a patent on free energy ?

[pam123]

I read this through once and it wasn't till the second reading that it sunk in.
According to Randi the USPTO has just given someone a patent on free energy, read it and weep.

AN OPEN REQUEST

Not to anyone’s surprise, I’m sure, when I wrote to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in Washington, D.C., 39 months ago, I received no response. Here is that letter, re-sent – by certified mail – just this week. Again, I don’t expect any response, because this particular office is known to ignore respectful inquiries. Perhaps my readers might wish to follow this matter. Here’s the current inquiry:

General Information Services Division
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Crystal Plaza 3, Room 2C02
Washington, DC 20231

Monday, August 15, 2005
CERTIFIED MAIL # 7003 0500 0002 3034 8287

Dear Sirs:

This is an enquiry concerning a specific patent issued from the USPTO. Please direct this to the appropriate person(s) who would handle such an inquiry. This inquiry was originally sent to this address in May of 2002, but received no response.

Our website has carried articles about a device known as the “Motionless Magnetic Generator” or “MEG.” On March 26, 2002, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued US Patent #6,362,718 to the MEG. In our Commentary column for May 10, 2002, at www.randi.org/jr/051002.html, we show a photograph of the MEG apparently powering a one-watt neon eco type light bulb. The information about the light bulb can be found in the May 24, 2002 Commentary, at www.randi.org/jr/052402.html.

The inventors of the MEG have stated that their machine “will provide free energy from the vacuum for the lifetime of the device." Should the MEG be functioning without a power source or any form of motion, it would be contradicting all laws of physics which are known at the present time. In order to clarify some of the issues surrounding the MEG, I would like to ask the following questions:

1. Is the USPTO confident that the MEG functions as stated in US Patent #6,362,718, in other words, producing free energy?

2. Was a working prototype of the MEG submitted to the USPTO prior to the issuing of US Patent #6,362,718?

3. If yes, was the prototype MEG subjected to testing by the National Bureau of Standards, or any other person, agency or organization, for the purposes of assessing the validity of the patent application for the MEG, and what were the results of the test(s)?

[mysterio2099]

I wonder if its real...and if it is, the price it costs to buy one will far exceed our current energy bills. lol

[HAL9000]

Nicoli Tesler had developed a method of free electricity to everyone in the world. Problem was, he discovered it could also be used as a weapon.

[mysterio2099]

Anything with energy can be used to make a weapon. Things without energy can be used to make weapons. I mean, a little black power (gun powder) explodes...

Just because it can be used to make a weapon doesn't mean they wont use it. I for one would love to have this in my house during the next hurricane Ivan.

[pam123]

Nicoli Tesler had developed a method of free electricity to everyone in the world. Problem was, he discovered it could also be used as a weapon.


Hal I think you mean Nikola Tesla?
If so I think I heard that one, I also don't believe it.
All his other inventions coud be, and were, used in the creation of weapons or as parts of weapons.

[HAL9000]

I saw a documentry on that just a few months ago... the device could be used to create world wide free energy, but when I say used as a weapon, I mean more destructive to human life than a nuke could be. I don't remember the details on how it worked, but he divided the plans up into 7 pieces and sold them off to major countries... US, Canada, Russia, China being the main 4.... they didn't mention who the other three were. The only way the device could be built was to all 7 pieces of the plans.

[pam123]

If we're talking about the same guy, who was born in 1856 and died in 1943, just what's the date for this sale?


edit: Oh yes, the penny just dropped. You mean teleforce ; combination particle beam and plasma weapon.
Ummnn... no .
You could call it the StarWars weapon of it's day (And we've spent how many billions on that already? ).
Like Einstein's search for the grand theory of everything this was Tesla's holy grail.
He never got there. He kept trying though and every so often the papers of his time would come out with predictions about a "death ray" (If you want to know why Orson Wells' radio broadcast of War of the Worlds was so effective you have to think of it against a general backdrop of stuff like this ).

[mbossman2]

ahhh...the tesla death ray rears its head again...

[fudtone]

"At the time, Robert Peary was making his second attempt to reach the North Pole. Cryptically, Tesla had notified the expedition that he would be trying to contact them somehow. They were to report to him the details of anything unusual they might witness on the open tundra. On the evening of June 30, accompanied by his associate George Scherff atop Wardenclyffe tower, Tesla aimed his death ray across the Atlantic towards the arctic, to a spot which he calculated was west of the Peary expedition.

Tesla switched on the device. At first, it was hard to tell if it was even working. Its extremity emitted a dim light that was barely visible. Then an owl flew from its perch on the tower's pinnacle, soaring into the path of the beam. The bird disintegrated instantly.

That concluded the test. Tesla watched the newspapers and sent telegrams to Peary in hopes of confirming the death ray's effectiveness. Nothing turned up. Tesla was ready to admit failure when news came of a strange event in Siberia.

On June 30, a massive explosion had devastated Tunguska, a remote area in the Siberian wilderness. Five hundred thousand square acres of land had been instantly destroyed. Equivalent to ten to fifteen megatons of TNT, the Tunguska incident is the most powerful explosion to have occurred in human history -- not even subsequent thermonuclear detonations have surpassed it. The explosion was audible from 620 miles away. Scientists believe it was caused by either a meteorite or a fragment of a comet, although no obvious impact site or mineral remnants of such an object were ever found.

