was a letter and a lack of a "produced physical proof of efficacy", there would be people who would abuse the system all too easily.  I think the possibilities would get complicated fast enough and often enough that a court of law would be necessary, sad to say.

Linda

P.S.  Hans isn't really so ugly, I guess, but he is certainly a surly devil isn't he? LOL

Quote from: linda933 on October 13, 2007, 04:20:09 AM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 04:11:16 AM

Quote from: linda933 on October 13, 2007, 03:50:23 AM
He may be semi-educated.  Could be he doesn't understand democracy.  No doubt at all that he's surly and quite shockingly ugly.  But, dear sir, I believe you will find that, on this particular matter of challenging the validity of a granted US patent, he may actually be correct.  God forbid!

Omnibus, you have insulted so many people here that I'd be surprised if anyone who knew the answer for certain would still be on speaking terms with you!  I say that based entirely on statistical probabilities.   If it is any consolation, I agree with you that the patent should be nullified, along with probably several hundred others. 

I believe that the reason most bogus patents are not challenged is that, until there is someone who has a financial interest sufficient to warrant the legal expense comes along, and wishes to claim the falsely-claimed IP territory with a working invention, there is just no incentive to mount the legal battle.  Unworkable patents bother many of us terribly, especially when they are paraded about as some kind of proof that the invention must be workable. 

I know of no procedure outside of a legal challenge filed in a court of jurisdiction to accomplish the task, though.  I'm sure if there were one, there would be far fewer bogus patents still standing.

Linda

You should know that I have no friends other than the truth. Truth is my only friend and anybody either politely arrogant or whatever who violates the requirement to defend the truth or pushes his or her incompetence and clutters the forum so the truth cannot prevail will meet with my fair criticism, no matter how insulted he or she may feel.

As for the US Patent Office, it is absolutely unacceptable that we as taxpayers whould tolerate a federal agency which protects nonsense. That isn't to be challenged in court. There must be levers within the agency itself to prevent from losing face before the public. Legal actions are only required if there is some financial gain to be had in connection with a patent. In this case this is a purely idealistic pursuit with no financial gain so courts are irrelevevant in this case.

So I guess you could write to your congressman or maybe to the Commisioner of Patents or something.  I agree that "there ought to be a way".  Of course, you have to play the devil's advocate and realize that if all it took was a letter and a lack of a "produced physical proof of efficacy", there would be people who would abuse the system all too easily.  I think the possibilities would get complicated fast enough and often enough that a court of law would be necessary, sad to say.

Linda

P.S.  Hans isn't really so ugly, I guess, but he is certainly a surly devil isn't he? LOL

Yeah, something like this. It has to be thought over carefully, though, to be efficient and not just barren activity.

It started with the native Americans. They began dying, in droves. Blood from day one.

As far as the second world war, it started in 1939, not when Pearl Harbour was attacked, as allowed by the oval office, to create a fervor in the public, as in the same tactic, recently used, and called '9/11'. So yes, American history books are specifically wrong on this point. World war II did NOT start with the attack on Pearl Harbour. It started 2 years before. America was selling arms and making profits on all sides before that. Like Prescott bush heading a consortium of banks that financed the Nazi's until they were stopped and doing secretly long afterward. So, the current president's grandfather was directly involved in financing the Nazi's for profit and directly responsible for the deaths of many. And he was going to be tried for treason and executed, but this was stopped by the owners of the Fed reserve, a privately held bank system...that still controls all money in the US,and it has never been audited. Look up the real history of the Federal reserve bank.Ã,  it is not a government institution, as the vast majority of the US public believes. It is a private group of banks, with zero government intervention or oversight. This is completely against US law.

The group of banks, also includes the Rothschild family, Harriman, Morgan, etc. They mounted an attack on the money system on, I believe, December 24th, Christmas eve, at 11:45pm, 1913, via republican voting in congress.Ã,  Before then, (the money supply) it was in the hands of the treasury office, as it should be, in any country..except the US. After that moment that bill was passed by an empty congress (all had gone home for Christmas break) except those few who made the vote for their friends who owned the banks.... it was thereafter signed into law by Woodrow Wilson,Ã,  who swore to his dying day that he destroyed his country that day.

The UN was created by the same group of elite bankers for the same reasons. Which is why it is so ineffective. Same for NATO.

The US gives money to other countries via the 'world bank', an arm of the Fed owners, and screw over and bankrupt foreign countries under the guise of helping them. You have military bases in about 130-150 countries. Many of those are conditional on those corrupt loans. The CIA is more properly known as the cocaine importation agency, and is responsible for the vast majority of the cocaine imported into the us. This business is protected by the DEA and others. Bush Senior is the biggest drug dealer in the history of the world. Bush junior is a lunatic child, who controls nothing..he is figurehead. An idiot. A frightening truth. Two elections were corrupted to maintain that control.... and real people, like Ron Paul.... are being sidelined by the same corrupt and controlled media, even though he is the most popular candidate since Kennedy. If he gains any more popularity he might end up assassinated, obviously, by some lone patsy, of course. And that patsy will die before any investigation can occur. A typical tactic. For example, On his deathbed, E.Howard Hunt, of Watergate break-in fame..made a written, in his handwriting, and taped, in his own voice, confession that Bush senior was present at Daly Plaza the day Kennedy died, as part of the operation (assassination).And to add, that Hoover was in on it,and that it was largely run by "President Johnson" and friends from the banking and oil industries. These tapes and papers are in the hands of his son (who was there for their recording).....his name is Saint John Hunt. Look it up. Bet the US media doesn't want you to know this stuff!!!! Which is exactly why you DON'T know.

China is supplied by a pipeline running through India and Afghanistan. The pipeline was GOING to be awarded to Haliburton, Cheney's little company. When the company that won the contract for the pipeline came out of Argentina, suddenly 9/11 occurred, and the war was taken to Iraq, to get the oil..and the war was also stepped up in Afghanistan, so they could control the pipeline, a paltry $6 trillion operation. And the drug from the poppies, Heroin trade, was divvied up by the Brits and the CIA, so the elite of Britain and the US (CIA) could get untold billions in totally 'black' money for secret operations. No need to wash any of it, the money is all 'black'. Besides raping the US economy of 9 trillion $ of value. Why is India so favored as of late? think about it. Osama was dragged out of the closet as a premise for both operations, he originally being a CIA trained asset, and a member of a rich Saudi family, who are close friends and business partners of the Bush family for 30 years prior to and after the towers being brought down. The pipeline control via a presence in Afghanistan is the sole reason China is willing to sit on the 1 Trillion in US dollars, and not dump it. As of recent you have folks like Ray McGovern attempting to tell you the truth of what is going on. He was the CIA White House Activity Liason for the Oval office for 15 of his 27 years at the CIA. He briefed the Presidents, 4 of them, on world activities via the CIA. Look him up. He is is trying to tell you the truth of this stuff. Recently, a CIA officer has tried to, at great personal risk, to tell you that there are no more than 14 Al-queda left in the world, period. All of them are highly ineffective, like kids in basements talking about the Sears tower.... There never were any terrorists. It was all a lie, a ruse - to get you to go along with the raping of the world and the US. This has been done for millennia, just look at Rome and the Visigoths, via Cicero. Cicero did the same thing to Rome as the Bush family and friends are doing today. This is all straight out of the Goebbels propaganda handbook. This is how entire populations have been controlled for millennia.

Rest assured, the Chinese are reading this forum. The same time that folks were screaming from the rooftops that Pons and Fleischman were full of crap on cold fusion, there were over 300 conferences on cold fusion in China. The Chinese want over unity, the elite of the world depend on energy control to keep their teeth sunk firmly into controlling the world. And you folks..are RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE of that battle field. And they will tear down the US in that effort, and show every sign of doing exactly that...right now. Rest assured, every single one of you are on a watch list due to this situation. The Middle Class population of the US, for the main part, unions, rights (in specific ways, etc), noncompetition laws, too little ownership of too many companies, IE too much concentration of wealth in the hands of the few-this is the one big thing that Bush II has destroyed-the laws that protect diversity. He destroyed financial diversity in the US at the highest levels-via the breaking of competition and diversity laws. He literally did this in his first month in office.

Most specifically, the overall awareness of US citizens is the bigger point, they want proles and serfs, not thinking human beings who might question the reality they try and give you. So, the US middle class is kept ignorant and is in the process of being eliminated. By the same bankers, who created the private company called the FED, via money market manipulation.

Many folks fight back, the most critical ones die. like free-energy researchers, good people who got into politics, good hearted businessmen, etc. Many of those good folks die. Many try to strike a balance, and become rich while they do their damnedest to try and help. Like Richard Branson, owner of Virgin airlines trying to get '9/11 loose change' on his international inflight movies for a month. He came up via nonpolitical/non-elitest routes and is an outsider... and appears to be the real thing, a concerned human being who is trying to get these animals off us. Keeping you ignorant is key to all these clandestine activities. For doing this, like I'm doing right now, I have been personally visited by members of the US defence Industry, right in my office. I'm playing with fire.

The lid is coming off on over-unity technologies and the understanding of the true existence of multidimensionality and parallel universes, etc. Every science known to mankind is 'brick walling', IE..is hitting the limits and coming back with information that supports over unity, wave-particle duality, over-unity or aetheric energy, and 'action at a distance', etc. The list is endless, but they all support each other, completely. This is getting too hard to control, in terms of too many people knowing the truth of what existence really is and how effective they can be in having positive lives in their own hands and live incredibly long lives at that. The elite of the world are panicking, their asses are being exposed and they are moving faster than they want to,as when they move fast, it exposes them. They are very dangerous right now, and will do anything, anything at all to maintain their grip of power as these families know..that if exposed..they will all likely die. All due to the fact that science cannot be slowed down and all these points in science and human understanding are coming along at breakneck speed. These dangerous animalistic elite are ready to kill as many of you as need be, to maintain that control. Look up the 'Fulford Ultimatum' for a rare look at what is really going on in this whole caste system.

The pituitary gland, for example, is critical in the growth of neural pathways and new neural pathways, in adult life. Real 'higher learning'. If damaged, we get mental retards, for the larger part. Lower energy intensity and lower intelligence people. Fluoride was introduced to the water systems of large parts of the US, but it does nothing for tooth decay, it was a ruse to destroy the minds of generations of US citizens. It severely damages the pituitary gland. Sound fishy? Check it out. The man responsible for the creation of this fluoride inclusion system is horrified as to what went on and has spent his remaining years on this planet doing everything he can to remove fluoride from US drinking water. To make you aware of the dangers. He is being blocked from doing that.

Rusmfeld, of US defence department fame, has been crying about terrorists that don't exist, with his buddy Cheney, for over 30 years. (remember, it's Cicero and the Visigoths, all over again) He was the head of Monsanto Corp, during the push to get Aspertame legalized, which specifically does just about the same as fluoride to human beings. Aspertame is a severe nerve toxin, it's origins are that it is a powerful crop dusting poison. There was a HUGE debacle at the FDA about that one. Three companies went bankrupt attemptring to legalize Aspertame via the FDA. The FDA was turned inside out, from the inside, by monied powers, to make it happen. The FDA was nearly blown to pieces in the fervor of the elite to get this vitality sapping and life destroying, highly addictive drug into the hands of innocent folks. Now, Bush appoints all his fascist monied cronies as the heads of all these critical internal outfits like FDA, IRS, FTC, etc, all to feed the companies that control the US, and those few familes, which control the stock exchange, the money supply, and the price of precious metals. I know some of these points directly from the horse's mouth-with respect to cronies being put in place as heads of all these agencies.

If you are still reading and think I'm a conspiracy freak..remember..during the second world war..we had millions of people in Britain attempting to keep a deep secret (D-Day invasion) from millions of inquiring germans. This did work, as the critical points were in the hands of a few people that could be counted on the fingers of one hand, on either side. So huge conspiracies CAN and HAVE been shown to be controllable by a very few people. They are real, no doubt. History illustrates this point brilliantly, so it is difficult for you to cry about your emotional point of view which may not want you looking in there, it might hurt your views on reality and make you sweat a bit, heaven forbid, even think a bit.

