What should someone do with a solution?

[Furcurequs]

Hey Jim,

Thanks.

If I'm not getting too confused, I believe that the claims in the patent application regarding the invention are expected to be true and complete while the device itself can be "frivolous, fraudulent or against public policy."

So, you could patent a novel and claimed "fake perpetual motion machine," for instance, "with a power source hidden (somewhere)" - which could be used "deceptively" in a science museum to, perhaps, get people to do a little bit of head scratching - or it could possibly even be used to help defraud gullible investors.

So, it's just not the patent office's job to decide whether a device gets a patent based upon how the invention is to be used or could be used - even if it is frivolous or it could possibly be used for nefarious purposes.

That makes pretty good sense to me. ...and then it would be for the police and/or others to decide later if the invention was actually used illegally.

---------

I've been thinking about the Joseph Newman device this evening as a possible example of what I stated above in my previous post to Raj. Newman claimed to have a motor that had more mechanical power output than electrical power input (if I correctly understand the available information).

He also apparently claimed the excess power simply came from converting some of the mass of the copper coils in his device into energy - and according to some unconventional scientific hypothesis/theory of his own.

So, apparently, he did indeed claim an unconventional power source and then the USPTO denied him a patent claiming that his device "smacked of perpetual motion".

There is a collection of news articles here about him and his device:

http://www.rexresearch.com/newman/newman.htm

Here's the wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newman's_energy_machine

I was thinking this evening that if he had just tried to patent his device as a novel electric motor design, though, without the claims of excess energy, he quite likely could have gotten a patent on that.

...a heavy, bulky, high voltage, low current, high torque, low efficiency permanent magnet motor design, maybe...

...a frivolous design?

...a design that was different enough from the norm that he could use it to defraud others later?

Anyway, some tests were eventually done by court order on his device by the National Bureau of Standards and they determined that it did not work as claimed.

However, I don't believe they actually tested it as a motor by measuring electrical power in and mechanical power out. It seems they just measured electrical power in and out. ...?!

So, Newman could have some legitimate beefs with those who did the tests.

I personally don't totally dismiss Newman. I think some of his ideas are actually somewhat interesting to think about, but I do believe he may be his own worst enemy.

...and after all these years I really doubt his devices work as he claims - though I believe that he actually still believes his own claims.

Know what I mean?

Dwayne

[Dwylbtzle]

"should refer to an actual model. Since you don't have one...

...the imaginary illuminati..."

two more declarative statements you provide no evidence for

einstein said that anyone who keeps doing the same thing over and over again--even when it doesn't work
is mentally unstable

which was yet aNOther declarative statement you previously posted about me, that you are incapable of providing any evidence for
(that i was mentally unstable)

along with...i think i counted four or five personal insults in that post
when, previously, i had never even ADDRESSED you

so let me just say:
would the fountain of your mind were clear once again
that i might water an ass with it

[Jim Williams]

Raj:

To the degree I know patent law; it's all American patent law. Jim_Mich knows more about patent law than I do. I'm not saying or implying there is anything fraudulent about applying for a patent on perpetual motion. I'm just examining what the law here has to say about it. I just found it curious how the law here actually reads.

Best of luck with your applications.

[Dwylbtzle]

dwylbtzle:

"no
they tap the gravity that is forcing the water down the hill

the heat from the sun lifts the water back up
yes
but my idea doesn't need to lift anything back up

it just needs gravity to always be pulling down
which it always does

but thanks again for the pertinent response
now we're getting somewhere"

..........................................................................

You've drifted a bit from how gravity needs to always be pulling down. Perhaps you could elaborate on how you have acheived this solution and what to do with it?

well it COULD pull up or sideways, i guess
and it wouldn't matter
direction being (also) relative

i was just saying that if a farmer comes across a stream or waterfall
and he wants to grind his corn
he has been released from having to worry about how the sun is
evaporating the water to bring it back around again
all he has to do is build the mill and start grinding away

because no matter how the laws of thermodynamics have come to NOT
be violated
he's got this source of energy always flowing down

likewise
we don't have to worry about how or why gravity always flows down
(in OUR case, since we're standing on a fairly horizontal surface and we call that direction "down")
all we have to do is use it to spin a wheel as it passes
and if we can do that
and we can
no law of physics has been violated

you wouldn't neccessarily have to use a wheel
i can think of at least one other device that would work, also

in our previous discussion i came so close to actually giving it up
i almost can't think of much more i could say
without doing so

once one sees it--like popscan said about what HE saw
even a child could not fail to grasp it instantly

that's why i think bessler saw it
and i think various people also must have
and it would almost HAVE to be being repressed

possibly some of the people here who say they see it
but don't have the machine shop to make it
or the money to pursue it
or patent it
have indeed seen it
maybe that's why the non believers are getting frustrated at the large number of them

