Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Anti-Gravity Device Patented

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the shouldn't-it-have-to-work-before-you-patent dept.

Patents 416

October_30th writes "According to the United States Patent Office website, Boris Volfson has recently patented a "Space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state", which is essentially an anti-gravity propulsion device." The validity of this patent remains to be seen, but the general consensus of the physics community seems to be that it is complete malarky.

cancel ×

416 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

usermilk does it again (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017197)

first post post first

Slashdot a couple days late (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017199)

This has already been hammered out on Fark.

Re:Slashdot a couple days late (0, Troll)

yup2000 (182755) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017207)

and on slashdot....

Re:Slashdot a couple days late (1)

icepick72 (834363) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017251)

Indeed, many er ... slightly informed opinions on the antigravity patent topic available over here at Fark [fark.com] . Is this a good idea to cross-link Fark and Slashdot? ... maybe not, and then again maybe through this action I have begun the ultimate demise of Slashdot. See your doom before your eyes. Muhahahahaahahha

They patented a hoverboard? (2, Funny)

Joey Patterson (547891) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017200)

Too bad Marty McFly is a fictional character.

rather than power a craft by ANTI-GRAVITY (0, Redundant)

way2trivial (601132) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017205)

we should harness gravity thusly.
let's learn how to block gravity waves on one side, and let the mass of the universe pull on the other side.

with "GRAVITIUM" (either a substance or energy field) blocking the pull of the planet completely
(in the shape of a disc at the bottom of our craft) the rest of the universe will pull us out of the atmosphere pretty damn quickly.

Re:rather than power a craft by ANTI-GRAVITY (2, Informative)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017243)

Prior art. It's called Cavorite. [newcastle.edu.au]

Re:rather than power a craft by ANTI-GRAVITY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017311)

The pull of gravity falls off with the square of distance, meaning that "the rest of the universe" would have essentially no pull on your craft whatsoever. The sun and planets, maybe. Using some quick calculations, the sun would have a pull of only 5.36 newtons on a craft weighing 10 tons. To put that in perspective, earth's gravity has a pull of approx. 822 newtons on me. So your device wouldn't exactly work "pretty damn quickly".

Re:rather than power a craft by ANTI-GRAVITY (1)

Rakshasa Taisab (244699) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017338)

Are those gravity waves kinda like those mind-control waves I must protect myself from? *Puts on his hat made of transparent and weightless aluminium*

If gravity is a curvature of space, how will you mend the shear that one side of your spacecraft will cause? Wouldn't that possible require alot of energy, perhaps as much as you are getting as acceleration?

IANAP

Re:rather than power a craft by ANTI-GRAVITY (2, Funny)

knipknap (769880) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017354)

let's learn how to block gravity waves on one side, and let the mass of the universe pull on the other side.

Right after we know they exist.

If this were true... (1)

rasafras (637995) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017367)

...and the gravitational pull of the universe were significantly greater on one side than the other, or in any particular direction, your weight would change drastically as you travel around the earth. If anything, the centrifugal force (aka inertia) would cause you to fly up, but even that wouldn't be significant, at an acceleration of ~0.033 m/s^2.

Re:If this were true... (0)

Retric (704075) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017403)

I think the idea is it blocks "all" gravity not just that from earth at which point your going to get some ext ream fast acceleration. AKA you would quickly end up at a good close to C but without without much tidal stress.

PS: Yep the idea is stupid, but as a thought exercise.

Re:If this were true... (1)

knigitz (714500) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017426)

They already did this on Willy Wonka. So, it must be real.

Re:rather than power a craft by ANTI-GRAVITY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017372)

Gravity isn't a wave, it is a 'dent' (or more correctly, curve, but that mistaken as well) in the fabric of time-space.

Blocking it is just as logical as 'blocking' those pot-hole waves so that you won't bust your tire.

I have an idea that actually works (4, Funny)

sznupi (719324) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017465)

Fact 1: cats always fall on four feet
Fact 2: bread slice always falls with the butter side down

So...put a bread with butter on top of a cat, and throw it through the window.

Antigravity device ready.

sweet (1)

endersadvocate (920247) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017206)

does this mean we can get to mars before 2025?? or maybe even someother star?

Sorry (2, Funny)

Luigi30 (656867) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017208)

I've patented patenting bullshit. I'll take my royalties now!