The day before the twin towers were brought down by demolition, a press conference was called (sept 10/2001) to speak on the missing $2.2 trillion in pentagon coffers, which was controlled by an Israeli citizen by the name of Dov Zakheim .Ã,  The so-called plane that hit the pentagon,Ã,  actually a missile, followed by the drone plane, it hit and killed the accountancy team that was doing the financial investigation,Ã,  22 of them died. You have many, many, key top people in the US government, atÃ,  the highest levels are DUAL citizens of the US and Israel, which is completely against all federal laws requiring single US citizenship in those government positions.

And on, and on, and on..............

Any of this can be researched, every bit is true.

So yes, I know my history.

To go full circle, rest assured, anything you provide to the patent office, insofar as technology goes..has been read over very carefully by these folk the day it hits the patent office. And if the technology is deemed dangerous to their control, you are put on their 'honey do' list.

Sounds like you have bought into each and every conspiacy theory that has even been invented.  I don't think you left any single one out. If you seriously think that the 911 attacks were an "inside job" using "a missle and a drone", there is not a single thing I can say in response to you because you are too far gone to be reasoned with.  I don't mean that as an insult, but I am seriously at a loss for words.

Bill

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 02:17:16 AM
@All,

I spoke with an examiner and will pursue this thing further. Amazingly, the patentee has brought several models to the US Patent Office but none of them had been a working model, just experiment "demonstrating" that potentially such motor can be built. And this is how the examiners were convinced of its viability!? Interestingly, although the very title says "Permanent Magnet Motor" the examiner tried to persuade me that the patent had been issued solely for the partiular construction of the magnet device. When I pressed him he said that the approval of this patent has passed several levels of scrutiny and the final decision hasn't been only his. Of course, I have no intention of harming anybody at the patent office while recognizing that we're all humans and mistakes are made. This is a serious mistake (not to require proof positive for such an important claim of far-reaching consequences), however, and it must be corrected. The examiner insisted that I should contact Frank Fecera himself. Aside from the fact that I did that and all my attempts to speak to him were in vain (I hear only a message on his answering machine, not to say that it was very difficult to get his telephone number) I think that it's US Patent Office's duty to require a demonstration if they want to save face. This patent is on public record and no excuses with NDA's and private companies' rules hold any water this time. Steorn, Torbay, Perendev etc. may escape from such scrutiny. This one cannot. Besides, Steorn would be out of their minds to demonstrate anything before Fecera proves that his device is viable, otherwise Steorn will be infringing on Fecera's patent and Fecera will own everything Steorn demonstrates. This is the status of this important inquiry as of today.

Does anyone know how a review process of an already issued patent can be initiated in the US Patent Office by a third party?

There is a process by which an issued patent can be overturned, but this process involves courts and lawyers.  This is expensive, and normally only done by a party with a financial interest, for example by someone with a desire to market a similar product, but with no desire to pay licensing fees to the original patent holder.

I have to ask.  Why does it bother you that there is a nonworking patent on the books?  It is one of many, I assure you.  The fact that it is a perpetual motion device is perhaps the only thing of note about it.

Keep in mind that the primary reason that the patent office kicks back PMM patents and demands working demos, is that it saves time.  The examiner does not need to spend the hundred plus hours necessary to review prior art, but can simply reject it after a few minutes of scanning the application.  This is not done out of a desire to keep the patent registry "scientifically correct".  That ship has long sailed, and frankly there is no desire to allocate sufficient resources to make this happen.

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 13, 2007, 02:27:50 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 02:17:16 AM
@All,

I spoke with an examiner and will pursue this thing further. Amazingly, the patentee has brought several models to the US Patent Office but none of them had been a working model, just experiment "demonstrating" that potentially such motor can be built. And this is how the examiners were convinced of its viability!? Interestingly, although the very title says "Permanent Magnet Motor" the examiner tried to persuade me that the patent had been issued solely for the partiular construction of the magnet device. When I pressed him he said that the approval of this patent has passed several levels of scrutiny and the final decision hasn't been only his. Of course, I have no intention of harming anybody at the patent office while recognizing that we're all humans and mistakes are made. This is a serious mistake (not to require proof positive for such an important claim of far-reaching consequences), however, and it must be corrected. The examiner insisted that I should contact Frank Fecera himself. Aside from the fact that I did that and all my attempts to speak to him were in vain (I hear only a message on his answering machine, not to say that it was very difficult to get his telephone number) I think that it's US Patent Office's duty to require a demonstration if they want to save face. This patent is on public record and no excuses with NDA's and private companies' rules hold any water this time. Steorn, Torbay, Perendev etc. may escape from such scrutiny. This one cannot. Besides, Steorn would be out of their minds to demonstrate anything before Fecera proves that his device is viable, otherwise Steorn will be infringing on Fecera's patent and Fecera will own everything Steorn demonstrates. This is the status of this important inquiry as of today.

Does anyone know how a review process of an already issued patent can be initiated in the US Patent Office by a third party?

There is a process by which an issued patent can be overturned, but this process involves courts and lawyers.  This is expensive, and normally only done by a party with a financial interest, for example by someone with a desire to market a similar product, but with no desire to pay licensing fees to the original patent holder.

I have to ask.  Why does it bother you that there is a nonworking patent on the books?  It is one of many, I assure you.  The fact that it is a perpetual motion device is perhaps the only thing of note about it.

Keep in mind that the primary reason that the patent office kicks back PMM patents and demands working demos, is that it saves time.  The examiner does not need to spend the hundred plus hours necessary to review prior art, but can simply reject it after a few minutes of scanning the application.  This is not done out of a desire to keep the patent registry "scientifically correct".  That ship has long sailed, and frankly there is no desire to allocate sufficient resources to make this happen.

Perpetuum mobile claim is dramatically out of the ordinary and I will not in any way consider it of significance less than that. The US Patent Office is the official governmental agency due to protect reason and not to protect nonsense. This goes without saying. To think it?s otherwise is to accept that USA is facing a catastrophe. I will not in any way forget that, neither any reasonable person should, no matter how tempting it is now that patents for perpetuum mobile devices have been noticed to have been granted by the USPTO seems to be to conveniently dismiss it. It is hypocritical to elevate to the skies the significance of the US Patent Office when it fits one's interests and to belittle it when interests require it. I will never agree to that, neither the American public will agree to that. I assure you that the US Patent Office will also not agree that it's regular business is to protect just anything, never mind if it's nonsense.

Therefore, instead of finding ways to explain that something obviously very significant isn?t significant, it would be much more productive to suggest ways to right this wrong within the system of the US Patent Office and not let it off the hook by going to courts. This will also be significant in that it would prevent future errors of the US Patent Office, especially of this magnitude.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 04:08:01 PM

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 13, 2007, 02:27:50 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 02:17:16 AM
@All,

I spoke with an examiner and will pursue this thing further. Amazingly, the patentee has brought several models to the US Patent Office but none of them had been a working model, just experiment "demonstrating" that potentially such motor can be built. And this is how the examiners were convinced of its viability!? Interestingly, although the very title says "Permanent Magnet Motor" the examiner tried to persuade me that the patent had been issued solely for the partiular construction of the magnet device. When I pressed him he said that the approval of this patent has passed several levels of scrutiny and the final decision hasn't been only his. Of course, I have no intention of harming anybody at the patent office while recognizing that we're all humans and mistakes are made. This is a serious mistake (not to require proof positive for such an important claim of far-reaching consequences), however, and it must be corrected. The examiner insisted that I should contact Frank Fecera himself. Aside from the fact that I did that and all my attempts to speak to him were in vain (I hear only a message on his answering machine, not to say that it was very difficult to get his telephone number) I think that it's US Patent Office's duty to require a demonstration if they want to save face. This patent is on public record and no excuses with NDA's and private companies' rules hold any water this time. Steorn, Torbay, Perendev etc. may escape from such scrutiny. This one cannot. Besides, Steorn would be out of their minds to demonstrate anything before Fecera proves that his device is viable, otherwise Steorn will be infringing on Fecera's patent and Fecera will own everything Steorn demonstrates. This is the status of this important inquiry as of today.

Does anyone know how a review process of an already issued patent can be initiated in the US Patent Office by a third party?

There is a process by which an issued patent can be overturned, but this process involves courts and lawyers.  This is expensive, and normally only done by a party with a financial interest, for example by someone with a desire to market a similar product, but with no desire to pay licensing fees to the original patent holder.

I have to ask.  Why does it bother you that there is a nonworking patent on the books?  It is one of many, I assure you.  The fact that it is a perpetual motion device is perhaps the only thing of note about it.

Keep in mind that the primary reason that the patent office kicks back PMM patents and demands working demos, is that it saves time.  The examiner does not need to spend the hundred plus hours necessary to review prior art, but can simply reject it after a few minutes of scanning the application.  This is not done out of a desire to keep the patent registry "scientifically correct".  That ship has long sailed, and frankly there is no desire to allocate sufficient resources to make this happen.

Perpetuum mobile claim is dramatically out of the ordinary and I will not in any way consider it of significance less than that. The US Patent Office is the official governmental agency due to protect reason and not to protect nonsense. This goes without saying. To think it?s otherwise is to accept that USA is facing a catastrophe. I will not in any way forget that, neither any reasonable person should, no matter how tempting it is now that patents for perpetuum mobile devices have been noticed to have been granted by the USPTO seems to be to conveniently dismiss it. It is hypocritical to elevate to the skies the significance of the US Patent Office when it fits one's interests and to belittle it when interests require it. I will never agree to that, neither the American public will agree to that. I assure you that the US Patent Office will also not agree that it's regular business is to protect just anything, never mind if it's nonsense.

Therefore, instead of finding ways to explain that something obviously very significant isn?t significant, it would be much more productive to suggest ways to right this wrong within the system of the US Patent Office and not let it off the hook by going to courts. This will also be significant in that it would prevent future errors of the US Patent Office, especially of this magnitude.

What I am saying is that there IS a way to right every wrong patent.  I assume you only care about the ones still in effect, i.e. those filed 20 years ago or more recently.  So, just get a few (or more) billion dollars together and sue every patent holder who you believe holds an invalid patent.  Currently, the average cost of single patent lawsuit is $2 million, give or take.

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 13, 2007, 04:26:29 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 04:08:01 PM

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 13, 2007, 02:27:50 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 02:17:16 AM
@All,

I spoke with an examiner and will pursue this thing further. Amazingly, the patentee has brought several models to the US Patent Office but none of them had been a working model, just experiment "demonstrating" that potentially such motor can be built. And this is how the examiners were convinced of its viability!? Interestingly, although the very title says "Permanent Magnet Motor" the examiner tried to persuade me that the patent had been issued solely for the partiular construction of the magnet device. When I pressed him he said that the approval of this patent has passed several levels of scrutiny and the final decision hasn't been only his. Of course, I have no intention of harming anybody at the patent office while recognizing that we're all humans and mistakes are made. This is a serious mistake (not to require proof positive for such an important claim of far-reaching consequences), however, and it must be corrected. The examiner insisted that I should contact Frank Fecera himself. Aside from the fact that I did that and all my attempts to speak to him were in vain (I hear only a message on his answering machine, not to say that it was very difficult to get his telephone number) I think that it's US Patent Office's duty to require a demonstration if they want to save face. This patent is on public record and no excuses with NDA's and private companies' rules hold any water this time. Steorn, Torbay, Perendev etc. may escape from such scrutiny. This one cannot. Besides, Steorn would be out of their minds to demonstrate anything before Fecera proves that his device is viable, otherwise Steorn will be infringing on Fecera's patent and Fecera will own everything Steorn demonstrates. This is the status of this important inquiry as of today.

Does anyone know how a review process of an already issued patent can be initiated in the US Patent Office by a third party?

There is a process by which an issued patent can be overturned, but this process involves courts and lawyers.  This is expensive, and normally only done by a party with a financial interest, for example by someone with a desire to market a similar product, but with no desire to pay licensing fees to the original patent holder.