(that's certainly understandable
and i wouldn't ever, personally, start insulting them for it
just because of that
though some have
and the non believers shouldn't insult US either
though some have
let's all just put our goddam shotguns down
can we get along?)

but hey
who's fault would that really be
the poor impoverished inventors?

and should they REALLY blab it to satisfy the frustrated?

really?

seriously?
they should just TELL you?
right HERE, in front of the devil and everyone?

or else...wot?
they should be insulted?
called LIARS?
nut jobs?

[Jim Williams]

Furcurequs:

That's what I'm reading too. The inventor has to be true, but the invention can be "frivolous, fraudulent or against public policy".

Nwman's case is actually used as an example in patent law; as to why the law is written the way it is.

........................................................................

"WhAn invention that is "inoperative" (i.e., it does not operate to produce the results claimed by the patent applicant) is not a "useful" invention in the meaning of the patent law... ...Examples of such cases include: an invention asserted to change the taste of food using a magnetic field (Fregeau v. Mossinghoff, 776 F.2d 1034, 227 USPQ 848 (Fed. Cir. 1985)), a perpetual motion machine (Newman v.Quigg, 877 F.2d 1575, 11 USPQ2d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 1989)), a flying machine operating on "flapping or flutter function" (In re Houghton, 433 F.2d 820, PATENTABILITY 2107.01 2100-25at"

..................................................

What I can't explain is why there are so many patents that got through being classified as perpetual motion, i.e., Class 415 Subclasss 916, smacking of perpetual motion, while Newman's didn't. I've posted this list below before. It needs a download of TIFF to look at the actual patents. Maybe Newman tried to get the government to pass a law his invention worked.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Pars ... 916&d=PALL

I think I know what you mean. I came to this board with someone else's patent that I just knew it had to work (Pat No 3,412,482)

[Dwylbtzle]

maybe...
if they let thru a bunch that are bogus
they can afford to stop the one or two occassional ones
that they can see are really gonna work
then the fossil cartels get to keep the monopoly on their control
of world energy
and everyone sees all these bogus things

and "hey
that crap is all bogus see?--and look! no-one is suppressing anything--just LOOK at it all!"

that's certainly what would be in their best interests

[Furcurequs]

Oh, hi Raj,

Here I am quibbling over some of the technicalities of getting a patent in the U.S., and there you are applying in the U.K.!

Actually, I think I may have realized that you weren't talking about the U.S. system, but unfortunately only AFTER making my post to you. Sorry for any confusion.

I certainly don't know as much about the patent system in the U.K. as ours in the U.S. (and I probably don't know as much about the U.S. system as I should). Maybe things are quite a bit different there.

I'll have to do some more reading, it seems.

I hope it didn't sound like I was suggesting you were doing anything fraudulent or illegal. I was referring to others in the "free energy" community who might suggest the withholding of pertinent information from their patent application claims.

An inventor who had a working device would likely understand the source of the excess energy and so would probably not be claiming "perpetual motion", anyway, imho.

Until I do some more reading, I'll just say for now that I do SUSPECT that the U.K. patent office would probably require a working model, too, for anything they thought sounded like a perpetual motion machine claim - even if the words "perpetual motion" weren't in the claim.

Dwayne

[Dwylbtzle]

raj
(and i address this advice to ALL who have seen it):
if you've seen it--and you have something in mind that requires a BFD to produce
(which is what happened to me at first)
think TOY
think of a way to make something small and light and cheap
even if it didn't work exactly the same way as the big BFD thing does
just so long as it demonstrates feasibility of the general principle

but then don't admit you have a working model
and don't deny it
(here)

if you say you have a working model
you will be called an arrogant liar
or crazy--unless you blab it
and if you explain why you don't have a working model

well i refer you to tangier--and the koala boy
they both have been following me around from pillar to post needling me
even when i had declared neither (possible) happenstance
nor denied either
and had never even ever spoken to, or addressed, either of them in any way
so you CAIN'T win, brother

people will not be satisfied either way
someone will perhaps even jump straight in and begin insulting you personally
right off the bat
without even discussing with you with one single post first
and if you bitch about their bitching
they will vote against you with that silly grade school political popularity button there

just to SEE it (apparently)
IS the offense

hey if you get a patent there in the mother country
the island of the mighty
i guess i might as well collaborate with you
and give you what i know
because they aren't gonna give me one here in the colonies

and to all britons: accept my apologies for that stupid revolutionary war

i was always against it
(loyalist)

and oh
it was over TAXATION?
gee
we sure dodged a bullet, there, DIDn't we?
heheheeeee

[jim_mich]

Analysis of some of of 24 Perpetual Motion Patents of the USPTO.

