Post by chuffmonkey on Dec 26, 2013 0:41:35 GMT -5
On the topic of Perpetual Motion, the way i understand it is as follows;
Should someone go one better than Stan Meyers and create a system that generates "free energy" they will never ever be able to cash in on such a device under the current standing, as the Patent Office (certainly here in the U.K), will only grant a Patent to something that complies with the four laws of Thermo Dynamics... Which is something that at face value, a Perpetual Motion Device can never do.
Here's the sketch....
Should you create such a device, it would have to be presented to a gang of Sheldon Coopers (Physicists), in order for them to break it down, understand it, and then either create a 5th law of Thermo Dynamics (which would be called the 4th law!), or alternatively, they would need to make an amendment or appendix to one of the existing 4 laws to include the workings of your device.
Thing is though.....
According to the Patent Office (here in the U.K any way), aside from yourself, the only other person you can tell about your device is your Patent Lawyer.
Should any other person become knowledgeable as to the inner workings of your device, their inclusion would be deemed as being in the public domain... and for any such patent claim to be deemed as in the public domain... any such claim to or for a Patent would become void.
Kinda like the mother of all Catch 22's don't you think.
I mean let's face it... The ONLY thing that the existing four laws of Thermo Dynamics stand for is the denial of perpetual motion, which means for the Patent Office to include this clause in their workings is nothing but a deliberate brick wall to deny the creator of a Perpetual Motion Device / PMD his or her place as the richest person in the known universe... as let us face it again, if a person invents free energy, the richest person in the known universe is what they would become.
Should a person invent a new way of opening a can of beans, they can get a Patent without any issue, and thus, retire a Millionaire.
Should a person invent a new container for transporting a glass of milk that negates the need for glass bottles, they too can get a Patent without any issue, and thus retire a Billionaire.
Should a person invent something that resolves the worlds energy problems... why is it that they're only likely to retire with a government bullet in their head with a government p :onis up their butt?
The laws of Thermo Dynamics have nothing to do with opening a can of beans, nor do they have anything to do with carrying a pint of milk, so why do they govern free energy?
Surely, the only criteria for gaining a Patent should be an answer of YES, to the question: Does this thing work?
If something works, it should be granted a Patent... if it defies the laws of Thermo Dynamics, then Physicists should examine it after it goes on general sale to the public and they've had a chance to buy it.
Do the four laws of Thermo Dynamics deliberately discriminate against creators / inventors of working Perpetual Motion Devices? Only it seems that way to me, and if that is the case, can it be challenged in a court of law?
Should someone go one better than Stan Meyers and create a system that generates "free energy" they will never ever be able to cash in on such a device under the current standing, as the Patent Office (certainly here in the U.K), will only grant a Patent to something that complies with the four laws of Thermo Dynamics... Which is something that at face value, a Perpetual Motion Device can never do.
Here's the sketch....
Should you create such a device, it would have to be presented to a gang of Sheldon Coopers (Physicists), in order for them to break it down, understand it, and then either create a 5th law of Thermo Dynamics (which would be called the 4th law!), or alternatively, they would need to make an amendment or appendix to one of the existing 4 laws to include the workings of your device.
Thing is though.....
According to the Patent Office (here in the U.K any way), aside from yourself, the only other person you can tell about your device is your Patent Lawyer.
Should any other person become knowledgeable as to the inner workings of your device, their inclusion would be deemed as being in the public domain... and for any such patent claim to be deemed as in the public domain... any such claim to or for a Patent would become void.
Kinda like the mother of all Catch 22's don't you think.
I mean let's face it... The ONLY thing that the existing four laws of Thermo Dynamics stand for is the denial of perpetual motion, which means for the Patent Office to include this clause in their workings is nothing but a deliberate brick wall to deny the creator of a Perpetual Motion Device / PMD his or her place as the richest person in the known universe... as let us face it again, if a person invents free energy, the richest person in the known universe is what they would become.
Should a person invent a new way of opening a can of beans, they can get a Patent without any issue, and thus, retire a Millionaire.
Should a person invent a new container for transporting a glass of milk that negates the need for glass bottles, they too can get a Patent without any issue, and thus retire a Billionaire.
Should a person invent something that resolves the worlds energy problems... why is it that they're only likely to retire with a government bullet in their head with a government p :onis up their butt?
The laws of Thermo Dynamics have nothing to do with opening a can of beans, nor do they have anything to do with carrying a pint of milk, so why do they govern free energy?
Surely, the only criteria for gaining a Patent should be an answer of YES, to the question: Does this thing work?
If something works, it should be granted a Patent... if it defies the laws of Thermo Dynamics, then Physicists should examine it after it goes on general sale to the public and they've had a chance to buy it.
Do the four laws of Thermo Dynamics deliberately discriminate against creators / inventors of working Perpetual Motion Devices? Only it seems that way to me, and if that is the case, can it be challenged in a court of law?