Re:Sorry (1, Funny)

Haydn Fenton (752330) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017227)

Well.. I for one, welcome our new anti-gravity overlords.

Re:Sorry (2, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017279)

Well.. I for one, welcome our new anti-gravity overlords.

If their technology fails, can we call them "underlords"? (I've been waitin' for an undergarment story to use that joke, but grew impatient.)
       

Sorry, Amazon beat you to it (1)

Eternal Vigilance (573501) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017313)

But you can still give the anti-gravity propulsion shield a five-star rating!

Next - Amazon offers "One-Click Patent Submission."

Re:Sorry (0, Flamebait)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017382)

I've patented patenting bullshit. I'll take my royalties now!

The Whitehouse Iraq War Planning Committee owes you a shitload of money.
     

Re:Sorry (1)

clickety6 (141178) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017446)


Yeah, like there's no prior art on that one!

What about... (1)

TriezGamer (861238) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017209)

Anti-matter propulsion?

Re:What about... (1)

dbolger (161340) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017222)

What about Bad News Propulsion?

Hell, bad patent propulsion would probably be faster still...

Re:What about... (2, Funny)

iLogiK (878892) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017267)

i'm working on a improbability drive...that's the next big thing...
anybody interested in investing? very improbable :P

Re:What about... (4, Insightful)

Boronx (228853) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017304)

If an infinite improbability drive were possible, wouldn't it have already brought itself into existence?

Re:What about... (1)

iLogiK (878892) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017343)

well...it would have brought itself into existence if it weren't possible...wait, that's not right...this is giving me a head ache :(

Re:What about... (2, Funny)

Haydn Fenton (752330) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017344)

Two to the power of one hundred thousand to one against and falling.

*A million-gallon vat of custard upends itself over you without warning*

Re:What about... (1, Interesting)

Rei (128717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017278)

Antimatter propulsion is at least technically realistic given our current knowledge of physics.

Actually, I had a potential malarky propulsion system of my own (can anyone shoot it down for me? Thanks!):

You have two gigantic electromagnets, one light hour apart - magnets A
and B. A is turned on, and left on for one minute, then turned off. It generates an intense magnetic field that propogates in all directions (at the speed of light, assumedly?). A is left off. An hour later, as the field from A is just starting to reach B, B is turned on, with its field aligned opposite that of A's (so it repells). B clearly will have a (miniscule) force excerted upon it. However, A is a light hour away, and is not even on any more. In fact, by this time, it could have been destroyed - perhaps tossed into a star and no longer be composed of even the same elements. So, it would seem that while B will have a force excerted on it, A will not. Is it possible that relativistic effects can make it so one electromagnet can have a force excerted on it but not the other, and if so, could this be considered propulsion against space itself?

Re:What about... (1)

schon (31600) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017350)

by this time, it could have been destroyed - perhaps tossed into a star and no longer be composed of even the same elements

Man, and I thought that the shuttle's SRBs were wasteful!

Re:What about... (1)

WalksOnDirt (704461) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017363)

You could do the same thing with bright flash of light at A and a mirror at B.

I think the electromagnetic field generated in either case has a mass, but with zero average velocity and momentum in either case until it interacts with B. So the momentum of B comes from the EM field, and the two combined still have zero velocity, but B and the EM field are both moving away from their center of mass.

Turn on a flashlight in space and you essentially have a space drive. Your scheme seems to do much the same thing but a lower frequency.

Oh yeah (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017210)

Fist my prost

Malarky eh? (1)

Spock the Baptist (455355) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017213)

The comments out of the physics community, to say the least, have been much stronger than that.

In Context... (4, Insightful)

lurch84 (889236) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017217)

When you look how absurd some of the intellectual property or business model patents have been recently, it was only a matter of time before the patent office started issuing absurd patents for (non-existant) physical products.

/me rushes off to get patent for inertial dampening

Re:In Context... (2, Funny)

Derling Whirvish (636322) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017245)

/me rushes off to get patent for inertial dampening

//I'm already in line for Heisenberg Compensators ahead of you

//the guy in from of me is carrying papers describing tractor beams

Re:In Context... (2, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017384)

More like patents for non-existent physics.

Oh, and while you're at it don't forget to patent the verteron pulse generator.

Re:In Context... (1)

Scarletdown (886459) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017442)

Here's the things I'm going to patent. So don't touch them. They're mineminemine!

