Talk-Polywell.org

edit (01/09/2012): The International Conference on Renewable Energy Utilization (ICREU 2012) have seen the publication of this paper:
http://www.monotherme.com/pdf/research_ ... t_pump.pdf
This is now a peer reviewed and published "Maxwell's demon" !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

I know your forum since the beginning (Nasaspaceflight). I hope some good news, soon, about Polywell fusion. I am not a scientist but I am knowledgeable (a little) in sciences.

Today, I have decided to join your community because I have discovered the Auroville Centre for Scientific Research, south India, and because they give some explanations about a new heat pump process. They say that they don't want to apply for patents (they want to give their discovery to humanity as a whole). So they don't have any strain. They are free to disclose everything and this is exactly what they are doing. I am currently in India and I met the inventor.

So... I have a few questions :

1- Do you think that a « Th+ » and a « Tc- » can "appear" ?
2- Is this really a new heat pump process or principle ?
3- What do you think about the efficiency of this heat pump ?
4- Please, help me ! Because I can't find where they are wrong (if they are wrong).

Of course, if they are right then this is good news for Polywell (to efficiently convert heat into mechanical energy).

The document :
http://www.monotherme.com/HEAT%20PUMP%2 ... NCIPLE.pdf
This heat pump concept comes from this document:
http://www.monotherme.com/Diathermic%20 ... er%202.pdf

Regards

P.S.: edit for repaired links

The problem in not patenting something is that there is then no incentive for anyone to pick up the project to make it work.

If a thing is 'owned' then a company can see a way of investing in it to a working standard and that they might get a return.

Otherwise, it is state sponsorship with tax payer's money but that requires academic institutions to take an interest.

There is no excuse for NOT filing for a patent for an idea. It is free to file a patent application and you have a year before you have to file an applicaton for a seach and examination. In that year the patent application can then be disseminated to see if anyone might, indeed, want to invest to develop it.

chrismb,

Where is it free to file a patent? In the US there are a number of fees right from the start. It appears for the EU, too, based on that link below.

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/qs/ ... htm#patapp

http://documents.epo.org/projects/babyl ... _04_10.pdf

Well, it was my understanding that the various international treaties meant that a person was free to file a patent application in their respective country.

Clearly the EPO is different because that is a simultaneous application in multiple countries so there are admin fees.

I guess everyone is on the take to pull in the money these days. It's certainly still free in my own country, UK, at least, so I am free to file patent applications and have them lodged as priority documents without cost. The cost only comes in when you want to progress it through formalities and examination.

http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/patent/p-ap ... p-cost.htm

It's very easy. You write out the patent, fill in an online form and attach your pdf of your patent. I did one just last week, took me about 10 minutes to go through the online forms, and cost me nothing. That establishes a 'priority document' and you can either run with that application in a year's time, or submit a new one by then that improves the application [but does not add 'new matter'] and use the first one as the priority date.

Filing a patent is quite expensive here, actually.
They reimburse you on the first talk with the patent lawyer (which you absolutely have to have).

Where is 'here'?

I filed one in the US, still going through. It was $435 for filing, examination and searches. That's about the same as in UK. The difference is that once granted in the UK, it's granted, but in the US once it is allowed they then charge you a further $700 fee for 'issue' and another $350 for 'publication'.

chrismb wrote:Where is 'here'?

I filed one in the US, still going through. It was $435 for filing, examination and searches. That's about the same as in UK. The difference is that once granted in the UK, it's granted, but in the US once it is allowed they then charge you a further $700 fee for 'issue' and another $350 for 'publication'.

Social Programs are not cheap my friend.

chrismb wrote:It's very easy. You write out the patent, fill in an online form and attach your pdf of your patent. I did one just last week, took me about 10 minutes to go through the online forms, and cost me nothing. That establishes a 'priority document' and you can either run with that application in a year's time, or submit a new one by then that improves the application [but does not add 'new matter'] and use the first one as the priority date.

easy?
You have to learn how to write a patent. You have to do a lot research about anteriority. You have to be SURE that nobody will be able to bypass your patent. You will have to wait two years to have your patent. You have to give money to one or more expert. You have to do the drawings etc... etc... and we don't know why THEY have decided not to apply for a patent.

