But Democrats probably want this sort of Star Trek technology..
Posted on 03/09/2019 6:04:55 AM PST by vannrox
Jim! I don’t think the engines will hold
Ah, mah poor bearins.
But Democrats probably want this sort of Star Trek technology..
What a strange way to talk!
SERCO is involved with “disclosure.” Trump’s Space Force must be made to appear feasible.
If the concepts are patentable then they have been shown to be capable of being made. You can’t get a patent on an abstract idea.
It’s not Trek until transparent aluminun is widespread.
Sure looks like Pais’s DNA traces back to Nikola Testa.
The first two are only published applications and have not been reviewed by the US Patent Office yet. The third is a patent that issued after being rejected for non-enablement (essentially the patent office saying the theory may be interesting but you haven’t taught how to really do it). I only took a quick peek at the file history, but it appears the Navy relied on an affidavit from an expert, which the Examiner initially argued wasn’t sufficient. Ultimately appealed and the Examiner caved, allowing the patent to issue based on the arguments made in an appeal brief by the applicant.
Bottom line - let’s see someone make it.
Finally revealing all that alien tech they got from Roswell...
Now about that Nazi moon base.
They already have it (in the form of the MSM propagandists). Landru was a digital projection that told people what to do and how to behave - remarkably similar.
“If the concepts are patentable then they have been shown to be capable of being made. You can’t get a patent on an abstract idea.”
The single patent that issued was over strong objections over just this problem, which was overcome by an affidavit from an “expert” saying it could be made. Ultimately the USPTO accepted the expert opinion - essentially let the chips fall where they may. Patent can not be enforced if patentee can’t prove infringement - which would require someone else to actually make it. Thus the patent office will often let a patent issue based on an affidavit for whatever rejection it overcomes, and leaves it to the patentee to try to enforce (and opens the door very wide to invalidate the patent by finding a flaw in the affidavit).
The gravitational wave generator sounds almost as bogus. Then again, I'm not a quantum physicist.
The piezo gizmo may be plausible.
“Everything that surrounds us, ourselves included, can be described as macroscopic collections of fluctuations, vibrations, and oscillations in quantum mechanical fields. Matter is confined energy, bound within fields, frozen in a quantum of time. Therefore, under certain conditions (such as the coupling of hyper-frequency axial spin with hyper-frequency vibrations of electrically charged systems) the rules and special effects of quantum field behavior also apply to macroscopic physical entities (macroscopic quantum phenomena).”
Yep...
But my curiosity would be what the “Metallic” coating and “Metallic” lining are exactly in these diagrams? Being put in parenthesis like that makes me think this is privileged information or it would just say “copper”.
Pie r round. Cornbread r square
Maybe these pie-in-the-sky ideas are how those unknown white “tic-tac” craft, off the San Diego coast, and chased by carrier-based FA-18s, work.
WHAT? I was under the impression that in order for something to be patented it had to actually function. I call BS.
It seems to me that these patents attempt to take advantage of this energy. That says to me, any spaceship utilizing such energy, would have to be quite large. And, you can't compress a vacuum. If you compress a vacuum, it gets smaller, and still has nothing in it. It's simply smaller and thus contains less energy.
It's transparent titanium we really need!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.