I have to ask.  Why does it bother you that there is a nonworking patent on the books?  It is one of many, I assure you.  The fact that it is a perpetual motion device is perhaps the only thing of note about it.

Keep in mind that the primary reason that the patent office kicks back PMM patents and demands working demos, is that it saves time.  The examiner does not need to spend the hundred plus hours necessary to review prior art, but can simply reject it after a few minutes of scanning the application.  This is not done out of a desire to keep the patent registry "scientifically correct".  That ship has long sailed, and frankly there is no desire to allocate sufficient resources to make this happen.

Perpetuum mobile claim is dramatically out of the ordinary and I will not in any way consider it of significance less than that. The US Patent Office is the official governmental agency due to protect reason and not to protect nonsense. This goes without saying. To think it?s otherwise is to accept that USA is facing a catastrophe. I will not in any way forget that, neither any reasonable person should, no matter how tempting it is now that patents for perpetuum mobile devices have been noticed to have been granted by the USPTO seems to be to conveniently dismiss it. It is hypocritical to elevate to the skies the significance of the US Patent Office when it fits one's interests and to belittle it when interests require it. I will never agree to that, neither the American public will agree to that. I assure you that the US Patent Office will also not agree that it's regular business is to protect just anything, never mind if it's nonsense.

Therefore, instead of finding ways to explain that something obviously very significant isn?t significant, it would be much more productive to suggest ways to right this wrong within the system of the US Patent Office and not let it off the hook by going to courts. This will also be significant in that it would prevent future errors of the US Patent Office, especially of this magnitude.

What I am saying is that there IS a way to right every wrong patent.  I assume you only care about the ones still in effect, i.e. those filed 20 years ago or more recently.  So, just get a few (or more) billion dollars together and sue every patent holder who you believe holds an invalid patent.  Currently, the average cost of single patent lawsuit is $2 million, give or take.

Like I said, that's exactly what shouldn't be done because it lets US Patent Office off the hook. This proposal makes it so that USPTO can do whatever they please without any accountability and everything wrong that they do is to be righted on the outside, somewhere else, not where it was committed. It is expecially important not to let it go when such a momentuous error has been made--to grant perpetuum mobile patents without any scientific or factual backing.

Quote from: Prophmaji on October 13, 2007, 04:42:59 AM
It started with the native Americans. They began dying, in droves. Blood from day one.

As far as the second world war, it started in 1939, not when Pearl Harbour was attacked, as allowed by the oval office, to create a fervor in the public, as in the same tactic, recently used, and called '9/11'.

(snipped to save precious monitor real estate)

Dude, I think you have been visiting boards like this too much, where fringe views like yours are accepted with little scrutiny.  I will not debate you point by point, but you use the common conspiracy technique of interleaving truth with fiction, thereby attempting to imbue fiction with the shine of truth.

All I can say is this: compare what the U.S. has done with its military might to what other nations in history have done.  Try to keep things in perspective.  No nation is perfect, but compared with many in the past who could field the relatively unstoppable military that the U.S. can field currently, the U.S. is a peaceful neighbor and a protector to the rest of the world.

The U.S. could, if it wished, simply invade the entire Middle East, bomb them into the Stone Age, and take their oil.  Would Russia and China object?  Cut them in on the action.  You trust their scruples?  This is the type of thing that the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan and countless other past powers would not have hesitated to do if it was within their reach.  Be glad there is a U.S. on this globe to keep other major powers in check.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 04:42:51 PM
Like I said, that's exactly what shouldn't be done because it lets US Patent Office off the hook. This proposal makes it so that USPTO can do whatever they please without any accountability and everything wrong that they do is to be righted on the outside, somewhere else, not where it was committed. It is expecially important not to let it go when such a momentuous error has been made--to grant perpetuum mobile patents without any scientific or factual backing.

I really do not see what you are proposing.  Any method of review of the validity of a patent would entail a judge and perhaps a jury, so it would necessarily be "outside" of the PTO office.  The patent examiner already made his decision, and he is not just going to overrule himself most of the time, so you need some kind of court system to handle disputes.  The owner of the patent would need a chance to present his side of the case.

This is exactly what we already have, and you are welcome to use it, if it really bothers you that much that this patent is on the books.  Patent litigation is expensive because patent law is a difficult area of study, and lawyers can charge high rates.  You are welcome to go to law school yourself and then sit for the patent bar, and then you can do all this pro bono.  Otherwise, you need to hire representation.

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 13, 2007, 04:56:51 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 13, 2007, 04:42:51 PM
Like I said, that's exactly what shouldn't be done because it lets US Patent Office off the hook. This proposal makes it so that USPTO can do whatever they please without any accountability and everything wrong that they do is to be righted on the outside, somewhere else, not where it was committed. It is expecially important not to let it go when such a momentuous error has been made--to grant perpetuum mobile patents without any scientific or factual backing.

I really do not see what you are proposing.  Any method of review of the validity of a patent would entail a judge and perhaps a jury, so it would necessarily be "outside" of the PTO office.  The patent examiner already made his decision, and he is not just going to overrule himself most of the time, so you need some kind of court system to handle disputes.  The owner of the patent would need a chance to present his side of the case.

This is exactly what we already have, and you are welcome to use it, if it really bothers you that much that this patent is on the books.  Patent litigation is expensive because patent law is a difficult area of study, and lawyers can charge high rates.  You are welcome to go to law school yourself and then sit for the patent bar, and then you can do all this pro bono.  Otherwise, you need to hire representation.

I'd expect that the examiner himself or herself or his or her supervisor would require the patentee to bring in a working model, in view of new circumstances, or else the patent will be revoked. It shouldn't be that a scammer who managed somehow to trick the examiner, would be allowed to set the deviously obtained decision in stone. No way. I can't believe that the system doesn't have these elementary protections.

G'day shruggedatlas,

In the main I agree with your assessment. I am not too familiar with US law, but basically it is the same as here in Australia, where I do have some knowledge.

The moment a patent is granted it has become PROPERTY. From that moment on the owner of the patent becomes a party to any dispute involving the patent as you quite rightly pointed out. This implies that any dispute has to come before an impartial arbiter and cannot be anymore resolved by the Patent Office. To do so after having granted the patent would leave the Patent Office open to litigation.

As to who can challenge the validity of a patent I am not so sure how this would work in the US. Here in Australia you would have to show an equitable interest in the matter, like a competing patent application or prior art or something like that in order to even get it to Court.

At least here in Australia you cannot challenge a patent in Court simply because you don't like it or because you have reason to believe it does not work. I would imagine it is similar in the US, otherwise the Courts would be even more clogged up than they are now.

Would you be so kind to explain to me how that would work in the US?

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 13, 2007, 05:39:42 PM
G'day shruggedatlas,

In the main I agree with your assessment. I am not too familiar with US law, but basically it is the same as here in Australia, where I do have some knowledge.

The moment a patent is granted it has become PROPERTY. From that moment on the owner of the patent becomes a party to any dispute involving the patent as you quite rightly pointed out. This implies that any dispute has to come before an impartial arbiter and cannot be anymore resolved by the Patent Office. To do so after having granted the patent would leave the Patent Office open to litigation.

As to who can challenge the validity of a patent I am not so sure how this would work in the US. Here in Australia you would have to show an equitable interest in the matter, like a competing patent application or prior art or something like that in order to even get it to Court.

At least here in Australia you cannot challenge a patent in Court simply because you don't like it or because you have reason to believe it does not work. I would imagine it is similar in the US, otherwise the Courts would be even more clogged up than they are now.

Would you be so kind to explain to me how that would work in the US?

Hans von Lieven

You can basically defeat any patent if you can show prior art.  Obviousness is another avenue, though that can be hard to establish.  I have not heard of a patent being overturned simply because it does not work, but there are things I do not know.  So I may need to amend my previous statement about Omnibus being able to defeat the offending patent, because absent prior art, the patent will likely hold up.

The whole question is a little silly though.  Patents on nonworking devices have no commercial value - there are no license fees and no one sues over them.  That is why this issue is rarely brought up, and when it is, it is by those who have an unrealistic view of what the patent system is for.

I do think the USPTO is understaffed, and there are not enough examiners to handle the current load, and this needs to be fixed.  Stretched resources is probably how this PPM patent got granted.

If he can't be contacted it would seem like a short case. You can just file a patent with the exact same device and if he doesn't object to it then you are free to do what you like basically.

For example Yull brown didn't invent browns gas but William A. Rhodes was to late with claiming ownership of the patent.

Quote from: gaby de wilde on October 13, 2007, 11:11:13 PM
If he can't be contacted it would seem like a short case. You can just file a patent with the exact same device and if he doesn't object to it then you are free to do what you like basically.

For example Yull brown didn't invent browns gas but William A. Rhodes was to late with claiming ownership of the patent.

It does not work that way in the U.S..  One thing the USPTO examiners actually are good at is looking at other patents for prior art.  (They typically do no other prior art searches.)  If you had an exact same device, it would be found pretty quick, and the patent would be rejected unless you could provide a valid argument for why your device is different.

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 13, 2007, 11:23:42 PMthe patent would be rejected unless you could provide a valid argument for why your device is different.

Just make it better. :)

It's fun to put the patent office in limbo where they get to say you don't get a patent for a perpetual motion device AND that the device is already patented.

Before you get it to work you have a lot of time to find him anyway. :D

I have to repeat it once again, this isn't just any kind of a non-working device. This is outright non-scientific. Show me another instance of a patented device violating scientific principles. I'd really like to hear from the US Patent Office that they don't care whether a claim is scientific or not and that just prior art matters. That will be the day.

I did a little digging.  Here is another magnet power generator patent (No. 6,362,718):

http://www.google.com/patents?id=-64KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,362,718 (http://www.google.com/patents?id=-64KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,362,718)

I doubt this one works either.

And about the USPTO and PPMs:  The USPTO has had a longstanding policy that anyone seeking a patent for a perpetual motion device must have a working model.  This policy was put into place because many unscrupulous persons were using the guise of a patent as validation of their technology and were duping investors in this way.

For more info on this as well as more examples of PPMs/energy generators which have been granted patents refer to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion)

So Omnibus is partially right in that it is a concern that someone does not use a patent to claim his or her device is legitimate.  However, I hope it is clear now that it is not so much a concern of the USPTO that patents are only granted on workable ideas, because this is clearly not the case, as little effort is made to validate the feasibility of other types of inventions.

Omnibus, if you want the USPTO to be a certifying body, then all I can say is: write your Congressman.

G'day omnibus,

You wanted another patent that violates scientific principles? Well here it is:

US Patent Nr. 709 5126       The patent was granted in 2006 and therefore is current.

In the opening paragraph it states:

?An external power source such as a battery is used to initially supply power to start an alternator and generator. Once the system has started it is not necessary for the battery to supply power to the system. The battery can then be disconnected. The alternator and electric motor work in combination to generator electrical power. The alternator supplies this electrical power to the two inverters. One inverter outputs part of its power to the lamp load device and part back to the electric motor/generator. This power is used to power the electric motor. The second inverter supplies power to the specific load devices that are connected to the system.?
   
This in no uncertain terms describes a perpetual motion device, something the patent office says it will not issue patents for. It also violates established scientific principles.

If you want the full patent you can download it here, it is on file on the overunity server.

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3130.0/topicseen.html

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 14, 2007, 01:30:47 PM
I did a little digging.  Here is another magnet power generator patent (No. 6,362,718):

http://www.google.com/patents?id=-64KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,362,718 (http://www.google.com/patents?id=-64KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,362,718)

I doubt this one works either.

And about the USPTO and PPMs:  The USPTO has had a longstanding policy that anyone seeking a patent for a perpetual motion device must have a working model.  This policy was put into place because many unscrupulous persons were using the guise of a patent as validation of their technology and were duping investors in this way.

