Room-temperature superconductivity?

[johanfprins]

I would still like to better understand your motivations for wanting to talk to businesses. What do you say to them, to explain your motivations for wanting to talk with them? Are you in it mainly for the recognition, for the money, or to benefit mankind? Where's the beef?

I really do not understand with what you have a problem. Ten years ago I found incotrovertible evidence that electrons extracted from a diamond by an anode forms a superconducting phase allowing charge transfer from the diamond to the anode and vice versa. I patented that but it isi not a very useful patent. Nevertheless, I have been ignored and ridiculed by the science community. I have found that this is because the amianstream physicist do not understand elementary physis laws like Ohm's law, Ampere's law, Coulomb's law etc.; and that the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is wrong. Since these findings are important for the future of physics I have been trying to publish thenm; but have been blocked by the mainstream physicists to do so.

Since then I have been able to generate wafers which superconduct at room temperature. This means that it is possible to manufacture electronic chips which do not generate heat. So, in addition, I have tried to find well capitalised and establsihed companies to take this invention further.

So what do you men by "what's my beef"? I have no agendas or "beefs". So what is your beef?

[chrismb]

I've no problem with this at all. I am just interested to see if I can learn what approaches work with businesses, and what doesn't.

I didn't come into this thread asking any questions on the physics. I claim no insight nor knowledge of it. I was just interested to know how one can take a scientific discovery which should be very useful but needs developing/demonstrating, and makes progress with it.

You have struggled. So there are lessons to be learned to avoid that. I'm interested only in the implementation, not in the tech.

So I've asked a specific question on what you say to businesses to get them interested. The 'beef', as in the 'meat', the 'filling' [in the sandwich], the 'main meal' of what you are offering them.

Let's say you are in a lift with the CEO of a materials company and he says to you "Hi! D'you work in materials' science?...".. Go from there. Get this guy interested. What is your message? Are you gonna say "groan groan no-one listens to me", or do you say "I've a great business idea" or "I want to sell some IPR", or "I'd like to tell you all about this idea so that someone can take advantage of it" or what? What's the angle?

[johanfprins]

I've no problem with this at all. I am just interested to see if I can learn what approaches work with businesses, and what doesn't.

You are asking insight into strategic questions which are handled by a standing committee of shareholders in my company who signed NDA's. Obviously I will not discuss these on an open forum.

[chrismb]

I've no problem with this at all. I am just interested to see if I can learn what approaches work with businesses, and what doesn't.

You are asking insight into strategic questions which are handled by a standing committee of shareholders in my company who signed NDA's. Obviously I will not discuss these on an open forum.

Well, that sentence you quoted above wasn't a question. I was just telling you I don't have a "problem". Mine is an interest in how you are getting on, not that I have an issue with it.

My question was "What is your message?" to a CEO of a materials company you met in the lift. It's as simple a question as this all boils down to. You don't have an NDA with this person, so what are you gonna say to grab this opportunity?

[johanfprins]

My question was "What is your message?" to a CEO of a materials company you met in the lift. It's as simple a question as this all boils down to. You don't have an NDA with this person, so what are you gonna say to grab this opportunity?

My answer is clearly that I am not willing to discuss strategy with you. It will be stupid to accost any CEO in a lift. So please stop accosting me with irrelevant questions which are just wasting my time.

[chrismb]

OK, I'll stop 'accosting' you with questions and express my own opinion: There is nothing in any of your responses that indicates to me that you have the inter-personal skills and commercial 'hunger' to progress what you seek in the business environment. You need to employ a development manager with the skills to accost businesses nicely, in the way that they are willing to be accosted, and then leave them well-alone to get on with that job, and stay at home when they are out visiting companies.

[GIThruster]

Chris, Johan,

IMHO, the best way forward with this project is to see validation studies done, ASAP.

I'm not altogether sure what Johan has done to date. He's made reference several times concerning how he's sent out test articles to others and got no word back. Can we focus for a bit on this issue?

IIRC, Johan has shared, that he's sent test items out not once, but at least twice in the past. Once to someone in Germany, and once to someone in the States. Apart from these was something about someone at an electrical utility in South Africa, who looked at Johan's wares.

Can we just look at the state of affairs with regards validation studies to date? Who has had Johan's treated, supposedly superconducting substrates in their hands for testing? Did they sign NDA's? Why did they not send reports back on their testing? What sort of reasons do we have to suppose Johan's substrates superconduct?

These are all important issues as regards validation. So in general, let me ask, "what is the state of affairs as regards validation of Johan's claims?"

We need details here, and these are not subject to confidentiality. They're details as approach the issue of past attempts at validation.

So what's the complete story here? If it's a good story, I might make some inroads for Johan in getting further validation studies done--so this is no idle request for the story behind the story.

[johanfprins]

Johan has shared, that he's sent test items out not once, but at least twice in the past. Once to someone in Germany, and once to someone in the States. Apart from these was something about someone at an electrical utility in South Africa, who looked at Johan's wares.

Not USA but England. The substrates were already in the public domain and were sent out to confirm that one can extrsct electrons from them at high vacuum with an anode, which then form a phase that superconduct between the diamond and the anode.

