Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 77 posts

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#11

Post by lloeki »

willvarfar wrote: post #3
stephengillie wrote: post #2

In the United States, regulations dictate that cars coming off of the assembly line must have a flat mirror on the driver's side. Curved mirrors are allowed for cars' passenger-side mirrors only if they include the phrase "Objects in mirror are closer than they appear." Because of these regulations, Hicks's mirrors will not be installed on new cars sold in the U.S. any time soon. The mirror may be manufactured and so…

so the question becomes, is his patent valid in Europe and Asia?

No, because there is prior art. I'm not even sure it would stand in the US.

It's been a while since I have not driven a car that has a flat mirror near side (cost cuts and relative driver position makes far side less of a problem. Still, they're often not exactly flat either).

Cars here (Europe) generally have an improved version, as the linear radius was giving too much of a fisheye, which breaks depth linearity. The improved version starts with a quasi-flat mirror for the 2/3rd near the car, while the remainder has an increasing radius (Here's a shot [0]). The result is (when properly seated and mirrors set up) basically enough for the passing car to pop up at the edge of my field of vision when it disappears from the mirror.

[0] http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/523/2007_Civic_iCDTi_Hat...

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#12

Post by kschua »

This is just beautiful. Practical application of maths. I would love to get my hands on one of these when it is done.

Glad that he has a patent for that. He should be justly rewarded for coming out with this road safety feature.

To those that believe that there is prior art, do note that the patent granted is for "Wide angle substantially non-distorting mirror". It is not just any curve mirror, it is unlike normal curve mirror which distorts the image, from the picture, you can see that there doesn't appear to be any distortion, which is what makes his mirror unique

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#13

Post by btn »

willvarfar wrote: post #3
stephengillie wrote: post #2

In the United States, regulations dictate that cars coming off of the assembly line must have a flat mirror on the driver's side. Curved mirrors are allowed for cars' passenger-side mirrors only if they include the phrase "Objects in mirror are closer than they appear." Because of these regulations, Hicks's mirrors will not be installed on new cars sold in the U.S. any time soon. The mirror may be manufactured and so…

so the question becomes, is his patent valid in Europe and Asia?

According to its PCT entry [1], it's still making its way through the Australian, Canadian, European, and Japanese patent offices.

1: http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO200...

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#14

Post by bitrot »

stephengillie wrote: post #2

In the United States, regulations dictate that cars coming off of the assembly line must have a flat mirror on the driver's side. Curved mirrors are allowed for cars' passenger-side mirrors only if they include the phrase "Objects in mirror are closer than they appear." Because of these regulations, Hicks's mirrors will not be installed on new cars sold in the U.S. any time soon. The mirror may be manufactured and so…

What if you have both?

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#15

Post by mbreese »

lloeki wrote: post #11
willvarfar wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so the question becomes, is his patent valid in Europe and Asia?

No, because there is prior art. I'm not even sure it would stand in the US. It's been a while since I have not driven a car that has a flat mirror near side (cost cuts and relative driver position makes far side less of a problem. Still, they're often not exactly flat either). Cars here (Europe) generally have an improved version, as the linear radius was giving too much of a fisheye, which breaks depth linearity. Th…

He would be able to patent all curved mirrors, just his particular implementation and design. He may have an optimal design that certainly would deserve patent protection.

The question that he has to worry about with the patents is whether or not his 2008 paper was published before or after the non-US patents were applied for. If I'm not mistaken, the US has a one year grace period between public display (publishing an academic paper) and filing for a patent. Whereas Europe et al. do not have a grace period.

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#16

Post by archangel_one »

aresant wrote: post #8
stephengillie wrote: post #2

In the United States, regulations dictate that cars coming off of the assembly line must have a flat mirror on the driver's side. Curved mirrors are allowed for cars' passenger-side mirrors only if they include the phrase "Objects in mirror are closer than they appear." Because of these regulations, Hicks's mirrors will not be installed on new cars sold in the U.S. any time soon. The mirror may be manufactured and so…

I am an easy sell to jump to conclusions about gov't idiocy but this one is so audacious it seems like there must a relevant reason - so why can't I have a curved mirror that is more efficient?

Curved mirrors are more efficient in one sense but tends to lead people to misjudge distances. Presumably the government think that showing a misleading picture may be worse than not showing one at all, which is not complete idiocy. This mirror apparently doesn't really suffer from that problem, but the legislation didn't anticipate it - which isn't really surprising, it's hardly realistic to expect them to foresee this development.

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#18

Post by ZeroGravitas »

kschua wrote: post #12

This is just beautiful. Practical application of maths. I would love to get my hands on one of these when it is done. Glad that he has a patent for that. He should be justly rewarded for coming out with this road safety feature. To those that believe that there is prior art, do note that the patent granted is for "Wide angle substantially non-distorting mirror". It is not just any curve mirror, it is unlike normal cu…

Glad that he has a patent for that. He should be justly rewarded for coming out with this road safety feature.

I'd prefer if he was justly rewarded in some manner that doesn't involve him having the legal right to prevent others from using this road safety feature particularly as it probably has a chilling effect on similar improvements.

Re: Math professor's side mirror that eliminates 'blind spot' receives US patent

#20

Post by einhverfr »

archangel_one wrote: post #16
aresant wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am an easy sell to jump to conclusions about gov't idiocy but this one is so audacious it seems like there must a relevant reason - so why can't I have a curved mirror that is more efficient?

Curved mirrors are more efficient in one sense but tends to lead people to misjudge distances. Presumably the government think that showing a misleading picture may be worse than not showing one at all, which is not complete idiocy. This mirror apparently doesn't really suffer from that problem, but the legislation didn't anticipate it - which isn't really surprising, it's hardly realistic to expect them to foresee t…

Indeed the picture in the article immediately made me think "How do I know how far those cars are away?" The objects in that mirror seem a lot closer than they appear, which strikes me as a different danger.
Post reply on HN