In an ideal world, yes. However, my experience (35 years ago) was that even many of the researchers did not have a firm grasp on the physics. Things may have changed (I suspect not!) but back then there was a fairly definite distinction in high energy physics between theorists and experimenters - a much bigger gap than in other branches of physics. Most theorists would have been a waste of space at CERN, but most experimenters could not properly explain the theory except in general terms. I suspect that the average EE knows even less about the Standard Model and the Higgs Effect than the average experimenter. There will always be exceptions, of course, but I have never personally met one.jneutron said:
A few years ago I knew a professor of mathematics. By some strange means she had obtained a grant to do some research which involved experiments. The snag was that she was so ignorant about dealing with real stuff and real instruments that she had no idea how ignorant she was! The project didn't make a lot of progress (at least during the brief time while I was involved).
Having spent much of my career in R&D, I would like to believe this, but the fact is, moat of the low-hanging fruit in science has been picked and further knowledge will become more difficult and expensive to acquire. Look at the levels of funding that are available for science. NASA no longer has manned space programs. The debt in the US is reaching catastrophic amounts, as it is pretty much everywhere except India and China, so not much will be available for science unless someone makes a breakthrough that spawns some related research that can be shown to have immediate application and benefit.
I found some strange references while searching "neutrino" on the EAST patent database.
US 4205268 Neutrino communication arrangement
US 20040059552 Process for modeling photons, electrons, protons, neutrons, atoms and the universe
US 20040082074 Axial atomic model for determination of elemental particle field structure and energy levels
US 20040102939 Simplist yet process for describing the universe
US 20040119375 Cosmic flux driven electrostatic turbine
US 20050118559 Posteinstein-bohr definitive end and development of new physics with consequences as superaccelerators and direct electricity transformation into light
US 4205268 Neutrino communication arrangement
US 20040059552 Process for modeling photons, electrons, protons, neutrons, atoms and the universe
US 20040082074 Axial atomic model for determination of elemental particle field structure and energy levels
US 20040102939 Simplist yet process for describing the universe
US 20040119375 Cosmic flux driven electrostatic turbine
US 20050118559 Posteinstein-bohr definitive end and development of new physics with consequences as superaccelerators and direct electricity transformation into light
The point of patenting this? I love this stuff.
EDIT - A MUST read. Hand drawings and mis-spellings.
EDIT II - Looks like it's some kind of joke, John R Ross is a patent attorney in CA. For a second I thought it was "haj" Ross who had his tenure revoked at MIT for passing joints in class.
Last edited:
The point of the patent is that he is attempting to provide a simple and complete theory. He makes specific claims at the end of his explanation as to a method of modeling certain well accepted particles.
He admits he is open to revising his patent as he has already done so to conform with specific criticisms.
So he is a patent attorney with time and money to pursue a hobby.
Now if only he had applied more of Occam's razor and realized that there are not lots of tronnies but only one and polarity is a direction along with time being discrete and finite, but the tronnie infinite, he would have it all.
Just think, FTL drives, Time travel, etc.
C'mon Ed the sloppy hand drawings, mis-spellings, and a patent only God could infringe.
It would be unethical to test it on humans. Perhaps he used another attorney.
They laughed at Einstein, Tesla, Velikovsky etc. O.K. Velikovsky ! 
I think out of the box hobbies are the reason, humorous patents yes, I met the fellow who's father was a patent attorney who got him a patent on being born! But continuous improvements in the patent lead me to think it is a hobby!
I think out of the box hobbies are the reason, humorous patents yes, I met the fellow who's father was a patent attorney who got him a patent on being born! But continuous improvements in the patent lead me to think it is a hobby!
Same author, even funnier.
http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Communications-Unification Theories/Download/625
http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Communications-Unification Theories/Download/625
Here this patent should put a stopper in this line of the thread.
US Patent # 6,695,997. Multilayer synthetic stopper - Patents.com
To all who may still be interested:
I have recently read two books that address the constancy of the speed of light with credible insight. Both are written for the layman by serious and well respected physicists. Joao Magueijo deals specifically with the speed of light in the context of cosmology and as an alternative to Alan Guth's inflationary universe theory. John Barrow surveys many physical "constants" including the speed of light "c", and the fine structure constant “alpha”. He looks at what it would mean if certain ones, including c and alpha, were not actually constant. His presentation of the historical perspective, including some pretty wierd ideas by very fameous scientists, is especially interesting.
Faster Than the Speed of Light, by Joao Magueijo, Perseus Publishing, 2003. Amazon.com: Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation (9780738205250): Joao Magueijo: Books
The Constants of Nature, by John Barrow, Pantheon, Amazon.com: the constants of nature: Books
Regards to all,
Neel
I have recently read two books that address the constancy of the speed of light with credible insight. Both are written for the layman by serious and well respected physicists. Joao Magueijo deals specifically with the speed of light in the context of cosmology and as an alternative to Alan Guth's inflationary universe theory. John Barrow surveys many physical "constants" including the speed of light "c", and the fine structure constant “alpha”. He looks at what it would mean if certain ones, including c and alpha, were not actually constant. His presentation of the historical perspective, including some pretty wierd ideas by very fameous scientists, is especially interesting.
Faster Than the Speed of Light, by Joao Magueijo, Perseus Publishing, 2003. Amazon.com: Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation (9780738205250): Joao Magueijo: Books
The Constants of Nature, by John Barrow, Pantheon, Amazon.com: the constants of nature: Books
Regards to all,
Neel
- Status
- Not open for further replies.