The Alludium Q36 Explosive Space Modulator

A C-Factor enhancement device to increase the speed of light, thereby making it possible to travel at or above what the current speed of light is without gaining infinite mass or moving backwards in time.

The Feline and Buttered Toast Turbine, the most effective way to have a perpetual motion machine.

And finally, I am going to patent the process of causing the expulsion of intestinal gasses by pulling the gasser's extended index finger. I should be able to collect a buttload of royalties from dads, grandpas, and crazy uncles worldwide.

Re:In Context... (1)

squoozer (730327) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017448)

AIUI in the states at least you don't have to actually have built the deveice that you patent or even know how to built it. You just have to show that it is reasonable that it could feasibly be built.

Personally I think that is totally wrong. Nobody should be able to petent something they can't build. Fair enough people can come up with ideas for deveices we could build in the future but if they can't build them, to my mind, they didn't invent them. Having said that by letting people patent ideas rather than inventions it means quite a few patents have expired before we can ever build the device which as good as nullifies the patent.

The real question (5, Funny)

ThatGeek (874983) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017218)

The real question is how can I, as an inventor, patent my time machine?

I mean, anyone can just go back in time with my intention and claim my patent!! WTF??

Re:The real question (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017277)

Well, apart from the fact you're not actually serious, money would become useless if a time machine were invented. Due to the chaos it would cause, governments would depreciate currecy as we know it and eventually replace it altogether with something even more megalomaniacal. Or maybe they'd see sense and do away with the whole notion of a currency, after all, if we can go anywhere in time, why would we need to buy anything? Take from when there's a surplus to when there's a deficit, or take from when there's nobody looking and take it to whenever else. Or if they really feel bright and sharp when they wake up after dreaming of more power and money and realise there's no real point when life becomes a trivial tedious manner after time travel has enlightened them, they might just do away with the idea of governments all together. Why try to control so many people's lives when something like time travel comes along, neither of us really want governments trying day-in, day-out to come up with new ways of restricting us, forcing us into other things, which the government then needs to restrict because a certain number of people get a little carried away, or a little crazy. No, forget about the people dealing with it, that's crazy, if we give them time to control the situation, we don't control them anymore. Let's spend all our free time we could use enjoying ourselves to come up with ways we can stop them and us doing things that people might enjoy.

Re:The real question (2, Insightful)

JulesLt (909417) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017416)

Yeah, governments are EVIL. Let's do away with them all. Because, if you look around the world, the best states are those with no governments, like in central Africa - the rule of the gun is so much better than civilization.

Re:The real question (1)

JulesLt (909417) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017365)

This is obviously the main reason for the lack of successful time machine companies - we need stronger time-travel proof patent laws.

Re:The real question (1)

ettlz (639203) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017380)

I mean, anyone can just go back in time with my intention and claim my patent!! WTF??

Or John Titor could claim prior art.

Re:The real question (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017401)

what you have to do is go back in time to the very first day the US Patent Office opened and patent it

Nonsense... (5, Funny)

moviepig.com (745183) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017219)


It's well-known that the only true anti-gravity device is a (Score:5, Funny)

Re:Nonsense... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017298)

You mean a "levity device"?

Jabberwocky! (5, Insightful)

The Amazing Fish Boy (863897) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017371)

We all know that the only real anti-gravity device is a (Score:5, Insightful)

I'll tell you... (5, Funny)

complete malarky (930602) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017223)

...what I keep telling the scientists, this device has nothing to do with me!

Re:I'll tell you... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017253)

Well, maybe next time you'll check the spelling before creating an username. After all, this is /. and nobody would expect the editors to get exotic words like 'malarkey' right.

Re:I'll tell you... (2, Funny)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017288)

an username eh ?

Re:I'll tell you... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017314)

No, a username hm ?

Mod Parent Down (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017443)

He registered the username just for the joke.

Vaporware of the Millenium (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017224)

Just like the patents for my cold fusion device and perpetual motion machine, plus convenient hair dryer.

Re:Vaporware of the Millenium (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017394)

Does it do windows?

Or is it Linux only?

Yeah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017226)

Lots of bullshit gets patented. You don't even have to have a working device to get your idea patented.

Re:Yeah. (2, Funny)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017283)

Lots of bullshit gets patented.

Wrong. Lots of bullshit are the ones who PATENT stuff.