From the USPTO patent search website:

[ 1] 682,378 Automatic Water Elevator
This one works. It is not perpetual motion. It is powered by a flowing water source. States that is works more efficient than a hydraulic ram pump.

[ 2] 1,708,807 Water and Air power Device
This one works. It is a "novelty device" designed catch attention because it looks like perpetual motion. It is powered by small air jets on the wheel spokes.

[ 3] 3,194,008 Positive Buoyancy Prime Mover
This is an attempt at perpetual motion. It is based on the age old concept of a float falling through an air chamber and then it enters into water to float back up. Simple knowledge of how such things work shows it cannot work.

[ 4] 3,412,482 Buoyancy Demonstration Apparatus
An apparatus for demonstrating the effect of weight and buoyancy. No claim of perpetual motion. It seems this is a demonstration to show that such schemes don't work.

[ 5] 3,625,089 Gravity Wheel Apparatus
A typical OOB type wheel where a ramp moves the weights out of balance. Such ideas don't work.

[ 6] 3,625,089 Fuel less water pressure machine
A typical OOB type wheel where a ramp moves the weights out of balance. Such ideas don't work.

[ 7] 3,934,964 Gravity-actuated fluid displacement power generator
This one has three claims. Claim one is an underwater chain design, with no claim of energy gain. Claim two gains energy by the dumping of waste which falls on the under water chain causing rotation. Claim three is a dependent claim to claim two, so it also has waste dumping on it to produce rotation. So this is not a perpetual motion scheme.

[ 8] 4,151,431 Permanent magnet motor
Howard Johnson Magnet Motor, which he was never able to make fully work.

[ 9] 4,311,918 Wind powered generator with gravity assisted mechanical advantage booseter
This seems to use wind to move weights out-of-balances whereby the wheel supporting the props then rotates. Thus it is not perpetual motion. And probably less efficient than a simple prop and generator arrangement.

[10] 4,385,497 Propulsion system for water wheel
A complex water wheel arraignment where the paddle boxes move inward and outward as the wheel turns. No perpetual motion claims.

This is as far as I got. I need to look at the following patents to see if they claim perpetual motion or not...

[11] 4,667,115 Energy machine generating hydraulic energy

[12] 4,698,516 Hydro-electric power plant

[13] 5,372,474 Gravity-assisted rotation device

[14] 5,944,480 Buoyancy and gravitation motor

[15] 6,644,937 Water powered pumping system with fluid link

[16] 6,666,024 Method and apparatus for generating energy using pressure from a large mass

[17] 6,731,035 Apparatus for generating autogenic energy

[18] 6,764,275 Fluid displacement rotational assembly

[19] 6,772,592 Float dependent wave energy device

[20] 6,817,180 Gravity as a source of renewable energy

[21] 6,820,420 Solar-based power generating system

[22] 7,003,947 Gyro wave activated power generator and a wave suppressor using the power generator

[23] 7,965,007 Three dimensional motor generator system

[24] 8,042,334 Vertical fluid container with endless chain

[raj]

I have only two reasons why I have made patent applications for my gravity wheel concepts.

I have given the reasons several times on this forum, since joining it 2/3 years ago.

(1) I want to put my concepts on OFFICIAL records.
(2) Make it public domain so that, if ever it works, nobody can patent it and anybody, anywhere can make and use it.

That is why, on my thread 'Mayday, Mayday', I am giving complete details of my gravity wheel designs, as I conceive them.

Raj

[Dwylbtzle]

wow!
that's exactly what I decided to do!
i even called patent attorneys to find out how
and then called the patent office, itself, to confirm it

so i came here again to get some feedback
and several helpful people here have enlightened me that i better think
carefully about how it might not be so simple
or advisable
to just BLAB it

i first found this place 2 years ago
and i've been looking at everyone here
and when i came back a little while back i posted those exact same words that you just did
"so anyone can make it--but no-one can own it"
yer beautiful mon!
YA!
i believe you are sincere
and i believe you've seen SOMETHING
probably aman and maybe ken and popscan too
and a bunch of others
no i don't think i'm smarter than everyone else
or anyone else
i'm convinced beesler and plenty of people have seen it
yer on the list
if anything happens to me
you and a bunch of other people on here