Why did they not send reports back on their testing? What sort of reasons do we have to suppose Johan's substrates superconduct?

I woiuld like to know this myself!

These are all important issues as regards validation. So in general, let me ask, "what is the state of affairs as regards validation of Johan's claims?"We need details here, and these are not subject to confidentiality. They're details as approach the issue of past attempts at validation.

I have given details here time and again and will NOT allow my present wafer substrates (which are NOT in the public domain) to be tested by anybody else but a financially strong electronics company with the correct infrastructure.

So what's the complete story here? If it's a good story, I might make some inroads for Johan in getting further validation studies done--so this is no idle request for the story behind the story.

How much capital have you got and what is your access to infrastructure. I am now talking a situation equivalent to IBM, SAMSUNG, INTEL etc. agreeing to do the validations.

[johanfprins]

Johan has shared, that he's sent test items out not once, but at least twice in the past. Once to someone in Germany, and once to someone in the States. Apart from these was something about someone at an electrical utility in South Africa, who looked at Johan's wares.

Not USA but England. These substrates were* sent out to confirm that one can extrsct electrons from them at high vacuum with an anode, which then form a phase that superconduct between the diamond and the anode.

Why did they not send reports back on their testing? What sort of reasons do we have to suppose Johan's substrates superconduct?

I woiuld like to know this myself!

These are all important issues as regards validation. So in general, let me ask, "what is the state of affairs as regards validation of Johan's claims?"We need details here, and these are not subject to confidentiality. They're details as approach the issue of past attempts at validation.

I have given details here time and again and will NOT allow my present wafer substrates (which are NOT in the public domain) to be tested by anybody else but a financially strong electronics company with the correct infrastructure.

So what's the complete story here? If it's a good story, I might make some inroads for Johan in getting further validation studies done--so this is no idle request for the story behind the story.

How much capital have you got and what is your access to infrastructure. I am now talking a situation equivalent to IBM, SAMSUNG, INTEL etc. agreeing to do the validations.
*In my first posting I said that these initial substrates were in the "public domain". They were not then and still are not freely available without a mutually acceptable agreement.

[DeltaV]

Johan, have you ever heard of this guy, Martin Rivas?
http://tp.lc.ehu.es/pages/spin.html
I haven't had time to study his approach in detail (not that I have enough of a particle physics background to avoid being fooled, if I did have time).
The core of his ideas seems to be that, for elementary particles such as electrons, the Center of Mass and Center of Charge are not coincident (CC orbits CM at speed c).

[johanfprins]

Johan, have you ever heard of this guy, Martin Rivas?
http://tp.lc.ehu.es/pages/spin.html
I haven't had time to study his approach in detail (not that I have enough of a particle physics background to avoid being fooled, if I did have time).
The core of his ideas seems to be that, for elementary particles such as electrons, the Center of Mass and Center of Charge are not coincident (CC orbits CM at speed c).

Interesting but still based on the wrong idea that "spin" and the magnetic moment of an electron around the nucleus are caused by the rotational motion of charge. There is no such motion that causes the "spin" magnetic moment nor the orbital magnetic moment; since the latter has no momentum whatsoever.

Let us concentrate on "spin" here: The magnetic moment of an electron is present because the mass of the electron is stationary light energy, and light energy is a combination of electric- and magnetic energy. The electric energy is equal to the mass of the electron (therefore a solitary electron cannot have a electric field-energy around it, and the magnetic component forms the magnetic moment of the electron.

On another thread I pointed out last night that the electron wave is the solution of a differential wave equation using a force constant K to obtain a ground state solution (1/2) (hbar)(omega). If you solve the same equation in the presence of a magnetic field, you find that the energy of the wave now also becomes a function of the angle between the electron's magnetic moment and the direction of the applied magnetic field. The energy is maximum when this angle is 90 degrees and the same as for the electron without the magnetic field when the angle is either zero or 180 degrees. Thus there is a cause why the "spin" goes either parallel or anti-parallel. Nonethless this magnetic moment has nothing to do with a charge rotating.

[GIThruster]

Why did they not send reports back on their testing? What sort of reasons do we have to suppose Johan's substrates superconduct?

I would like to know this myself!

What sort of agreement did you have? Did someone sign an NDA? Have you called them since? Are you saying you sent out substrates for testing twice, and both times the people who got them simply stopped taking your calls, or answering your mail and have never sent your substrates back?

Sorry to press the issue so directly, but this just sounds incredible to happen even once. You're saying this happened twice?

Please fill in all the blanks here. What happened?

[johanfprins]

[quote="GIThruster]

What sort of agreement did you have?

That they will test the substrates in confidence without any disclosure and send me the results

Have you called them since? Are you saying you sent out substrates for testing twice, and both times the people who got them simply stopped taking your calls, or answering your mail and have never sent your substrates back?

Yes. When I send e-mails they do not even open them.

[mdeminico]

Johan, I just sent you an eMail, not sure if they work right through the forum, but keep an eye out for it.

[GIThruster]

Johan, if you post the details of who you sent the substrates to, their phone numbers, email addresses, the dates you did this, etc., then those here in the forum might be moved to call, write etc. and ask these people what is the scoop.

Is there some reason for you to not be this forthcoming?