Re:Yeah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017327)

Has anyone patented the "intelligent designers" theory yet? Cuz ya know that everything is just to damn complex for all of this to either evolve or even be created by a supreme being...it is so complex it must have taken MANY supreme beings. I'll submit the patent app tomorrow and then all of jooz will be paying me royalties...muahahahahaha In short...yeah, what you said, m4n.

Oh Yea? (2, Funny)

JrbM689 (896692) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017230)

Well, I'm going to fight back by patenting something already implemented and working. That's right, Slashdot, I'm gonna patent me some Gravity.

What does this have to do with my "Rights Online"? (3, Insightful)

Digital Pizza (855175) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017233)

How is this related to my rights, especially online?

If it's "complete malarky" then nobody has anything to worry about, but if the guy were to actually make something out of this then doesn't he deserve the patent?

This should probably have been put in the "Funny" category, if anything.

Re:What does this have to do with my "Rights Onlin (1)

toetagger1 (795806) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017312)

I agree with you that it isn't a perfect fit for the YRO category. However, if womeone can patent anti-gravity space propulsion systems, just use your immagination what you could do for software or on the internet.

I'm going to go and patent my O(n^-9) sorting algorithm and then my new web browswer that doesn't need an internet connection to display web content.

Up to this point, this poste has been a troll, but what if in 5 years, someone does come up with a way to do better sorts or a way to show webpages without requireing a live internet connection? The point of a patent is to encourage inventors by providing security of a return on their investment. In this case, its yet annother example of how the current patent system is abused to stiffel innovation.

Patent Nonsense--Everyone's Rights are Eroded (5, Insightful)

Alaren (682568) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017329)

This is perhaps just an extreme example of a very real, very dangerous problem with the patent system.

Apparently you can patent anything, even if it is utter nonsense... or by extension, even if you have no evidence that you've created something.

This has created a climate which is in fact very anti-innovation, which is the precise opposite of what the founding fathers had in mind when patents were implemented in the U.S. It doesn't matter if you can further science or useful art, it doesn't pay to be creative or innovative. It pays to patent, and now patents are being handed out sans creation and innovation. That is a BIG problem. It creates a great climate for litigation, an excellent climate for wealthy corporations with deep pockets and large legal teams, indeed it must create an awesome revenue stream for the patent office itself! But it only hurts creation and innovation.

I wouldn't really call that "nothing to worry about," even if this specific instance is a bit over-the-top.

Re:What does this have to do with my "Rights Onlin (1)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017332)

if the guy were to actually make something out of this then doesn't he deserve the patent?

I don't think that's how it should work. He should only deserve the patent if he can accurately describe HOW to build such a device, even if he currently does not have the means build or test the device himself.

Otherwise people could go around patenting any idea, no matter how far fetched, and then hoping one day someone will figure out a way so they can cash in. I realize this is essentially what the Patent database has turned into, but that doesn't mean it's right. Otherwise, I'd patent this list of ideas for teleportation devices I have. Oh, and there was this one idea about a hot-chick-vending-machine...

Re:What does this have to do with my "Rights Onlin (1)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017369)

Oh, and there was this one idea about a hot-chick-vending-machine...

Instead of Coke Classic, Mellow Yellow, 7 Up, it'll be Petite Blonde, Sexy Redhead, Seductive Brunette, Kinky Jet Black, Horny Asian, Senorita Bonita, and Hot Black Babe.

Re:What does this have to do with my "Rights Onlin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017449)

"How is this related to my rights, especially online?"

Well sir, technically, you have none. Nobody does. The internet is a (mostly) unregulated entity, where its not what rights a person has, but what they can get away with. This is my explanation for goats.exe and all the donkey porn flooding servers around the world.

I think the story was placed in that category because it was the best of the worst.

Race! (2, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017244)

but the general consensus of the physics community seems to be that it is complete malarky.

Quick, patent malarky!
       

Re:Race! (1)

Luigi30 (656867) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017345)

I did. Read the second thread :P

Re:Race! (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017370)

Rats!, I suppose you also patented "redundant" mods.
     

What the other side has to say (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017252)

Since the "normal" scientific will dismiss this off the bat as usual, what does the "underground" scientific community, which tries to deal with this type of phenomena, have say about it? (Yes it does exist, break out the tin-foil hats etc..)

Well even they agree that the patent examiners have been duped and it would never fly. For a interesting compilation of discussions going within the community have a look at this article [zpenergy.com] .