Nikola Tesla had a different explanation. It was plain that his death ray had overshot its intended target and destroyed Tunguska. He was thankful beyond measure that the explosion had -- miraculously -- killed no one. Tesla dismantled the death ray at once, deeming it too dangerous to remain in existence. "

This is how I believe it to have happened.

http://www.parascope.com/en/0996/tesla4.htm

[pam123]

So he devastated Tungunska instead of vaporizing the Peary expedition?
There's alot of room for doubt here but there's also a possible solution, it's the sort of thing Myth Busters might like to do.
Use the Freedom on Information Act to get Tesla's notes from the FBI, they carried off every thing not nailed down at his death and Serbia only got some of it back for their Tesla museum, and build the thing.

[HAL9000]

No... not a death ray... i would have to find that again... it was a totally different concept.

[David M]

I would imagine the US Patent Office ignores anything that pertains to free energy, perpetual motion machines, magnets that will get you 100 horsepower and 150 MPG from gasoline and free energy from magnets in a vacuum that get you one watt.

The US patent offiice is correct in ignoring crackpot inventions that claim to break the laws of physics. There is no big government conspiracy or corporate conspiracy when it come to these things. This is the kind of garbage spoken by scientific illiterates heard on Art Bell.

[Jaggannath]

That Tesla death ray stuff sounds like a big steaming pile of you know what to me...

btw, I'm completely unimpressed with Mythbusters. I think their proofs are often unscientific, and they never bother to understand the reasons for the failure or success of their myths. One salient example I have in mind is their toast landing buttered side up example

[David M]

Jagg,
Your correct. One of the principles of science is repeatability. Myth Busters almost never repeats what they claim to have proven or debunked. They draw conclusions after one experiment almost all the time. Sometimes events occur only once every 1000 times for example.

Jamie and his buddie say they used to do things for movies. Never have they stated they have any sceintific credentials. I have never seen them use the scientific method. They have never used a control that I have seen.

It a great show otherwise...you just cant take what they do as real science.

[pam123]

No... not a death ray... i would have to find that again... it was a totally different concept.


The death ray name was coined for it by the newspapers.

[catacon]

MythBusters is a TV show, not scientist trying to save the world. I don't think them not following the scientific method is something to lose sleep over.

The free-energy thing seems highly unlikely. If someone did break the laws of physics, I think there would be a lot more talk. They'd also be arrested :rolleyes: (get it, break the law....yeah....I've had a slow day.)

[foolishone]

Jagg,
I have never seen them use the scientific method. They have never used a control that I have seen.

What kind of controls are you expecting? What is the control group for a person jumping just before a falling elevator hits the ground, or a construction worker who is blown off a building holding a piece of plywood? They test the myth, and then see what it might take to actual make the myth true. Like the astronaut one, they attached 47 rocket to a chair and lit it. Then they put small missiles on the same chair, and it still didn't work. Technically, they don't do science. They just replicate myths and see if they work, nothing to scientific about it.

»fo

[HAL9000]

The death ray name was coined for it by the newspapers.

I know the one you're talking about and I don't believe it to be one and the same as the one I am thinking of

[pam123]

I'm at a loss here Hal and my long distance telepathy just isn't kicking in.
Of course the problem is that Tesla invented so much it's hard (impossible?) to keep track.

[CaptTuna]

No... not a death ray... i would have to find that again... it was a totally different concept.
Tesla was supposed to have developed a way to broadcast electricty without wires.

[redmarkerdown]

He used the Tesla Coil to create a huge electricity field to light up lights up to 150+ feet I thik it was. The coil produced somewhere around 100M volts if I remember correctly. He lit up things numerous times increasing the amount of lamps and the distance from the coil.

[juppy]

Another term you can Google that might find you more information on what that little gizmo supposedly does is "zero point energy".

[David M]

All I was saying is they advertise the show as science and portray it as science when it is not.

[Xayd]

Tesla was supposed to have developed a way to broadcast electricty without wires.

that might be believable. it was all in electromagnetics. he also claimed it would be possible to harness sound waves that could destroy buildings, similar to the principles of an earthquake.

unfortunately he was also certifiably insane later in life by our legal definitions ;).

however, he should be credited for his inventions that actually worked, such as alternating current electricity transmission and such.

i'll buy the death ray when i see it (pun intended).

[Jaggannath]

Sorry for hijacking your thread to a small degree with the Mythbusters thing Pam... I'll start a new thread
As to Tesla, well as it happens we're measuring fields in lines towed through seawater for underwater comms, and the measurements are in nT :)

[bigpuma]

All I was saying is they advertise the show as science and portray it as science when it is not.

I have only seen the show a few times but I don't remember them ever claiming that there show is scientific.

[Iniamyen]

I have only seen the show a few times but I don't remember them ever claiming that there show is scientific.

They may not profess to be a "scientific" show, but most viewers with half a brain need to see some elements of the scientific method for them to make their case. For example, they COULD have a large-breasted woman say to the screen "This myth is false because I have big boobs and that's enough for you to believe it." However, most people would need to see some evaluative techniques -- enter the scientific method.

But in some instances they might need to be more convincing in their argument. As a control example, take the dummy in the elevator. Did they do a test run without making it jump? This is a control. They could have done that, and made their argument more convincing.

[David M]

Their commercials do portray it as science....and I would give a reference to one of their commercials if I could find one.

It's not a big deal and perhaps I am making it a big deal. It's just a little misleading to the public. I do thoroughly enjoy the show though. :)

Sorry Pam about the total hijacking your thread. I plead guilty. :(