US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator • Hacker News Board

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#31

Post by AnimalMuppet » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:13 AM UTC

mokus wrote: post #20

mypalmike wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an invention cannot be "reduced to practice", it is not patentable. My understanding is that reduction to practice means the invention has been actually built by the inventor, or that it is fully disclosed in a patent application such that a reasonably skilled person could construct the invention. If an invention hinges on some entirely theoretical concept that can not be demonstrated by even the most highly skill…

If it can’t be built, how does the patent harm anyone except the one who wasted their money to get the patent? There will never be a licensee or infringement to sue over.

If you can't build it today, but someone can build it in five or ten years, the patent lets you hold them hostage because you guessed right (even though you didn't do any of the work).

That is not morally right. It also isn't the intent of patents, because it does absolutely nothing to further the progress of the useful arts and sciences.

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#32

Post by colechristensen » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:15 AM UTC

ubertoop wrote: post #27

ksaj wrote: post #5

This relies on the existence of the graviton, which at this point is is not actually known to exist. Some would even argue that there is no reason for it to exist. There are a few competing theories of gravity that don't jive at all with what's discussed in pseudo-factual language in the patent. It doesn't help that his only source cited seems to be his own, albeit peer reviewed, paper. I hope that paper at least cit…

The patent is really only half of the story here. The bigger question is why does the US Navy own this patents? And, how does this relate to the pill shaped UFO that navy pilots verified having seen over the last decade performing antigravity maneuvers? On December 30th 2020 the United States Senate had requested for the Pentagon for an explanation of this UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon). The Senate said the Pen…

Publishing nonsense is a good way to spread disinformation to your adversaries and waste their resources, likewise to “explain” things you want to keep secret which have vaguely similar properties.

But also in a large organization there will be pockets of incompetence which are more expensive to eradicate than they cost to leave be. If you’re making sure to do zero nonsense, you’re probably also preventing some unexpected quality progress.

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#33

Post by avl999 » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:18 AM UTC

Is this the beginning of a cover story that the intelligence agencies are setting up in reaction to congress passing a provision to be briefed on UFO research within 180 days as part of the covid funding bill?

Also note that David Fravor encountered the Tic Tac UFO tech in the early 2000s about 13 years before the publishing of this paper.

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#34

Post by 8bitsrule » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:19 AM UTC

ihunter2839 wrote: post #25

Curious as to what others here think about the idea that the Tic Tac UFO could be some sort of high energy particle beam being controlled from the ground? My mom unfortunately passed from cancer, but she was able to get proton beam therapy for a tumor that would have been inaccessible with traditional radiation. This, as I understand it, is because a proton beam sheds the majority of it's energy at the very end of it…

Those 'things' fly at hologram speeds, turn hologram corners. Given a relatively stable atmosphere (on some days), could the 'Bragg Peak' be controlled enough? Radar signature? Interesting hypothesis.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bragg_peak]

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#35

Post by frongpik » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:20 AM UTC

ubertoop wrote: post #27

ksaj wrote: post #5

This relies on the existence of the graviton, which at this point is is not actually known to exist. Some would even argue that there is no reason for it to exist. There are a few competing theories of gravity that don't jive at all with what's discussed in pseudo-factual language in the patent. It doesn't help that his only source cited seems to be his own, albeit peer reviewed, paper. I hope that paper at least cit…

The patent is really only half of the story here. The bigger question is why does the US Navy own this patents? And, how does this relate to the pill shaped UFO that navy pilots verified having seen over the last decade performing antigravity maneuvers? On December 30th 2020 the United States Senate had requested for the Pentagon for an explanation of this UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon). The Senate said the Pen…

Academics can't really research this subject if they want to remain employed, but that doesn't mean the patent lies.

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#36

Post by swader999 » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:23 AM UTC

ihunter2839 wrote: post #25

Curious as to what others here think about the idea that the Tic Tac UFO could be some sort of high energy particle beam being controlled from the ground? My mom unfortunately passed from cancer, but she was able to get proton beam therapy for a tumor that would have been inaccessible with traditional radiation. This, as I understand it, is because a proton beam sheds the majority of it's energy at the very end of it…

The viking man has a good run down on all this tech: https://rumble.com/vbodst-u.s.-space-force-technologies-and-...

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#37

Post by bdowling » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:28 AM UTC

mypalmike wrote: post #16

ksaj wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of patents for things that are not yet known to work, but are plausible. Things that are in study stage often get patents if they are novel enough, to avoid someone else coming in and getting rich off your research before you've even had a chance to pay back your investors (let alone yourself). It's not a patent troll thing. It's protecting your investment. A lot of money goes into research, and there…

If an invention cannot be "reduced to practice", it is not patentable. My understanding is that reduction to practice means the invention has been actually built by the inventor, or that it is fully disclosed in a patent application such that a reasonably skilled person could construct the invention. If an invention hinges on some entirely theoretical concept that can not be demonstrated by even the most highly skill…

> ... some entirely theoretical concept that can not be demonstrated by even the most highly skilled people...

In that type of case, I would expect the patent to fail the utility requirement (§101). But attacking it on written description or enablement (§112(a)) might work as well.

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#38

Post by pontifier » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:28 AM UTC

ksaj wrote: post #9

new_guy wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It makes sense to patent an idea based on what he's hoping will eventually become a fleshed out scientific theory with proofs and whatnot, it doesn't mean any of it will turn out to be correct. It just means if it does find proof, he could get rich. It would just make him yet another patent troll. The US patent system is beyond absurd. Unless he can physically demonstrate a fully working 'gravitational wave generat…

There are a lot of patents for things that are not yet known to work, but are plausible. Things that are in study stage often get patents if they are novel enough, to avoid someone else coming in and getting rich off your research before you've even had a chance to pay back your investors (let alone yourself). It's not a patent troll thing. It's protecting your investment. A lot of money goes into research, and there…

This is exactly why I applied for patents on my novel fusion reactor design. I think it will work, I hope it will work, but it's still untested.

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#39

Post by pontifier » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:31 AM UTC

dantheman wrote: post #13

ksaj wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of patents for things that are not yet known to work, but are plausible. Things that are in study stage often get patents if they are novel enough, to avoid someone else coming in and getting rich off your research before you've even had a chance to pay back your investors (let alone yourself). It's not a patent troll thing. It's protecting your investment. A lot of money goes into research, and there…

If you don't have a working implementation that is available for sale you're a patent troll.

If you build and sell something publicly before you start on your patent your patent will be denied.

Re: US Navy – Tic Tac UFO – High frequency gravitational wave generator

#40

Post by evilduck » Sun, Jan 17, 2021, 5:32 AM UTC

philip142au wrote: post #10

It’s rubbish, whatever propulsion method you have you still need to push the air out of the way to move the thing forwards which takes the same energy using imaginary gravitational waves or a jet engine. No magic is going to make the air get out of the way any faster

We're well within the realm of sci-fi speculation here, but if you have a gravity generation device that can be directed you could augment traditional aircraft to safely allow for high G maneuvers or sustained accelerations that would otherwise be harmful to the pilot or the airframe. That would have some tactical advantages even if it doesn't mean it helps us go faster.