For more info on this as well as more examples of PPMs/energy generators which have been granted patents refer to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion)

So Omnibus is partially right in that it is a concern that someone does not use a patent to claim his or her device is legitimate.  However, I hope it is clear now that it is not so much a concern of the USPTO that patents are only granted on workable ideas, because this is clearly not the case, as little effort is made to validate the feasibility of other types of inventions.

Omnibus, if you want the USPTO to be a certifying body, then all I can say is: write your Congressman.

Thanks for the patent but I don't see how an electromagnetic generator is a perpetuum mobile. There is external energy applied in this case, isn't there? Or maybe I'm missing something. I know, however, of several perpetuum mobile patents, including that cited by @hansvonlieven. The patent I'm focusing on here in this thread is the one by Frank Fecera (http://patimg1.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=06867514&homeurl=http%3A%2F%2Fpatft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect1%3DPTO1%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526d%3DPALL%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsrchnum.htm%2526r%3D1%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526s1%3D6,867,514.PN.%2526OS%3DPN%2F6,867,514%2526RS%3DPN%2F6,867,514&PageNum=&Rtype=&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page)
because it's the most recent and the most explicit perpetuum mobile device of those I've seen so far.

Contacting my Congressman is certainly something which I'd consider doing, maybe even one of our Senators, Clinton or Schumer. I'd pursue first contacting the USPTO and will keep you posted. This problem shouldn't be left unresolved.

Forgot to mention. As far a I know the owner of the patent @hansvonlieven mentions has demonstrated it before the US Patent Office. This patent is also worth pursuing.

Can't you read???


it says:

?An external power source such as a battery is used to initially supply power to start an alternator and generator. Once the system has started it is not necessary for the battery to supply power to the system. The battery can then be disconnected. The alternator and electric motor work in combination to generator electrical power. The alternator supplies this electrical power to the two inverters. One inverter outputs part of its power to the lamp load device and part back to the electric motor/generator. This power is used to power the electric motor. The second inverter supplies power to the specific load devices that are connected to the system.?

The highlighted text makes it clear that this is a perpetual motion device.

The inventor claims that he had a working device which has since been destroyed and he is trying to re-build it. An all too familiar story.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 14, 2007, 02:20:28 PM
Can't you read???


it says:

?An external power source such as a battery is used to initially supply power to start an alternator and generator. Once the system has started it is not necessary for the battery to supply power to the system. The battery can then be disconnected. The alternator and electric motor work in combination to generator electrical power. The alternator supplies this electrical power to the two inverters. One inverter outputs part of its power to the lamp load device and part back to the electric motor/generator. This power is used to power the electric motor. The second inverter supplies power to the specific load devices that are connected to the system.?

The highlighted text makes it clear that this is a perpetual motion device.

The inventor claims that he had a working device which has since been destroyed and he is trying to re-build it. An all too familiar story.

Hans von Lieven

The patentee said more important things. For instance, that he has demonstrated it to the US Patent Office. I said that, you didn't notice it but I'm repeating it. And yet, I don't think this and other perpetuum mobile patens which I also mentioned I know of are as explicit as the Fecera patent in being really perpetuum mobile. In the patent you quote there must be an external energy source, as very well seen from the boldened text you provide. Fecera, however, explicitly says in his patent:

"There are many instances where a motor action is required and no source of external power is available. Accordingly, a motor which relies solely on the energy stored in permanent magnets would be useful."

In Fecera's patent once the device is constructed there's no need for any external energy for it to turn.

Anyway, as I'd say for the third time, I know there are other perpetuum mobile's, other than that of McQueen and Fecera but of all those Fecera's is the most explicit that I know of in its being a perpetuum mobile and at the same time is fairly recent. Also, it isn't necessary at all to spread oneself too thin. One glaring example of a perpetuum mobile granted by the US Patent Office is enough to raise a red flag. Resolution of this will spread over to everything else.

Some nice magnet motors patents from my link collection.

somes was "forgotten?"

Magnet
http://www.ameslab.gov/final/News/2001rel/01magneticrefrig.htm   MAGNETIC REFRIGERATOR SUCCESSFULLY TESTED

http://amasci.com/elect/mcoils.html          Transformers          RIGHT ANGLE CIRCUITRY   Achtung - Die dort gennanten Schaltungen
sind zum Teil Dummheiten. Jedoch sehr interessant als "Kniffel"-Aufgabe
zum nachdenken.
-----------------------------------------<h2>
Patent DC Motor  Hp  with low amperages

http://www.google.com/patents?id=9NQiAAAAEBAJ

Magnetic tramsmission Magnet Gear
http://www.google.de/patents?id=qApMAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA2#PPA8,M1


http://www.google.com/patents?id=-64KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,362,718  Motionless electromagnetic generator Stephen L. Patrick  LOOK THIS NOW  !!!!

http://www.google.de/patents?id=LREWAAAAEBAJ&dq=6867514  Permanent magnet motor Frank J. Fecera

http://www.google.de/patents?id=BkYxAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1 Permanent   magnet motor Leonard C. Czerniak

http://www.google.de/patents?id=JSIGAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1#PPA9,M1  Electric motor Barry Reginald Hobson et al   GIVE ATTENTION TI IT !! G.Pese

http://www.google.de/patents?id=3soIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1   Energy extracting mechanism having a magnetic spring Etsunori Fujita et al

http://www.google.de/patents?id=2UIvAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1#PPA2,M1   Mechanic Energy storage and transmission apparatus Archie B. Gray

http://www.google.de/patents?id=Cc01AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1#PPA1,M1   Electric motor with permanent magnets combined with electromagnets Carlos S. Garron

http://www.google.de/patents?id=hhg8AAAAEBAJ&dq=Carlos+S.+Garron   Electric motor having permanent magnets and resonant circuit Carlos Subieta Garron

http://www.google.de/patents?id=FmpXAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=Carlos+S.+Garron  Transformer in Combination with permanent Magnet




Oh Wonder , an lot of Ideas.


http://www.google.com/patents?id=bkBXAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1#PPA3,M1   CURRENT RESPONSIVE ARRANGEMENT Inventor: Wemner- Kramer 1939

http://www.google.com/patents?id=jBRaAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1#PPP1,M1    POWER CONVERTER CIRCUITS HAVING A HIGH FREQUENCY LINK Mc Murray

http://www.google.com/patents?id=bGU0AAAAEBAJ&pg=PA68#PPA68,M1    Electromagnetic generator Eduardo Villasenor de Rivas

http://www.google.com/patents?id=NuomAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1#PPA5-IA2,M1  Single winding power converter John W. Luce
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT4683527                     -""-

<h2>SOURCE: Home: 
http://www.pese.cjb.net/liELECTRO.html 
www.pese.cjb.net

Gustav Pese

@shruggedatlas,

What do you think, will these organizations do the job:

http://www.pubpat.org/

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/

Have you heard of them or of similar organizations? Do you think they may help in resolving the problem?

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 14, 2007, 01:30:47 PM
I doubt this one works either.

Who cares? You claim to have done a little digging, where is the long list of patents you found in the first 3 min? Why are we not discussing hundreds of patents?  I don't doubt you didn't look. I know for sure!

http://www.google.com/patents?id=-64KAAAAEBAJ&dq=6,362,718
Motionless electromagnetic generator

REFERENCES:
Patent Number   Title   Issue date
2153378   CURRENT RESPONSIVE ARRANGEMENT   Apr 1939
2892155   INPUT F   Jun 1959
3079535   VARIABLE STRENGTH PERMANENT MAGNETS   Feb 1963
3165723   MAGNETIC MEMORY DEVICE   Jan 1965
3228013   MAGNETIC MEMORY DEVICE   Jan 1966
3254268   PROTECTIVE SYSTEM FOR CAPACITANCE SERIALLY CONNECTED WITH INDUCTIVE APPARATUS   May 1966
3316514   FAIL SAFE ELECTRO-MAGNETIC LIFTING DEVICE WITH SAFETY-STOP MEANS   Apr 1967
3368141   SUBIETA-GARRON   Feb 1968
3391358   CIRCUIT BREAKER WITH IMPROVED MAGNETIC TRIP MEANS   Jul 1968
3453876   MAGNETOSTRICTIVE LOAD CELLS   Jul 1969
3517300   POWER CONVERTER CIRCUITS HAVING A HIGH FREQUENCY LINK   Jun 1970
3569947   MAGNETIC MEMORY DEVICE   Mar 1971
3599074   HIGH-POWER DIRECT-CURRENT TO SQUARE- WAVE CONVERTER UTILIZING AN INDUCTIVELY COUPLED GAS DISCHARGE TUBE   Aug 1971
4006401   Electromagnetic generator   Feb 1, 1977
4077001   Electromagnetic convertor with stationary variable-reluctance members   Feb 28, 1978
4366532   AC/DC or DC/AC Converter system with improved AC-line harmonic reduction   Dec 28, 1982
4482945   Transformer for low distortion rectifier system   Nov 13, 1984
4554524   Secondary circuit breaker for distribution transformer with indicator light switch mechanism   Nov 19, 1985
4853668   Integrated magnetic converter core   Aug 1, 1989
4864478   Integrated-magnetics power converter   Sep 5, 1989
4904926   Magnetic motion electrical generator   Feb 27, 1990
5011821   Method and apparatus for generating electricity   Apr 30, 1991
5221892   Flux compression transformer   Jun 22, 1993
5245521   Suppression of transformer capacitive current   Sep 14, 1993
5327015   Superconductor device to produce electrical impulses   Jul 5, 1994
5335163   Power supply circuit with integrated magnetic components   Aug 2, 1994
5694030   Magnetic element for power supply and DC-to-DC converter   Dec 2, 1997
Referenced by
Patent Number   Title   Issue date
7247337   Method and apparatus for microarray fabrication


Don Adsid has a nice page he says is from Geoff Engels Site


Bougon, G.H.     1859764     Magnetic Device     Permanent Magnet Motors     USA
Clover, L.W.    4025807    ELM Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Ecklin, J.W.    3879622    Magnet Motion Converter    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Gay, H.    #2486327    P.M. Self-Movement Device    Permanent Magnet Motors    FRANCE
Jines, J.E.    3469130    Magnetic Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Johnson, H.R.    4151431    Magnet Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Kelly, D.A.    4082969    Magnetic Torque Converter    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Kelly, D.A.    4167684    Magnet Torque Multiplier    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Kelly, D.A.    4179633    Magnetic Wheel Drive    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Kiniski, Z.C.    3811058    Magnetic Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Kinnison, R.W.    3899703    Magnet Motion Converter    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Kuroki, 5.    4305024    Magnetic Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Powell, A.    1835721    Magnetic Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Poysa, J.W.    1963213    Magnetic Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Putt, J.W.    3992132    Energy Converter    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Scholin, H.W.    4011477    Magnet Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Sheridan, F.R.    3609425    Magnet Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Stahovic, R.F.    4207773    Magnetic Piston Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Teal, B.R.    4024421    Magnetic Engine    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Teal, B.R.    4093880    Magnetic Engine    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
Worthington, H.L.    1859643    Magnetic Motor    Permanent Magnet Motors    USA
http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/menu/patents.htm

One should feel free to try be a little more specific as one generalised opinion. I'm sure the inventors range over a width spectrum. One universal debunk doesn't do justice to any of it. It merely describes the author.

If you want a clear violation of scientific dogma you look at the hundreds and hundreds of electrolysis patents. Stan showed a working model, everyone knows this. No way in the world would he have gotten that patent if he didn't have anything to show. They are granted under Section 101, the contraption has been examined by US Patent Office".

It's just like the medical establishment having problems with moderating ships logs. Any reasonably good captain however will describe what ever happened. His log is not something one can question.

In that same way the scientific establishment may pretend the patent office has zero credibility. But 101 is 101! The man in dresses can chant their mantra all day. Still 101 is 101. Then Stan was forbidden to continue his research under the US national security act. Science doesn't trust that either I guess? I would love to hear the opinion of a forensic scientist on this topic.

Give me a break? No rational argument is going to repair this lie.