all those who have automatically been called liars by everyone who calls me a liar
and thousands of people an hour will be notified
automatically
there is no force on earth that can stop that from happening

it's gonna come out very soon, anyway, no matter what
it's TOO frikkin simple
the jig is up, bitches

the selfish ones who sell their souls for mammon and don't care if they choke the very earth
i believe the scripture says "those who destroy the earth"
and the naysayers
don't know Who they're dealing with

here's a hint
oh it's not li'l Dwylbtzle
guess again
someone else
He's the one who's given us everything else

and "confirms the word of His servant"
and "gives His servants the power to stop the mouths of the naysayers"

and ye should stand in fear and trembling as even the devils do

"Doest thou believe in God? Thou doest well. Even the devils believe, and stand in fear and trembling."
-James 2:19, who was the biological brother of Jesus--well they had the same MOTHER

Amen

hey
who has more fun than us, eh?

****************

this edit added tuesday 7-10-12, i'm gonna say about 12 o clock north pole time--but i'm not gonna say AM or PM so's you illuminatai guys monitoring this place can't find my igloo:
********
the above post not being meant to indicate that i am Almighty God's prettiest champion...the truest heart in christendom or anything
nor that God NEEEEDS any one to deign do him any favors
just that we all should stand in fear and trembling because he's PROBABLY(i don't know fer sure, mind you) but probably sitting back watching us to see what WE are gonna do with all this steaming pile of cat puke we've arranged for ourSELVES--and he MIGHT let us fail if we cling to our jerkitude
and MAY just be laughing his butt off at us
in fact...here's an actual quote: "I laugh at your calamity" (but that was directed at a specific set of jerks)
i wanted to make that clear in case someone (who knows anything) might have read this and be laughing HIS butt off at ME
i will say He seems to be giving me ideas that i never woulda thought, of myself

[Dwylbtzle]

Analysis of some of of 24 Perpetual Motion Patents of the USPTO.

From the USPTO patent search website:

[ 1] 682,378 Automatic Water Elevator
This one works. It is not perpetual motion. It is powered by a flowing water source. States that is works more efficient than a hydraulic ram pump.

[ 2] 1,708,807 Water and Air power Device
This one works. It is a "novelty device" designed catch attention because it looks like perpetual motion. It is powered by small air jets on the wheel spokes.

[ 3] 3,194,008 Positive Buoyancy Prime Mover
This is an attempt at perpetual motion. It is based on the age old concept of a float falling through an air chamber and then it enters into water to float back up. Simple knowledge of how such things work shows it cannot work.

[ 4] 3,412,482 Buoyancy Demonstration Apparatus
An apparatus for demonstrating the effect of weight and buoyancy. No claim of perpetual motion. It seems this is a demonstration to show that such schemes don't work.

[ 5] 3,625,089 Gravity Wheel Apparatus
A typical OOB type wheel where a ramp moves the weights out of balance. Such ideas don't work.

[ 6] 3,625,089 Fuel less water pressure machine
A typical OOB type wheel where a ramp moves the weights out of balance. Such ideas don't work.

[ 7] 3,934,964 Gravity-actuated fluid displacement power generator
This one has three claims. Claim one is an underwater chain design, with no claim of energy gain. Claim two gains energy by the dumping of waste which falls on the under water chain causing rotation. Claim three is a dependent claim to claim two, so it also has waste dumping on it to produce rotation. So this is not a perpetual motion scheme.

[ 8] 4,151,431 Permanent magnet motor
Howard Johnson Magnet Motor, which he was never able to make fully work.

[ 9] 4,311,918 Wind powered generator with gravity assisted mechanical advantage booseter
This seems to use wind to move weights out-of-balances whereby the wheel supporting the props then rotates. Thus it is not perpetual motion. And probably less efficient than a simple prop and generator arrangement.

[10] 4,385,497 Propulsion system for water wheel
A complex water wheel arraignment where the paddle boxes move inward and outward as the wheel turns. No perpetual motion claims.

This is as far as I got. I need to look at the following patents to see if they claim perpetual motion or not...