Though real science aside, it would be very cool if it worked.

What goes up... (2, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017255)

Naw, its full of hot air..........hmmm

Hey, I can do that, too! (1)

mortong (914447) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017268)

I recently patented a stopwatch that can freeze time. In theory, with the flux capacitor installed, it should work, and I own the patent. Of course, I don't have the technology to create my design. Moral of the story: You can patent anything, even if humanity doesn't have the tech for it.

Yeah, but... (1)

JumpinJohnny (124823) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017276)

If somebody does actually invent a way to do this in the next 20 years, they are going to owe this guy royalties bigtime.

I got to get that lightsaber patent application in. ;-)

Johnny

Profiteering from snake-oil ... (1)

external400kdiskette (930221) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017280)

This sort of thing is common, you can make a lot of money with it. Take for instance the "Professor Searl" @ http://www.searleffect.com/ [searleffect.com] . Similar bogus anti-gravity technology, tragic tales of lost sisters, claims it was stolen by the government (and in several decades hasn't been able to make enother !?) , lots of other BS but I'm sure he's making some money with his junk physics books http://www.searleffect.com/free/store/store.html [searleffect.com] "The Law of the Squares" Series .

FINALLY! (1)

c_forq (924234) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017282)

If this went through then I should have no problem patenting my Delorean with a flux capacitor!

However.... (1)

weston (16146) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017316)

... the guy who finally makes it work won't have much trouble applying before you do.

Patent requirements (1)

Solandri (704621) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017289)

This is why every patent application should have to be accompanied by a functional prototype demonstrating the efficacy of the idea being patented.

Re:Patent requirements (1)

Thanatopsis (29786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017319)

That used to be the case at the patent office till about 1900 ~ it simply got too expensive to store the crap - Most of the prototypes got destroyed in a fire.

BSD

Re:Patent requirements (1)

Scarletdown (886459) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017398)


This is why every patent application should have to be accompanied by a functional prototype demonstrating the efficacy of the idea being patented.


Rumor is that he did have a functioning prototype. However, he made the mistake of opening the package before entering the USPTO Building, and the damn thing just up and floated off into infinity, never to be seen again.

It claims more than "just" Anti-Gravity propulsion (1)

slobber (685169) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017292)

If the vacuum pressure density of the locale is modified to be substantially higher than that of the ambient vacuum, the speed of the vehicle could conceivably be higher than the ambient light-speed.

... beam me up, Boris!

But does it run... (1)

The Lerneaen Hydra (885793) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017296)

But does it run Linux?
Or a Beowulf Cluster?

Star Trek Anyone? (5, Insightful)

Zebra_X (13249) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017308)

If you read the patent text he's basically describing the warp drive from star trek.

"whereby providing for the gravitational imbalance such that the lowered pressure of inflationary vacuum state is pulling said space vehicle forward in modified spacetime."

interesting i guess.

in normal fashion both slashdot and the reporting news outlet have got it all wrong. it's not a perpetual motion machine - becuase it requires input of a nuclear reactor to make it "go". It's no more a perpetual motion machine than a space probe launched from earth.

nor is this "anti gravity". the patent describes a device that will "modify" space time such that an area of "low pressure vacuum" and "high pressure vacuum" are created. the low pressure area is infront of the ship and the high pressure is behind the ship. the ship travels forward because it's caught in the middle. i guess.

not a physics major.

Re:Star Trek Anyone? (1, Insightful)

istewart (463887) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017445)

Problem is that vacuum, by definition, does not contain any sort of matter that would exhibit an observable pressure. Vacuum is simply empty space. To metaphorically "compress" or "expand" vacuum (as in Star Trek) would require a deeper knowledge of the nature of space-time than we have now, if it was even possible then.

Understood? (1)

Crouty (912387) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017310)

Is gravity really understood well enough to call this nonsense without thorough investigation?

I for one welcome our new weightless overlords.

Prior art? (1)

supersho (816055) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017321)

Sounds a lot like H. G. Wells's cavorite.

How about a working prototype? (1)

RKBA (622932) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017324)

Too bad the USPTO doesn't require a working prototype.

Re:How about a working prototype? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017460)

This has always been my biggest problem with the patent system. I actually don't know of any country that does require a working model.