The patent database is much like the Internet, it's only much more complicated to navigate. But if you compare navigation with 1980 then you will have to conclude that your 5 min google searching would have cost you thousands of bucks back then, your query would continue to return results over a very long time span. If you take a few hours to seriously collect links and compare that to 1960 you will have the equivalent of an extremely slow and most expensive project. It would have cost an enormous heap of cash and it would have taken years to resolve the data. Meanwhile everyone on the Internet is acting like a 12 year old kid crying wolf over not getting things on a gold plate. You are just lazy, this proves it.

My own "found patent list" got kind of crufty when I started mixing application numbers though it. :-[ It's pretty sad to have just an application number, most of the time you really cant find anything with it. 1 in 50 or so you can find the patent or (even better) another similar patent mentioning the application.
So, I decided upon having them rather then not having them I just forgot it takes 100 times as long to validate as a patent number. So, yeah my page is a big mess sorry peoples, please have mercy... What is your excuse btw?

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/others/patents
patents - others - magnetmotor

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/others
others - magnetmotor

____
puh, it's probably just nothing, all of it, it has to be, it must, no no no it cant be anything noooooo I hate smurfs!!

Quote from: Omnibus on October 14, 2007, 04:04:31 PM
@shruggedatlas,

What do you think, will these organizations do the job:

http://www.pubpat.org/

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/

Have you heard of them or of similar organizations? Do you think they may help in resolving the problem?

I have not heard of them, but the pubpat.org organization seems particularly interesting.  It files for reexamination and then produces prior art to invalidate patents.  I found a brief overview of reexamination.  I have not been involved in reexamination, but only in litigation as a researcher, so I am not familiar with this process, but it appears to be a speedier option to litigation.  It was introduced in 1980, looks like.

http://www.baypatents.com/reexam.asp (http://www.baypatents.com/reexam.asp)

I think you would still need prior art to invalidate the patent.  The PTO will probably not care that the idea cannot work, though I agree that this notion offends sensibility.

I think you are all right some of the time. It is a fact that US patents go through a national security review process. If they have any military value,or if the patent attorney has not done her job correctly, you lose your rights to the patent. They use what are called marching orders to steal it from you,put you under a secrecy order and the patent office tells you to go pound sand.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, the merchants of death produce your work or suppress your work by shelving it at the Carlyle Group for example. They may make a huge profit selling it to the pentagon that probably didn't even want it but the contract was awarded because the merchant of death gave a corrupt congressman 50K in an envelope and called it campaign finance.

I have an attorney in the family that does international patent law, and I have had to listen to the rant about the corruption. When it comes to the banking system or oil, it is considered vital national interests. That is code speak for "we will kill you if you mess with it or if we want it."

It is rarely in the national interest, it is in the interest of the entities that control the government. I live in the US and am not proud of that these days. Anyone that creates an OU device would be a fool to patent it. Name one person that actually created an OU device that either marketed it and made a profit or lived happily ever after. I does not happen and it is because of corruption.

If you want to profit from a "free energy" device, you had better do it quietly and remember the free part. You will only profit to the extent that everyone else does and it is because of corruption.

Money is worth nothing without oil, oil is worth nothing without fiat money and the military makes sure that they have a supply of oil.

The last stupid thing Saddam did was print his own money and demand payment in Iraqi Denar. The private corporation called the Federal Reserve ultimately run it all through their "Jewish Lobby" AKA the 4000 or so members of the CFR.

There are many organized crime syndicates in Washington DC and ultimately they depend on each other rather than compete. It is not the little guy at the patent office, it is the former executive from Phillips that runs that division that will make sure you don't sell your device or impede the Family business.

The US has always basically been run by around 200 families. Money, oil and death are family businesses.

So you are all right some of the time but Washington is corrupt all of the time. We do not live in a democracy and some of us are smart enough to realize that.

I personally plan retire by selling cookbooks to the poor that will eventually eat the rich. Technically, that makes me a merchant of death. javascript:void(0);
Grin

QuoteTechnically, that makes me a merchant of death.

I have this fetish with torturing sadists. Stan Meyer filled up the patent office with hydrogen gas utilising a small battery. Technically that qualifies as a terrorist attack.

I'm not sure what still justifies killing a million Iraqi civilians to drive SUV's. But what do I know? I mean I use to think those SUV's where rather large for a means of transportation, I didn't know peeps was planning on living in them. Isn't the US peoples ability of having a house and driving their car a mater of national security? I'm not understanding any of it.... ROFL!

You are singing to the Choir Gaby. It is not 1 million, try 3 million. 2 million between 1992 and 2002.

500,000 of them children from dysentery. Here in America we have been chemically dumbed down by the government through our food supply with aspartame and MSG just to name a few. I live in a sea of zombies and it is scary. But don't think that just the US government is involved, it was many countries that is helping our with things like torture and troops.

It really gets down to a war between the western world quietly run by Jews and a legal system based in the Torah and the Arab world of Islamic law. The money masters -vs- the oil men.

This war is being fought on behalf of Israel as they plan to continue to expand their territory far beyond what they have. They now receive oil through a pipeline built by Rothschild in the 50's to Haifa Israel. Most of the US bases are along that pipeline.

Most western governments were hijacked by the Zionist as Zionism started way back in 1898. They got control of the money systems and from there, it was a piece of cake to take over the media, politics, medical, legal,etc. Where there is money, there is a small group of people loyal to Israel in control.

We will all live like, and be treated like the Palestinians in our land someday if we do not do something. It is happening here in the US now. It won't work though, the people are waking up and are getting pissed off.

The easy way to destroy that cabal without killing millions of people is through an energy revolution. We take away the two main components of their power, oil and petro bucks.

But hey, if this does not work, my cookbook idea is a good fall back position.

Also I should have mentioned - If Stan Meyer ever made gas at MW levels has never been proven and not what he patented. What he patented was a pulsed plasma water igniter and most if not all the parts can be had off the shelf. Stan was the third person to my knowledge to patent that and no aspect of what he patented was new from what I see.

People will eventually get tired of making bubbles and build the injector, replace their plug wires with steel wires and put a spark booster on their coil and feed their WFC foam into the injector..

Quote from: Freenrg4me on October 14, 2007, 10:08:08 PM

It really gets down to a war between the western world quietly run by Jews and a legal system based in the Torah and the Arab world of Islamic law. The money masters -vs- the oil men.

This war is being fought on behalf of Israel as they plan to continue to expand their territory far beyond what they have. They now receive oil through a pipeline built by Rothschild in the 50's to Haifa Israel. Most of the US bases are along that pipeline.

Most western governments were hijacked by the Zionist as Zionism started way back in 1898. They got control of the money systems and from there, it was a piece of cake to take over the media, politics, medical, legal,etc. Where there is money, there is a small group of people loyal to Israel in control.

Isn't that sweet!  Gaby, you made a new skinhead friend.

Quote from: Freenrg4me on October 14, 2007, 10:08:08 PM
It really gets down to a war between the western world quietly run by Jews and a legal system based in the Torah and the Arab world of Islamic law. The money masters -vs- the oil men.

This war is being fought on behalf of Israel as they plan to continue to expand their territory far beyond what they have. They now receive oil through a pipeline built by Rothschild in the 50's to Haifa Israel. Most of the US bases are along that pipeline.

Most western governments were hijacked by the Zionist as Zionism started way back in 1898. They got control of the money systems and from there, it was a piece of cake to take over the media, politics, medical, legal,etc. Where there is money, there is a small group of people loyal to Israel in control.

BOO!

Everyone who read that will always remember that you're a paranoid anti-semite.

Well done Feenrg4me,

Adolf Hitler would be proud of you, for the rest of us your views stink!

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 14, 2007, 10:43:41 PM
Isn't that sweet!  Gaby, you made a new skinhead friend.

Hair isn't very tasty anyway. I guess you could use it to tie a ham. More then an ornament it will never be on the diner table.

Trust me.

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 14, 2007, 11:48:30 PM
Adolf Hitler would be proud of you, for the rest of us your views stink!

Could you be a bit more specific explaining where you don't agree, deliver evidence of such etc

Attacking the messenger does not qualify as logic. I think of you as an above average intellectual Hans, this kind of school bully behaviour is exactly what we are talking about here.

If you don't agree with something then you take the responsibility to explain it. Don't blame people for being confused if you are to lazy to explain why they are wrong about something. If you are in the know jet are not willing to explain then you are the cause of others not knowing, this is hardly a position to complain about it in stead? Explain about~what  some~one is wrong and specify why you think this is so.

That's how it works remember? Or not?

G'day Gaby,

The only way to counter school bully behaviour is to be a bigger bully, these arseholes do not understand any other language.

I could have gone into explaining where his views are total reflections of ideas expressed in "Mein Kampf" but it would have been over his head. No amount of rational explanations ever get through to people with this kind of bias.

Besides, I was not attacking a messenger, I was attacking the originator of a number of idiotic , racist and despicable statements. That makes this prick a legitimate target for people with more socially desirable values and morals. To argue with people like this is fruitless.

Better just to call him an idiot and move on.

Hans von Lieven

I get called a skinhead nazi, asshole, idiot and god knows what else for pointing out that the US is controlled by a small group of Zionist? One person (Rahm Emanual) interviewed every democrat running for the house in the US and decided who got how much DNC money for their campaigns.

Anyone informed person living in the US knows exactly who started that war and who they represent.

Maybe you are not from here, maybe you are misinformed, maybe you don't use the medical system, legal system, watch a mass media controlled by 7 Zionist Jews, etc., but we do.

I am not anti-semite any more than I am anti-mexican or anti-ice cream. What I am, is anti-corruption which I guess makes me anti-washington dc, anti-war, anti-fiat money which can be inflated (stolen) by a corporation without government oversight or taxpayer representation, anti crime syndicate whether it being the wacko jewish lobby or the wacko christian lobby.

Anyway, if that makes me a bad person (in your eyes), I am willing to live with that.

What I am not going to do is call you an skin head, asshole, nazi, etc. That is what people do when they are incapable of forming a thought or want to destroy truth. The Zionist controlled media does it all the time, hence people turning off their TV in large numbers.

All I said was you are all right some of the time and I think you could all agree with that. The patent office and system as a whole, is corrupted by many entities. That is true.

BTW - People are being taken from their countries and being thrown in jail for challenging the jewish version of the holocaust. Ever seen someone kidnapped and thrown in jail for denying Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, that George Bush is a Christian or was honestly elected?

Reality bites doesn't it? This makes my point quite well in the news today:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4733820.stm
British historian David Irving has been found guilty in Vienna of denying the Holocaust of European Jewry and sentenced to three years in prison.

http://www.jewishtimes.com/News/7042.stm
Jewish institutions will receive the majority of U.S. federal funds designated this year to help secure non-profit organizations. Of the 308 grants awarded through the Urban Areas Security Initiative Non-Profit Security Grant Program, 251 are being allocated to Jewish groups totaling $19.6 million.

And the people are waking up to this reality.
http://mparent7777-2.blogspot.com/2007/10/ron-paul-wins-al-straw-poll-by.html

Quote from: Freenrg4me on October 15, 2007, 09:49:56 AM
I get called a skinhead nazi, asshole, idiot and god knows what else for pointing out that the US is controlled by a small group of Zionist? One person (Rahm Emanual) interviewed every democrat running for the house in the US and decided who got how much DNC money for their campaigns.

No rational person is ever going to debate you on your claims.  It involves "getting down in the mud," so to speak, and nobody wants to be in the mud with you.  Continue through life with these notions at your own risk.

"No rational person is ever going to debate you on your claims.  It involves "getting down in the mud," so to speak, and nobody wants to be in the mud with you.  Continue through life with these notions at your own risk."

No rational person can debate these simple facts. That is the problem you have, not me.

As someone that intimated you were an attorney in a previous post, what OU device are you working on?

I have worked with perhaps a thousand attorneys in my life and never met a single one with a modicum of interest in this subject. Perhaps you have another agenda.

Quote from: Freenrg4me on October 15, 2007, 10:51:19 AM
"No rational person is ever going to debate you on your claims.  It involves "getting down in the mud," so to speak, and nobody wants to be in the mud with you.  Continue through life with these notions at your own risk."