[11] 4,667,115 Energy machine generating hydraulic energy

[12] 4,698,516 Hydro-electric power plant

[13] 5,372,474 Gravity-assisted rotation device

[14] 5,944,480 Buoyancy and gravitation motor

[15] 6,644,937 Water powered pumping system with fluid link

[16] 6,666,024 Method and apparatus for generating energy using pressure from a large mass

[17] 6,731,035 Apparatus for generating autogenic energy

[18] 6,764,275 Fluid displacement rotational assembly

[19] 6,772,592 Float dependent wave energy device

[20] 6,817,180 Gravity as a source of renewable energy

[21] 6,820,420 Solar-based power generating system

[22] 7,003,947 Gyro wave activated power generator and a wave suppressor using the power generator

[23] 7,965,007 Three dimensional motor generator system

[24] 8,042,334 Vertical fluid container with endless chain

COOL!
thanks for posting that!
i will admit to being a bit bemused at looking at some of that list, just
now, and remembering spinning some of those ideas in my head, myself,
when i first thought of the BFD thing that doesn't use a wheel

but every one of those, (that i did), i came to the same conclusion:
NAW!--none of that there would work
and neither of my machines are on that list!
and, from what i've read about bessler's wheel
i can't see it using any of those things
well, duh--since his seems to have worked
and those sure wouldn't

by looking at all those--i SEE how each person's mind was reaching
but they either got too complicated
or JUST BARELY missed it
and veered off into sillyness

for instance:
the ramp to keep the weights toward the middle on one side
would require the weights to rise at a sharper angle
on the inside side
as the weights on the outside side were trying to force that side down
and the other side up
and that would take more force than the outside side was originally thinking it could provide
even when it was only gonna balance itself, in the first damn place
(and just balancing (even) don't cut it baby)
so the wheel would find it's equilibrium
FAST

i know i, personally, have demonstrated, (historically), that i'm pretty damn dumb sometimes
most of the time--ask anyone
and even i just instantly SEE stuff like that
i don't even have to think about it
probably MOST people do (just see it and don't even have to think about it)
that's not genius
just common sense
if it wasn't gonna do anything but balance with the more gradual angle
it ain't gonna do MORE than just balance with a steeper angle
DUH!

a coupla those things comes KINDA close, though
but ne cigar
hehehe

and the stuff with the waste falling down to push the wheel?
great
you have a gravel stream
nice
sheesh
:{/
now THAT (right there!) shows you that someone at the patent office is
REALLY TRYING to go OUT OF THEIR WAY to be a horse's ass
just merely for not writing that inventor a letter saying: "Hey! Why don't you bite me, chump?"
i don't know who i feel like slapping in the face more
probably the guy at the patent office i guess
even if it woulda been against the rules
and he was told he was supposed to issue patents for something as smelly as that
he shoulda just done it anyway and got fired
i wonder if they let that guy pee standing up

so that all fits with my theory, (so far):
MAYBE they issue patents for the bogus stuff
but not for what works
then everyone sees all this bogus stuff and says: "look at all that silly
crap!--See! they aren't repressing anything--and nothing ever works!"

[Jim Williams]

If today's US Patent Office examiners had been faced with the MT drawings as applications, they all would have been rejected for not working; if for no other reason, lack of working models. Yet the patents don't seem to cover ranges of perpetual motion ideas that are expressed by the MT drawings.

The point I'm trying to make is US Patents still focus on being useful, before appearing to work. I would suggest all of the patents listed in 415/916 - perpetual motion, remain useful in some aspect of the inventions and that's why they all have primary classifications that are not perpetual motion, with a secondary classification that is.

What strikes me the most isn't the time. effort and money that all of these patented inventions must have cost, for none of them to be the solution; but that there wasn't some government official saying you can't even try to solve it, it's impossible, it's perpetual motion. In the US Patent System, even of today; Bessler could have had his day.

[Dwylbtzle]

oh yes
i agree
absolutely

i fact:
i'm glad i might now be able to order one of those gravel stream
generators for my man cave

('caused it's a REAL actual cave, of course, and i have a handy supply of gravel by my couch here)

*********************

please read tiny brown edit at bottom of coupler posts back

[Dwylbtzle]

also
if the choice becomes to blab
i wouldn't neccessarily use the general internet web cloud to just
indescriminately blurble it, like some brainless, broadcast-breeding clam,
(or american teenager), trying to get lucky

i would use some version of my back-up 'martyred dead murdered Dwylbtzle' atom bomb deterrent plan:
send it to a specific list of people who will be instructed to band together and get it produced first

because
just in case the illuminatai haven't yet got that idea--or one as good
i sure wouldn't want it to turn out that they (or the goddam Republicans) ended up getting it from ME first
i'd feel terrible
even though i WAS dead
and there're, apparently, from what i'm beginning to glean
only a few tens of thousands of people on earth who aren't in the illuminatai

i mean the bastards seem to be everywhere
right?
hehehe

(see what i'm doing?....now they know they can't kill me, so they're gonna
have to try and buy me off--and, of course, i'm gonna hold out for as
much cash as i can get--and then i'm gonna burn they asses, and blab
anyway, naturally--..........................don't tell 'em)