Of course, if someone does try to make an anti-gravity device before March 14, 2025 (the patent application was filed March 14, 2005), Volfson will make out like a bandit. The funny thing, though, is if you read claim 1, one of the elements (and thus a requirement of infringement) is "a crew, the crew disposed inside said inner shield accessibly to said life-support and said flux modulation controller". So just set it on autopilot and give Volfson the finger.

Also claiming FTL speeds! (1)

sanborn's man (687059) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017325)

from the patent text:
"The devices combining these capabilities may be able to move at speeds substantially higher than the light-speed in the ambient space."
Wow! I want one of those devices!

One the plus side... (3, Insightful)

kreyg (103130) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017341)

...by the time anyone actually invents one, the patent will have expired.

test message (-1, Offtopic)

trounce-catcher (930608) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017352)

spam collector - please ignore trounce@devmx.adelaide.edu.au thanks for your patience

Slashdot trowels out more junk science (1)

amightywind (691887) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017356)

The validity of this patent remains to be seen, but the general consensus of the physics community seems to be that it is complete malarky.

Well, given this site's moderator's affinity for junk science it is no wonder that the story ended up here. You have to wonder what they are thinking.

Deep Impact (1)

MonGuSE (798397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017366)

I'm going to patent using a large mass mounted to a spacecraft to alter the trajectory of space debris (AKA a big freaking asteroid). Then when the US gov contracts a company to build it when an asteroid is on an emminent collision course with earth in 2048 I'm going to be sitting pretty. Talk about playing chicken on an interplanetary scale....

Re:Deep Impact (1)

kebes (861706) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017454)

in 2048 I'm going to be sitting pretty

You do know that your patent will have long since expired, right? The patent system is broken... but not THAT broken.

Just another good example of the ..... (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017378)

.... mindset failure of teh US patent office.

Bah! (1)

eno2001 (527078) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017379)

The current state of the USPTO could allow me to patent a method for buying "hot stocks" now with information from the future based on my special method for "non-temporal pipelining" to send stock results from www.nyse.com a few months in the future to > /dev/hotstocks.  With enough references cited, and some "work", I'm sure I could patent this.

Ok, Slashdot, enough with the jokes (2, Funny)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017381)

With all the engineering breakthroughs we had in the last two weeks, the next headline better be: There's a company in Israel that is creating hover cars that run on water and their lift is from anti-gravity. These cars actually generate hydrogen as they travel, so if you're running low on money, you can pull into any gas station to be paid for your excess fuel since their primary fuel source is perpetual motion. These cars can also fly in case you need to make a transatlantic voyage. Combined with the fact they can drive themselves to the destination, they also can automatically park themselves in the air when you decide to get out. While space travel is not standard with this car, you can get it as an option for those people who want to take a vaction to their property on the moon.

I'm all for it (3, Insightful)

Kuukai (865890) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017409)

If some guy in Indiana wants to pay hundreds of dollars to patent stuff that (regardless of being real physics or not) can't possibly be implemented before the patent expires, I'm all for it. That means that if/when technology finally catches up it'll be public domain. He should go ahead and slip in a broad patent on near-light travel, and something about wormholes. To tell the truth, I feel the same way about gene patents. If they want to patent them all, let them. As many incredible advances as have been made in genetics, I somehow feel they'll be much more useful in twenty years. The goverment is too dumb to figure out what's obvious and what's not, so if we just patent [i]everything[/i] now and check back in twenty years, the problem will be solved.

uh? (1)

radl33t (900691) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017423)

The USPO is suppose to prohibit patents that violate the 2nd law. What gives?

probably fake... (1)

GrayFox777 (908337) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017428)

I know it's probably fake, but wouldn't it be nice? Though... why patent it if you aren't actually going to (at least try to) make it?

Cripes! (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017451)

The screenwriters of the Stargate franchises could write a better patent application than that! In fact, I think it would be cool to apply for a patent on the Zero-Point Module and see if it gets granted.

If it's been patented, it ain't real. (1)

Fantastic Lad (198284) | more than 8 years ago | (#14017458)

Were there patents on the books for the technology which rendered those black, angular American war jets radar-invisible? You know, those whatchamacallit planes the US trucked out during the first Gulf War.

No? No patents on technology which the U.S. Military would without any question want first dibs on and absolute subsequent control over until it became twenty years old and hopelessly out of date?

Really? No kidding?


-FL

In Solvat Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14017462)

Anti-Gravity Device patent you!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>