No rational person can debate these simple facts. That is the problem you have, not me.

As someone that intimated you were an attorney in a previous post, what OU device are you working on?

I have worked with perhaps a thousand attorneys in my life and never met a single one with a modicum of interest in this subject. Perhaps you have another agenda.

Yes, and I am also Jewish and I support Israel.  Wait, hold on, I am getting instructions now from one of my seven Zionist overlords (Steven Spielberg this time!).  I will now proceed to spread disinformation.

Yes, and I am also Jewish and I support Israel.  Wait, hold on, I am getting instructions now from one of my seven Zionist overlords (Steven Spielberg this time!).  I will now proceed to spread disinformation.

Well at least you can admit it. :-) I notice that you don't answer the simple question though. What OU device are you working on?

Two attempts at the wax off didn't work. Like I said, you can't debate simple facts.

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 14, 2007, 06:51:30 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 14, 2007, 04:04:31 PM
@shruggedatlas,

What do you think, will these organizations do the job:

http://www.pubpat.org/

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/

Have you heard of them or of similar organizations? Do you think they may help in resolving the problem?

I have not heard of them, but the pubpat.org organization seems particularly interesting.  It files for reexamination and then produces prior art to invalidate patents.  I found a brief overview of reexamination.  I have not been involved in reexamination, but only in litigation as a researcher, so I am not familiar with this process, but it appears to be a speedier option to litigation.  It was introduced in 1980, looks like.

http://www.baypatents.com/reexam.asp (http://www.baypatents.com/reexam.asp)

I think you would still need prior art to invalidate the patent.  The PTO will probably not care that the idea cannot work, though I agree that this notion offends sensibility.

Question is, regarding reexamination, what constitutes prior art? Can the fact that Science denies the workability of such machines (and therefore they cannot be new and useful as the law requires) be prior art? If it can, it would be newly discovered prior art regarding the patent in question (and all related prior patents, of course) which should render the patent invalid. What do you think?.

@Freenrg4me
Just to correct you on one of your thoughts.  We have never lived in a democracy, it is a representitive republic, and always has been. This used to be taught in 4th grade civics class.  I have heard many an "educated" person make the same error. I guess public schools are not what they used to be.


Bill

Dear Pirate Bill,

I would not know about the public schools as I attended private school.

That being said, if you can find where I claimed we live in a democracy, I will eat my diploma.

As for when things are taught, most people learned to read in the first grade.

Don't misquote me, you only make yourself look foolish.

Quote from: Pirate88179 on October 13, 2007, 02:10:28 PM
Sounds like you have bought into each and every conspiracy theory that has even been invented.Ã,  I don't think you left any single one out. If you seriously think that the 911 attacks were an "inside job" using "a missile and a drone", there is not a single thing I can say in response to you because you are too far gone to be reasoned with.Ã,  I don't mean that as an insult, but I am seriously at a loss for words.

Bill

It was never meant to be personal, Bill. Although it can feel that way, if it specifically involves the country that one may be born in and reside within. I'm not attempting to put words in your mouth, on my reply, either. Perhaps the depths of your thoughts on such matters are completely different, and likely differ from my allusion.

In essence, we all go to the places in thought where we,as individuals, with uhm...'emotionally driven braking', which is the point that creates our 'limits' when attempting to formulate a good solid grasp of how the world works.

As stated, each and every point I've raised can be found to be true, if you do the research. The depth of the matter on the most intimate levels is actually far more frightening and ludicrious.

For example, you, or I for that matter, cannot imagine ourselves sitting at a table and eating the cooked remains of the meat on someone's skull after we've hadÃ, $ex with said skull, yet this is exactly what Jeffrey Dahmer did. Truth is stranger than fiction, for the most part, as it can and many times does involve things that we would never think of doing, or be able to hold easily within our minds. This is the basic operational point of mental consideratons, vis-a-vis the electrochemical origins of thought, piled upon the design and structure of the human mind. Thus I can seem like a raving lunatic to a mind that is organized and structured upon fundamentals that differ from any given point of reality that I try to relate to them...as that may not agree with that given person's 'internal design'.

Reality and truth, for the most part, is limited by the given individual's capacity to deal with and accept. Basically, It will seem like an insult, but the opposite is meant, it is merely a reflection of realities:A mind that cannot clearly look at the true nature of reality, and or the structure of the world around them, without severely filtering through rose colored glasses, is clearly an immature mind.

We all have our filters and limits, I simply have fewer than most. Thus..I see further down the road.

And those that have severe filtering when it comes to these realities..are only more easily manipulated by others....via those enormous blind spots.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 15, 2007, 11:55:51 AM
Question is, regarding reexamination, what constitutes prior art? Can the fact that Science denies the workability of such machines (and therefore they cannot be new and useful as the law requires) be prior art? If it can, it would be newly discovered prior art regarding the patent in question (and all related prior patents, of course) which should render the patent invalid. What do you think?.

The prior art can indeed be newly discovered.  However, the prior art itself must of course predate the patent filing date, preferably by a few months.

There is a whole body of law on what is and what is not prior art, and I am not an expert, but generally speaking, any type of publicly published information or built devices that show the same concept would qualify.  Private letters, documents and conversations generally do not count.  Sadly, the fact that the laws of physics or other branches of science render the device impossible would not constitute prior art.  Still, if you want to smack this patent, find a similar device from an earlier time.  Just be prepared for a fight.  Patent holders can be very creative in differentiating their ideas.

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 15, 2007, 12:36:34 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 15, 2007, 11:55:51 AM
Question is, regarding reexamination, what constitutes prior art? Can the fact that Science denies the workability of such machines (and therefore they cannot be new and useful as the law requires) be prior art? If it can, it would be newly discovered prior art regarding the patent in question (and all related prior patents, of course) which should render the patent invalid. What do you think?.

The prior art can indeed be newly discovered.  However, the prior art itself must of course predate the patent filing date, preferably by a few months.

There is a whole body of law on what is and what is not prior art, and I am not an expert, but generally speaking, any type of publicly published information or built devices that show the same concept would qualify.  Private letters, documents and conversations generally do not count.  Sadly, the fact that the laws of physics or other branches of science render the device impossible would not constitute prior art.  Still, if you want to smack this patent, find a similar device from an earlier time.  Just be prepared for a fight.  Patent holders can be very creative in differentiating their ideas.

See, the point is that revoking te patent isn't my intention. My intention, as I said at the beginning, is to smoke out the person claiming perpetuum mobile and have him demonstrate in flesh in blood what he has patented (which if he doesn't do should, of course, lead to invalidation of the patent). Some of us here have a lot of experience with such "discoverers" who flash their devices only to disappear later. Recall Torbay, Mike Brady (Perendev), Steorn, Danny from Ohio, several Canadian dudes, etc. etc. Steorn and the like, for instance, ask you to sign a NDA which is similar to killing the possibility to uncover the truth. Here in this case we have involvement of an official governmental organization paid for by our taxes which is backing (protecting) claims for perpetuum mobile. That's a whole new level of the story. Government must be accountable brfore its citizens, musn't it? It cannot hide behind NDA's and must abide by its own laws. The problem now is to find the exact avenue to pursue this accountability.

@ Prophmaji - Hey that was a really well written post.

I think people deny reality largely because they would feel a responsibility to do something about it. When a persons fear is greater than their love they tend to accept belief or disbelief.

Belief and disbelief are magical thoughts and the world is largely filled with magical thinkers. It is that lack of thought integrity that makes them easy marks.

Prophmaji, your lack of filters and lack of approval needs are made up of your surplus of love and the intelligence that springs forth from that.

That was really well written and ties right into my "merchant of death cookbook joke."

For what it is worth, I don't take any of this personally. If my Jewish lawyer friend walked through the door right now, we would probably both burst out laughing and I would offer her a big hug and a ham sandwich. :-)

QuoteWe do not live in a democracy and some of us are smart enough to realize that.

@feenrg4me

Your words quoted above indicated that you think only a very small part of the population, including yourself, realize we don't live in a democracy. My statement was to point out that any person who went to public school should already know that.  Congratulations on your going to private school, does this mean you were educated by the Jews?  Was Mein Kampf on the required reading list? I find it interesting that people, as yourself, that spew ideology get upset when compared to Hitler.  What you may not realize is that everything you are saying was said before, by Hitler.  Like Hans said, read Hitler's book because all of your words, thoughts and opinions are all in there.  Maybe you have already read it and that's where you get your ideas.  Maybe you have not read it and have thought this up on your own.  Either way, if you regurgitate all of Hitler's ideas and philosophies you should not be shocked when reasonable people logically make the comparison.  You have your right to your opinions, but then, so do we.

Bill

"Congratulations on your going to public school, does this mean you were educated by the Jews?"

Bill,

I clearly stated that I attended private school. Perhaps you are confused?

No I have no read Hitlers book but Hitler and Zionism are so closely linked they are inseparable. Perhaps you need to go beyond what you were told in the forth grade of a public school and study history a bit more.

Nobody knows their history better than the Jews. Here would be a good place to start learning:
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/nazisupport.cfm

And when you get done with that, read chapter II of this book about the ties of the present administration and Nazi Germany:
http://www.tarpley.net/bush2.htm

And then if you really want to debate such a subject, here is not the place. Many beliefs on what I tried to say in the first post applied to what I said. That is just the programming that goes into the feeble minds of the masses from the mass media.

In reality, if I were Jewish, nothing would scare me more than Zionism. Not all Jews are Zionist or support the policy of Israel. Not even close. I am not an antisemite as stated, I am anti Zionist crime syndicate.

One of the biggest supporters of Israel "The final solution" was Hitler. The Jews had taken over much of the institutions of Germany and had become corrupt and abusive, though they were but a small part of the population. My grandmother was a teen living in Germany at the time and that is what she told me.

Many of the families currently in US government had a hand in Nazi Germany. It is my understanding Carl Rove's grandfather was Rovertine and Hitlers worked in propaganda. Rove is a Ashkenazi Jew, no?

Bush gave 100 million to IG Farbin who made the gas and lost his assets for a time under the trading with the enemies act. At the same time he was in charge of assigning military contracts.  - Wikipedia

So you see, once you get past the forth grade, reality is a bit different. War is a racket where idiots fight and die, most of those killed are civilians and the rich merchants of death profit.

As my friend explained to you in a previous post, not everybody is capable of living in reality.

Enjoy your day.

@Freenrg4me:

Thank you for pointing out my error.  I went back and edited my previous post accordingly.  It was my error and there is no excuse for it. My mind must have been distracted.  I have studied history extensively and I know that most of the things you point out never happened. You are reporting revisionist history which is not real history or reality.  But, I do agree 100% that this is not the forum to debate this. I wish you the best and I guess we have to agree to disagree.  Let's get back to discovering overunity and putting it to good use.

Bill

Quote from: Freenrg4me on October 15, 2007, 01:49:53 PM

No I have no read Hitlers book but Hitler and Zionism are so closely linked they are inseparable.

Is that not the height of ignorance? I would have thought that only someone thoroughly familiar with Hitlerian and Zionist philosophy would be entitled to voice an opinion on the subject.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on October 15, 2007, 04:56:38 PM

Quote from: Freenrg4me on October 15, 2007, 01:49:53 PM

No I have no read Hitlers book but Hitler and Zionism are so closely linked they are inseparable.

Is that not the height of ignorance? I would have thought that only someone thoroughly familiar with Hitlerian and Zionist philosophy would be entitled to voice an opinion on the subject.

Hans von Lieven

Is that not the height of arrogance? If you think that not reading one book makes me somehow less qualified to know what is going on in the my country or elsewhere in history, you are delusional.

Lots of people write books and many of them are in politics. Do you think that what they wanted you to believe in a single book is reflective of the reality of their career?

What makes you think you are the end all be all of political reality in the US? You claim to live in the Netherlands. I live here Jack, and I know what is going on and it is so similar to what happened before WWII it scares me and if you don't know enough about history to know that there were many Zionist Jews in Hitlers government, you are a magical thinking idiot.