So... What do you think about THIS new heat pump principle?

http://monotherme.com/translate1_fichie ... late_p.htm

It's a multiple Stirling cycle of some kind, the rest being lost in translation.

My guess is the system uses one Stirling module as a 'supercharger' to significantly increase the temperature differential across the other. As a heat-engine's efficiency is exquisitely sensitive to delta-T, there's a positive outcome.

Well, if it works, it works.

D'uh, I, for one, would not relish trying to shepherd such a notion through the complex patent process, then defend it against endless, expensive challenges. Copyright protection is simpler and cheaper. They *may* be able to make modest money from it by advising folk who want to build it. Also, as the inventors, they'll probably have a fund of knowledge about what variants *won't* work, and why...

Aurobindo wrote:You have to learn how to write a patent.

You just write what you need to write. The legal art/skill is in the writing of the claims, for sure. If you are not confident over that, this is the only part I think an intelligent person really should get advice on.

You have to do a lot research about anteriority.

Well, do it!

You have to be SURE that nobody will be able to bypass your patent.

Impossible! You pays your money and you takes your chance!

You will have to wait two years to have your patent.

I filed my last USPTO one in 2007 (as priority doc) and 2008 as an application. It still hasn't received an examination. No sweat. So what how long it takes if you trust your patent, and if you don't it's not going to make any difference to the outcome!

You have to give money to one or more expert.

Only if you want to.

You have to do the drawings etc... etc...

If drawings need doing then do them!!

And after all that, first filings don't really have to be very good or accurate, so long as the one you file after a year is sound then you can scratch out your idea with a crayon and file that. As long as it shows the essential claims then it's OK as a priority filing.

These are all things that expensive patent lawyers want you to think. ...and why would you think they want you to think this!?!?

So... What do you think about THIS new heat pump principle?

I'm not a heat pump expert. So I guess the 1st lesson in patents is.. stick to what you know!

Not really studied it in depth just yet. I might be inclined to think if it wasn't worth patenting then it's probably not worth reading.

Chris, here is Austria and the prices are about the same here as the ones you mentioned in the US. I cant quite remember anymore. It has been a while since we filed.

... of course if the inventor really is philanthropic, he/she might like to consider copyleft/patentleft instead of usual copyright/patent rout. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyleft, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patentleft, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_licenses ).

the internet simply wouldn't be what is is now without it.

although, it requires no less 'rigor' than copyright/patent (searches for prior art, etc still required, also enforcement, etc), it does make work widely available for further development (especially important if they have no real budget and there's a lot of work still to do). importantly it will offer protection against other people claiming false attribution, and makes it harder for the bigger players to monopolise early development/commercialisation - though that of course may be a double edged sword if much larger investment is truly required).

as to the idea itself, a quick scan leaves me with the impression they are attempting to flout some major law of thermodynamics. but i haven't worked through in any detail, so that might be an unfair hunch.

certainly looks simple enough to build and test though. they should just do that before anything else, surely.

Aurobindo wrote:So... What do you think about THIS new heat pump principle?

An even more quick scan makes me think that it will reach thermal equilibrium from both sides and stop dead.
Too bad I read 50% of the website in french before realizing that there was the "English" tab...D'OH.

Will give a better look at it tomorrow.

Repaired links

Aurobindo wrote: http://www.monotherme.com/HEAT%20PUMP%2 ... NCIPLE.pdf
This heat pump concept comes from this document:
http://www.monotherme.com/Diathermic%20 ... er%202.pdf

KitemanSA wrote:Repaired links

Thank you KitemanSA

chrismb wrote:Well, do it!

The difference between a good and a bad patent is a lot of work (a few months or more).

Nik wrote:As a heat-engine's efficiency is exquisitely sensitive to delta-T, there's a positive outcome.

They say: ''''with Tc = 300k and Th = 600k and helium being the working fluid we could obtain a Tc of around 260k (compartment B full) and a Th+ of around 670k (compartment A full).
Pmax/Pmin ≈ 2.3, taking into account all the dead volumes.''''

1,7 is good.
2 is theoretically the maximum (600/300=2)
2,3 is huge!
This is almost incredible.
We can find some rough calculations here:
www.monotherme.com/Tableau%201bis.xls