OT: One for the greenies

[John Rumm]

[Chris Hogg]

I wasn't sure from reading the patent itself that they'd actually got as far as making one.

I expect all the fusion devices going back to the 1950's had patents published in advance of their construction, and we still haven't got a working fusion reactor.

[harry]

Exactly what research facility has the US navy got? If they had such a device, would they publish the plans?

[Roger Hayter]

I think we could afford to file that news with the story of aliens in Area 51.

[Jeff Layman]

+1

Seems to me it's just some nonsense to get "the other side" to spend time, money, and effort on to distract them from doing other, much more practical things.

[Robin]

The report is that the US Navy has filed a patent. The patent is free for you view. The report makes it clear that the patent doesn't mean the Navy has a working source of energy. But the same is true of many patents. And I've - still - not seen comments from anyone known to be an expert on fusion on its merits.

[Robin]

47 seconds to find

[Brian Gaff]

That is just a bit of prospecting on somebody's behalf. If they can sew up some ideas then if anyone designs a working model they can cash in. For the reasons stated and many others, Fusion here on Earth has a problem that power in needed is greater then that generated, and this will remain so up to huge proportions. Brian

[Brian Gaff]

No they are speculating in case anyone does so they can cash in. However patents like this should not be allowed. It would be like patenting the look and feel of software all over again. Brian

[Dave Liquorice]

Pretty sure that one of research machines is energy positive(*). Though possibly not by much. Also the large scale trial machine is expected to be energy positive.

(*) In that more useable energy comes out than goes in. No energy is created, some of it goes in in the form of matter. B-)

[newshound]

Actually the US Office of Naval Research is pretty good. I used to look up a fair number of their papers in my dim and distant research days.

[newshound]

As of 2017, the record for Q is held by the JET tokamak in the UK, at Q = (16 MW)/(24 MW) ? 0.67, first attained in 1997.

From the obvious Wikipedia link.

[newshound]

[John Rumm]

ISTR there are a number of "working" reactors. The usual stumbling block being getting more energy out than put in, and sustaining the reaction.

[Chris Hogg]

Well, yes. By 'working' I meant generating useful amounts of electricity.

[Martin Brown]

USPTO will let you patent perpetual motion machines too if they fail to spot what it is on a cavalier prior art search. Their only requirement is that your dollars are green and supplied in sufficient quantity.

[Chris Hogg]

That was rather my experience in the distant past. If you're an American company, you can patent almost anything regardless of prior art, but if you're not American they give your application a real grilling and will reject it for the most trivial of reasons.