Most politicians write a book about themselves. Al Gore wrote one all about global warming. Does Al Gore know anything about the galactic oscillation of our solar system and how that might affect the temperature on Earth? Perhaps Al could explain why the other planets are heating up too.

Does his book really tell us anything about him? Nope, his actions tell us about him. He is a billionaire , Arman Hammer (a communist) was his godfather, his father, a senator was responsible for all the technology transfer sales to the Soviet Union. A traitor? You bet, and his "book" isn't going to tell you all about that, any more than Hitlers book is going to tell you all about Hitler.

But don't take my word for it, here are the words of some of the Zionist.

Theodor Herzl, Founder of Zionism in 1897:
?It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . . I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends?.
-- From Herzl's Diary

5. German Zionism offers to collaborate with Nazism
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/ch05.htm

"Werner Senator, a leading German Zionist, once remarked that Zionism, for all its world Jewish nationalism, always politically assimilates to the countries within which it operates. No better proof of his remark exists than the political adaptation of the ZVfD to the theories and policies of the new Nazi regime. Believing that the ideological similarities between the two movements ? their contempt for liberalism, their common volkish racism and, of course, their mutual conviction that Germany could never be the homeland of its Jews ? could induce the Nazis to support them, the ZVfD solicited the patronage of Adolf Hitler, not once but repeatedly, after 1933."

51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration with the Nazis
http://www.counterpunch.org/brenner1223.html

Jews Against Zionism
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/news/Newsletters/pressrelease070904.htm

Theodor Herzl (1860-1904), the founder of modern Zionism, recognized that anti-Semitism would further his cause, the creation of a separate state for Jews. To solve the Jewish Question, he maintained ?we must, above all, make it an international political issue.? Herzl wrote that Zionism offered the world a welcome ?final solution of the Jewish question.? In his ?Diaries?, page 19, Herzl stated ?Anti-Semites will become our surest friends, anti-Semitic countries our allies.?

Zionism was supported by the German SS and Gestapo. Hitler himself personally supported Zionism. During the 1930?s, in cooperation with the German authorities, Zionist groups organized a network of some 40 camps throughout Germany where prospective settlers were trained for their new lives in Palestine. As late as 1942 Zionists operated at least one of these officially authorized ?Kibbutz? training camps over which flew the blue and white banner which would one day be adopted as the national flag of ?Israel?. The Transfer Agreement (which promoted the emigration of German Jews to Palestine) implemented in 1933 and abandoned at the beginning of WWII is an important example of the cooperation between Hitler?s Germany and international Zionism. Through this agreement, Hitler?s Third Reich did more than any other government during the 1930?s to support Jewish development in Palestine and further the Zionist goals.

Would you like to see some quotes from some of your Zionist friends? Enjoy!
Let us start with David Ben Gurion Prime Minister of Israel  1949 - 1954, 1955 - 1963

There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" -  David Ben Gurion Prime Minister of Israel  1949 - 1954, 1955 - 1963

"If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel."

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian people... It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist."

"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!"

Well I could go on with that cut and paste for days. The Nazis and Zionist could not act any different. I am not a Nazi or a Zionist and do not support either unlike some of you.

O.K., time for your little bumper sticker smear job. Is that all you are capable of?

You seem capable of doing many things.  After reading your last post, I think you would have had a talent for loading boxcars, or operating furnaces, or anything else that needed doing. (Directed at Freenrg4me)

Bill

You see Hans, in reality I could not be any more pro Jewish. You can't see because of the lens of racism you view others and the world through.

A Zionist in not a Jew, that is a myth. Many people that claim to be Jews also claim to be Zionist or supporters of Israel but are they really Jews?

Read the book The Thirteenth Tribe. It traces the origin of the Ashkenazi Jews of Poland, Hungary and Romania and suggests they are not Jews at all.

The most racist people on Earth are the Israelis. Hitler was was a racist, I am not. I am just fine with Jews, not fine with Zionist. Why is it that people with ties to German Nazism also seem to such supporters of Zionism? The Bush family would be a good example.

If I were a Jew, I would be asking myself the questions:

Why are Zionist doing things that cause people to hate Jews?
Why are the Zionist trying to get all the Jews to move to Israel?
Could that separation wall have two sides?
Could the wall be used to keep Jews in?
Is someone planning another holocaust?
Have two enemies worked together for decades but each separately planning to double cross the other in the end?

Zionism is racism and racism is always the pretext to genocide.

Quote from: Pirate88179 on October 15, 2007, 06:52:02 PM
This guy seems capable of doing many things.  After reading his last post, I think he would have had a talent for loading boxcars, or operating furnaces, or anything else that needed doing.

Bill

Still can't form a proper sentence can you Bill? I am sure you have done lots of that type of work in your life.

But in the end, you turned out to be just just another flag waving cheer leader with thoughts that don't go beyond a bumper sticker or someone else's programming.

You inability to form an argument is a reflection of your lack of intellect. You lack lack of intellect is a function of your lack of personal integrity.

I sir, think for myself, and do not rely upon extremist, racist propaganda to bolster my thoughts and statements. I make decisions based upon historical facts, not hysterical ramblings.  What the hell all of this has to do with overunity is beyond me.  You sound like a very frustrated, lonely, and deeply disturbed individual.  Just the kind of recruit genocidal maniacs are looking for.

Bill

Wow!

This thread has really degraded fairly quickly into smelling like the armpits of human existence.

Frankly, I'm impressed with how quickly we were able to get from patents to prejudice.

Maybe we should write a new book using this thread as the starting point?

Instead of "Pride and Prejudice"... we would do, "Patents and Prejudice".

Who knows... it might sell a hundred copies!

Shirley, we cun do bedder dan dis.

FB

@ForeverBlisse:

Agreed 100%

Bill

Dearest Bill,

A comma before the word and? I think they covered that in forth grade didn't they?

I quoted racist Zionist and that is not propaganda, that is historical fact.

I think that it is funny that some of you are too stupid to realize that I am not a racist. It is like you can't comprehend what you read. Quite the opposite is true but you filter out reality with your id based ego, your own racist views or the mind control propaganda that you are fed every day through the media.

Is it your filter on reality that someone else pointed out earlier or a reading comprehension problem?

I keep waiting for someone to go back, read all the posts and say, oops!

I seriously can't stop laughing about this. Snap into reality! Read and comprehend with an open, unfiltered mind the posts. It is like black is white, up is down with some of you people.

Enjoy you day Bill.

@Freenrg4me:

Yes, welcome to the world of the educated.  I also have a degree in journalism and the comma before "and" is optional and accepted.  But, you might not know this as it would require reading, and learning, etc.  Hey, I put a comma before etc.  This too is optional.  And, (Hey, I started a sentence with the word "and", which is accepted but frowned upon.) if we all are "too stupid" to understand you, why do you keep posting this crap on a scientific site?  As I said before, at the risk of repeating myself, why don't we go back to overunity?  Unless, you think we are too stupid for that also. (Hey, I ended the sentence with the word "also".  This too is accepted but not used very often as it can appear to be awkward.)

Bill

Quote from: Omnibus on October 15, 2007, 12:56:27 PM

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 15, 2007, 12:36:34 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 15, 2007, 11:55:51 AM
Question is, regarding reexamination, what constitutes prior art? Can the fact that Science denies the workability of such machines (and therefore they cannot be new and useful as the law requires) be prior art? If it can, it would be newly discovered prior art regarding the patent in question (and all related prior patents, of course) which should render the patent invalid. What do you think?.

The prior art can indeed be newly discovered.  However, the prior art itself must of course predate the patent filing date, preferably by a few months.

There is a whole body of law on what is and what is not prior art, and I am not an expert, but generally speaking, any type of publicly published information or built devices that show the same concept would qualify.  Private letters, documents and conversations generally do not count.  Sadly, the fact that the laws of physics or other branches of science render the device impossible would not constitute prior art.  Still, if you want to smack this patent, find a similar device from an earlier time.  Just be prepared for a fight.  Patent holders can be very creative in differentiating their ideas.

See, the point is that revoking te patent isn't my intention. My intention, as I said at the beginning, is to smoke out the person claiming perpetuum mobile and have him demonstrate in flesh in blood what he has patented (which if he doesn't do should, of course, lead to invalidation of the patent). Some of us here have a lot of experience with such "discoverers" who flash their devices only to disappear later. Recall Torbay, Mike Brady (Perendev), Steorn, Danny from Ohio, several Canadian dudes, etc. etc. Steorn and the like, for instance, ask you to sign a NDA which is similar to killing the possibility to uncover the truth. Here in this case we have involvement of an official governmental organization paid for by our taxes which is backing (protecting) claims for perpetuum mobile. That's a whole new level of the story. Government must be accountable brfore its citizens, musn't it? It cannot hide behind NDA's and must abide by its own laws. The problem now is to find the exact avenue to pursue this accountability.

Well, the name of the person who owns the patent is public information, so there is no need to smoke him out.  As far as having a working model, it is pretty apparent that there is no working model and can be no working model, so a demonstration is never going to happen.

The problem you face is that you have an agenda that almost no one in the PTO, the court system, or in the private sector cares about.  The USPTO cares about protecting inventions and not handing out patents for ideas already patented.  Patent holders similarly care about protecting their own inventions.  Organizations such as the ones you listed care about protecting others from patent trolls.  No one cares about nonworking patents, because they have no value and cause no harm to anyone.  Someone is just out $20K or whatever.  Sure, in an ideal world, with infinite resources, we would like to have enough patent examiners to be able to flush out nonworking ideas, but this is not critical to a well functioning patent system.

The big problem with patents right now is how easily they are granted on working, but non-original or relatively obvious ideas, and this is where patent reformers tend to focus their efforts.  Your complaint, while valid, is frankly not as pressing of a problem.

As I said before, at the risk of repeating myself, why don't we go back to overunity?  Unless, you think we are too stupid for that also.

Dear Bill,

We were not on the subject of free energy, we were on the subject of patent office corruption. Please try to follow along.

As to the subject of over unity, which by the way is two words, I think that is a grand idea. My first post was all about trying to get you to do just that. Remember that part about "I think you are all right some of the time"??? The post was about getting people to stop arguing over what can not be solved and has no place in a open source community anyway.

A patent attorney plying these waters? Don't think for a second I didn't know that I would get a response from her or her friend omnibus, who sounds like he works for the government from his posts. It is important for us to take time to drive people away that have no place here.

For example, my friend Hans posted a link for the resonate frequency of the elements in a thread I have been posting in. Just one problem, the link and associated article are for elements that do not exist. Is that being helpful? For a person that claims to be so intelligent... I guess he didn't take the time to read it.

It was in relation to my noticing that the barium core of Dr. Stiffler was almost a perfect resonate multiple of hydrogen (H1).

Last week I replicated Dr. Stifflers CREC circuit and designed a mark space circuit for the "Dave cell" that uses phase lock loops and a 4017 divide by ten for a rock solid pulse generator.

I am working on OU Bill, I am also hard at work running off the shills, intellectual property thieves, ambulance chasers and what ever else seems to impede progress.

What did you build? You said in an earlier post something to the effect that you had to choose between buying a bearing and eating. Hard times for a well educated journalist?

I have no malice for you, Hans or anyone else on this board. Freenrg4me is a made up user name, it is not who I am. No aspect of my ego is insulted by anything you or anyone else says to that cyber name. It has no approval needs nor do I.

Well I discovered that high voltage could be amplified by 1000% using a barium magnet today and I am off to play with that. If you post again in regards to me, I will be back tomorrow.

Enjoy you day.

PS - Kentucky is a beautiful state and I have been through there several times. I am sure it is spectacular with the fall colors on the trees this time of year.

@Freenry4me:

I never said I was a journalist.  I said I also have a degree in journalism.  I have no need to choose between food and a bearing, I think you are confusing me with someone else.  It is true that money is very tight for me right now, but I have seen fortunes come, and go, and I am not too worried about it. I have over 18 years as a design engineer, specifically dealing with precision ceramic machining for the defense, aerospace and electronics industries.

