🚀 go-pugleaf

In message 
<9dd31140-fdf2-4089-bfb1-edd1e423bd2e@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, 
janpajak@gmail.com writes
>On Mar 1, 10:12�pm, Sevenhundred Elves <sevenhund...@elves.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>> > Instead of bleating about this on usenet why not build one, sell the
>> > power to a utility and retire to the Riveria on the income generated
>> > (no pun). � You could live on Moet et Chandon and pate d'fois gras
>> > while laying endless nubile young wenches. �But there's the rub. �You
>> > can't can you? �The practical proof of the theoretical pudding is in
>> > the eating.
>...
>> He can't build one, because it is 
>>patented:http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5313850-claims.html
>...
>
>I would NOT scare potential builders of this perpetual motion flywheel
>just by telling them that it was patented. This is because every
>patent has its life span, and also because every patent can be walk
>around by utilising some specific technical details for which it is
>not restricted. Therefore, the existence of this patent only should
>encourage various hobbyists to build this flywheel, as it proves that
>it actually DOES work as a perpetual motion device. The patent also
>proves that all this spitting done by some individuals on the idea
>presented here is actually out of place and unjustified. The flywheeel
>will really work - no matter what some well masked individuals are
>telling us about it.

Even USPTO is no longer so completely dumb as to grant perpetual motion 
machine patents any more. Though it doesn't stop them granting new 
patents for blindingly obvious and prior art invalidated software. They 
will still grant a patent on almost anything if your money is the right 
colour.
>
>I personally cannot build this flywheel for the simple reason that I
>do NOT have conditions for building it. After all, in order to build
>something mechanical, one needs to have space, tools, materials,
>money, time, practical skills, and many other encouraging conditions.

Like living in a universe where it is possible to build one? I suspect 
you will find that it is an even more non-trivial undertaking to create 
a new universe.

Regards,
-- 
Martin Brown

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com