FacebookTwitterDiggStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditTechnoratiLinkedin

Welcome

The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project is a group dedicated to researching Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (often referred to as LENR) while sharing all procedures, data, and results openly online. We rely on comments from online contributors to aid us in developing our experiments and contemplating the results. We invite everyone to participate in our discussions, which take place in the comments of our experiment posts. These links can be seen along the right-hand side of this page. Please browse around and give us your feedback. We look forward to seeing you around Quantum Heat.

Join us and become part of the project. Become one of the active commenters, who question our work and suggest next steps.

Or, if you are an experimenter, talk to us about becoming an affiliated lab and doing your work in a Live Open Science manner.

Username:
Password:
Remember me

Welcome to the New Fire Discussions

Tell us and our members who you are, what you like and why you became a member of this site.
We welcome all new members and hope to see you around a lot!

TOPIC: Question about openness

#509 7 years 3 months ago
Question about openness

APreston's Avatar
OFFLINE
Karma: 0
Hello everyone,

The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project has a very good model in terms of openness and live data sharing when it comes to replication experiments. When it comes to the powder experiments though, and experimental deviations from set-ups that you're trying to replicate (e.g. deviations from the H2 + Celani wire experiment), I wonder what action you would take in the case of some very large excess heat.

Would there be some sort of race to patent a device in the event of a breakthrough? I am not an expert on patents so I don't know how "open source" any unexpected large technology advancements can be.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

#510 7 years 3 months ago
Question about openness

Kapytanhook's Avatar
OFFLINE
Karma: 4
Seems pretty simple to me, if this become number 1 energy source in the world it will just be up for grabs, there is no patent on burning coal. No one is going to stop this ball once it gets rolling.
If they succeed in doing that they could survive the rest of their lives melting down nobel prizes in nuggets and selling them.

What I am trying to say is the best way to earn money with this is just by saying look guys we did it, here you go!

Personally I am in it for the fun, science and possible great significance. I think that goes for pretty much everyone here.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

#511 7 years 3 months ago
Question about openness

APreston's Avatar
OFFLINE
Karma: 0
My thought is that if the technology for getting a high reaction rate is complicated and requires certain innovations, then the process can be patented.

Miley, Piantelli, Rossi, NASA, and Larsen have filed patents, and probably many others.

www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/european-pate...tellis-lenr-process/

I am reading through part of the Piantelli patent, there are many parts where he is very vague. He lists TEN different ways, with hardly any quantitative details, about how to trigger LENR.

I guess it is a broadly accepted idea that patent trolls are a problem. Perhaps they will slow down innovation in LENR technology and they probably already are.

edit/update: So, if MFMP finds large excess heat, I suppose we shouldn't be worried that it will be snapped up by a patent troll. Rather, it will only encourage better funding for MFMP, and funding in academia and industry. Perhaps, patents may not be able to be applied to the basic breakthrough method(s), but instead will be applied to highly engineered reactor systems and the like.

I'm thinking about submitting a mini-project proposal to MFMP.
Last Edit: 7 years 3 months ago by APreston.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

#515 7 years 2 months ago
Question about openness

bob's Avatar
OFFLINE
bob
Karma: 14
Hi guys,

First off, we would like to create some incontrovertible excess of any level!

Second, go ahead and put forward your mini-project idea!

What we have done to date is refine our experiment designs and protocols so that we are getting very trusted results even if they are very boring. Credibility is everything in what we are trying to do. What we have not done is tried (with Celani) any of the claimed triggering and stimulation methods. We need to make allowances for these in our apparatus designs and then massively upscale the number of people working on the project so that all of these various methods can have their parameters swept.

The approach is like this.
  1. Reward pledges on Kickstarter with variants of the Celani cell, Concentric Calorimeter and Steel and Glass Dual Wall cells the last two of which will be able to test wires and nano powders.

  2. Provide rewards of power driving, data acquisition and publishing systems so that results can be published on MFMP live from participants.

  3. Establish a hit list of triggers and stimulants to work through. Then supported participants will have to:
  • publish their experiment design before active run, including any novel treatments, catalysts, triggers or stimulants intended
  • keep an open log book of their experiments live
  • live publish their data
This way if anything happens, we have a live public record of what made it happen that then other participants can follow. It will not be vague, it will not be patentable as it was public but the originator will get due credit.

Time and time again, real life changing technology has been delayed because the discovery has been hidden from exploitation behind patents, industrial secrets or worse, the inventor has died with the secret. If there is any benefit to mankind that can be realised from this technology, then it is too important to persist with these kinds of impediments. As soon as money starts locking down the technology the impact of it is restricted or muted.

Some might argue commercial protectionism is the best way, however I would cite Android and Arm as the better way. Phone companies have developed life changing phones even though they did not own the core processor or operating system designs. Android is Open Source and Arm is "licence to anyone". Manufacturers build on both the OS and the processors to meet their own specific product needs. And unlike iOS, Android is able to be used in cameras, fridges etc etc because does not require one company to develop all the products that use it.

Following the kickstarter, we hope to see many people contributing to the MFMPs advancement of this technology, the very worst case scenario is that IP would be licensed to anyone so that the non-profit Quantum Heat C.I.C. could sponsor and carry out primary research for the advancement of the core technology. The most likely scenario is that, with the approach above, the IP will be by default in the public domain. In reality, this is how something so fundamental as a new energy source should be.

Bob
Last Edit: 7 years 2 months ago by bob.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Powered by Kunena Forum