I am a licenced Private Investigator and own and operate Tactical Investigations.  I see no need to post any further information about my resume.

Yes, it is beautiful here in Kentucky, although it just, as of the last few days, has cooled below 90 and almost feels like fall.

Yes, over unity is two words, but not if you don't hit the space bar when typing them.  This is sometimes refereed to as a "typo".

Yes, this thread is about the US Patent Office, but I said this "forum" meaning the entire forum.  This thread is also not entitled "How the Jews are destroying the world."

And, if you think that ShruggedAtlas and Omnibus are friends, you have obviously not read very many other posts on the other threads.  After doing so, you may want to choose to rephrase that.

I don't think that anyone is here to attempt to destroy progress, or stop over unity experimentation, including you.  I find the Patent Office posts, those that stick to the subject matter, very educational and informative.  If you feel differently, then fine, feel free to do so.  This is my last response to ANY person's racist, conspiracy, U.S. bashing posts on this thread.  It has nothing to do with the topic, and sadly, neither does this reply.

Bill

Quote from: Pirate88179 on October 15, 2007, 09:28:50 PM
@Freenry4me:

I never said I was a journalist. I said I also have a degree in journalism. I have no need to choose between food and a bearing, I think you are confusing me with someone else. It is true that money is very tight for me right now, but I have seen fortunes come, and go, and I am not too worried about it. I have over 18 years as a design engineer, specifically dealing with precision ceramic machining for the defense, aerospace and electronics industries.

I am a licenced Private Investigator and own and operate Tactical Investigations. I see no need to post any further information about my resume.

Yes, it is beautiful here in Kentucky, although it just, as of the last few days, has cooled below 90 and almost feels like fall.

Yes, over unity is two words, but not if you don't hit the space bar when typing them. This is sometimes refereed to as a "typo".

Yes, this thread is about the US Patent Office, but I said this "forum" meaning the entire forum. This thread is also not entitled "How the Jews are destroying the world."

And, if you think that ShruggedAtlas and Omnibus are friends, you have obviously not read very many other posts on the other threads. After doing so, you may want to choose to rephrase that.

I don't think that anyone is here to attempt to destroy progress, or stop over unity experimentation, including you. I find the Patent Office posts, those that stick to the subject matter, very educational and informative. If you feel differently, then fine, feel free to do so. This is my last response to ANY person's racist, conspiracy, U.S. bashing posts on this thread. It has nothing to do with the topic, and sadly, neither does this reply.

Bill

"I have no need to choose between food and a bearing, I think you are confusing me with someone else."


Dear Bill,

For the record...

"P-Motion:

I understand that. I know exactly what you mean. Some people say that "all you need to try it is this and that" and what they might not understand is "this and that" cost money. Let's see...should I eat today or buy that bearing that I want? It would be a lot easier with a government grant or reasearch allotment. but, they only give those to people with connections and no real ideas on how to do anything. (personal opinion) Let's continue to swap ideas and experiment results. It may not end up meaning anything but, it might mean everything."

I think you are the one that is confused. Enjoy your foot sandwich.

Now how about this one?

"And, if you think that ShruggedAtlas and Omnibus are friends, you have obviously not read very many other posts on the other threads. After doing so, you may want to choose to rephrase that."

For the record, if you could show me where I typed the user name "ShruggedAtlas" I would sure appreciate knowing where. I didn't think so. Confused? Perhaps you would like to "rephrase that."

Ooo! Got to love this tired old trick:

"This thread is also not entitled "How the Jews are destroying the world."

Bill, as someone with a "degree in journalism" surely knows, when you apply quote marks, you are quoting something that a person said. If you could just show me where I stated "How the Jews are destroying the world." I would sure appreciate it. Otherwise, we can just assume that you have done what you have been doing all along and that is misquoting, in a pathetic attempt to win an argument.

At this point, between your lies, misquotes and constant defamation you have reduced your credibility to zero.

And for the record Bill, I am not a racist. However after reading your many posts about "Islamic terrorist" and "Saddam nukes" I can see that you are a racist and not living in a real world. Were you pursuing free energy in those posts or just spewing your racist propaganda?

You never seem to argue the facts of what I said, you just slander me with your bumper sticker mentality in each post. How pathetic.

I assume that is you all dressed up in your Dick Tracy costume?

Tactical Investigations
William Ellis
2701 N. Mill Ave. Suite 72
Bowling Green, KY 42104
Phone: 270 202 4200
Fax: 270 846 3746

If I ever need a racist PI that can't seem to keep his facts straight or is not afraid to liable himself or blow his cover, you da man... If I ever need someone with a degree in journalism that constantly misquotes someone, again, you are my first pick Dick.

I will hold you to your words "this is my last response to ANY person's racist, conspiracy, U.S. bashing posts on this thread."

Negative judgment is self judgment. Perhaps you could find a therapist to explain what projection means. Here are a few more of your racist and delusional posts.

This is not a political forum so I will hold the rest of my thoughts for now, except to say that anyone that lives here that thinks the way Prophmaji does thinks needs to leave, we won't stop him. (One of our freedoms)  and if he already lives in another country...good stay there, we don't need you.
I respect your opinion but I have to say that you need to study history and obtain more information. Iraq was training terrorists, and seeking nuclear weapons and shooting at our aircraft patrolling the no fly zone. The major source of the insurgency is soldiers from Iran...yes, army regulars in uniform and most others dressed as civilians. We don't really have a beef with the Iraqi people anymore, but that is not who is fighting us now. To anyone who knows the history of the gulf war, the Iraq war is nothing but an extension of that.  They surrendered...remember that?  They agreed to the surrender conditions...weapons inspectors, no fly zone, etc.  They violated that many, many times...so to me, that means the peace is over...but you don't agree?  If Japan surrendered unconditionally as they did in WWII, and suddenly started shooting at our boats at sea, do you think the surrender terms should still be in force?  Oh, and in case you don't know this...we still have troops in Japan and Germany.  Why can't we bring them home?  It's been over 4 years now? Study your history more and then you will see.  This is a science forum and I don't want to clutter it up with political stuff.  I have said my piece, and you have said yours and maybe, we can at least agree to disagree.

Bill

What is the evil? You have to be kidding me, right? When you have the majority of radical Islamic leaders stating that their mission is to convert the world to Islam or, if they can't convert, to kill the infidels. (That's us) Sounds evil to me. Are you planning on converting? I'm not. Please note that I am not speaking of all of Islam, only the radical extremists that are dedicating their lives to the death of us and our way of life. Anyway, that is what I meant by my quote in the above post.

Bill

@bourne:

I hate to get political on this forum but, you leave me no choice when you post such ignorant "facts".  "All the troops out of Iraq now"...yes..that will solve everything.  Terrorists will just go away and leave everyone alone.  It was EXACTLY this kind of thinking that allowed a failed house painter to destroy half of Europe.  Remember Nevel Chaimberlin?  That was his attitude and what did it bring?  Or, do you not know your history? I am against war, I HATE all war, but, when you are up against people that live to destroy you and your way of life, you have no choice.


I don't want to argue this on here, you have your opinion and I have expressed mine. We both have the right to do so because a lot of very brave men died for things they too believed in. I am an American but my ancestry is from Europe in the 1800's.  I wish there were not evil in the world, but there is.  I will leave you with a quote..."Evil triumps when good men do nothing." Peace.

Bill

Hans:
Those have been around since I was a kid...(long time ago ha ha) I remember playing around with one when my Father worked at Bell Labs in NJ.  This is what he is talking about?  The "big" break-through? I am going to have to go back and read all of the posts on this but, if this is really what it is........let China have this "advanced" technology.

Bill

I will learn yet another thing not to do.  I have spent most of my life learning what not to do.  Why should I stop now? (smile)


Maybe you will learn not to misquote and slander me? I doubt it, you can't fix stupid. God knows I have tried.

G'day all except Freenrg4me,

Let us just ignore that idiot and NOT respond to anything he says. This way he will be isolated and piss off eventually. At the moment we are all playing into his hands and empower him to spew his venom whenever he feels he ought to.

If we are lucky he will somehow upset the wrong people and wind up getting certified, he sure sounds as if he needs it.

Hans von Lieven

@shruggedatlas,

QuoteWell, the name of the person who owns the patent is public information, so there is no need to smoke him out.

I disagree there?s no such need. As I said, the names of other ?inventors? such as the already mentioned Torbay, Brady etc. are also publicly known but there?s no way to make them demonstrate what they claim. On the other hand, USPTO is an official agency which, at least during the process of examination, can do that. As a matter of fact, try to find Frank Fecera?s phone number and see how easy it is. Try to phone him and see if you can get anything else but a phone message. As I said, the experience many of us have is that these people are better skilled in hiding than in being true to their words. USPTO shouldn?t assist them in that.

QuoteAs far as having a working model, it is pretty apparent that there is no working model and can be no working model, so a demonstration is never going to happen.

Now, that?s not apparent at all. There?s a patent granted and the patent law requires that the patent is for something new and useful. Patent for something non-working, as described in the patent, isn?t useful.

QuoteThe problem you face is that you have an agenda that almost no one in the PTO, the court system, or in the private sector cares about.  The USPTO cares about protecting inventions and not handing out patents for ideas already patented.

Again, that?s not what the law says. The law says that the patent has to be about something new and useful. Something that doesn?t work as described isn?t something useful as intended.

QuotePatent holders similarly care about protecting their own inventions.  Organizations such as the ones you listed care about protecting others from patent trolls.  No one cares about nonworking patents, because they have no value and cause no harm to anyone.  Someone is just out $20K or whatever.  Sure, in an ideal world, with infinite resources, we would like to have enough patent examiners to be able to flush out nonworking ideas, but this is not critical to a well functioning patent system.

I already commented on this. It isn?t true that non-working patents cause no harm to anyone. To grant a patent for a non-working device is to abuse the system. Abusing the system is harmful to everyone. It is also unlawful in the most direct sense?non-working patents do not protect anything useful as the law requires.

QuoteThe big problem with patents right now is how easily they are granted on working, but non-original or relatively obvious ideas, and this is where patent reformers tend to focus their efforts.  Your complaint, while valid, is frankly not as pressing of a problem.

You?re right, this is what appears to be the primary goal of the mentioned organizations so far. Undeserved patents and unsound patent policy have wider meaning, though.

Hans:

I agree. I admit I fell into that ratrace.  While I appreciate my business contact information being posted on here, I don't feel that this is the proper place for me to obtain international exposure for my personal gain.  My apologies to Stephan and all the other members.

Bill

Just to round it up:

If it comes to "free energy" - there will be no (worldwide)patents at all.
Can you patent the sun, the moon, the earth,
can you patent water ? no.
Maybe there will be national patents and global agreements.
Can somebody release a patent on the kaplan turbine or on the
idea of a storage lake ? no.
Is there a patent on nuclear power stations ?
Maybe there are patents on special equippement and techniques used.....

we?ll see.

BTW: I think the most interesting thing on the availab?lity of free energy are
the economic and social effects.

Quote from: Omnibus on October 16, 2007, 01:47:45 AM
Again, that?s not what the law says. The law says that the patent has to be about something new and useful. Something that doesn?t work as described isn?t something useful as intended.

To my knowledge, there is no case law requiring patents to be about something useful.  New, yes; useful, no.

On a related note, here is a good article explaining a big problem with the current patent system.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/07/AR2007100701199_pf.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/07/AR2007100701199_pf.html)

Quote from: shruggedatlas on October 18, 2007, 10:37:27 PM

Quote from: Omnibus on October 16, 2007, 01:47:45 AM
Again, that?s not what the law says. The law says that the patent has to be about something new and useful. Something that doesn?t work as described isn?t something useful as intended.

To my knowledge, there is no case law requiring patents to be about something useful.  New, yes; useful, no.

Not so. See what Consolidated Patent Laws state:

35 U.S.C.101 Inventions patentable.
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,subject to the conditions
and requirements of this title.