The United States Patent Law (35 U.S.C. 101) provides:

"Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine,
manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement
thereof, may obtain a patent therefore, subject to the conditions and
requirements of this title."

I believe I have discovered a process for modeling photons and
everything else in the universe.  I believe my process is new and (if it
is correct) it certainly will be useful.  I believe my theory is
basically correct.  Therefore, I believe I should be entitled to a
patent on my discovery.  My attempt to patent my discovery is certainly
not frivolous or bizarre.  

If the patent examiner examining my application determines that my
theory is not correct, he may very likely also determine that my process
in not useful, therefore, not patentable and I won't get the patent.  If
any of you or anyone else can convince me that my theory is basically
wrong, I will abandon my effort to patent it.

The problem is I do not know for sure whether or not my theory is
correct.  I have tried without success to get my theory published in two
very respected scientific journals and have been rejected out of hand.
I have given descriptions of my theory to almost all of the scientist I
know (and I know a bunch of them).  No one has pointed out any basic
flaw in my theory.  I have submitted descriptions of my theory to this
group (which is suppose to be especially interested in Theories of
Everything) and have received no response on the merits, just criticism
or skepticism for my bothering the patent office with my theory.  I and
others have found many minor flaws and I have in each case modified my
theory to correct the minor flaws.  In the process I have filed seven
separate patent applications over a five year period covering the theory
as it matured.  If any of you are interested in the development of my
theory,  they can view my earlier patent applications on the PTO web
site.

No one should bother with my theory who doesn't want to.  However, I
welcome, very much any criticism of my theory.  If any of you tell me of
a flaw that can be easily fixed, I will modify the theory to fix the
flaw.  And if you can prove to me that I am basically wrong, I will be
very happy abandon the patent applications, get out of the business of
trying to discover the secrets or the universe and get on with my life.


-----Original Message-----
From: Johnathan Corgan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 11:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: ROSS MODEL OF THE UNIVERSE - The Simplest Yet Theory of
Everything


John M wrote:

> Seriously: there are countries where a patent can be
> granted only if a working model can be produced (this
> is against the perpetuum mobile deluge of patents). It
> may be valid for a TOE as well.

The patent process is designed to provide an inventor with certain legal
rights regarding the use of his invention by others.

To attempt to patent a scientific theory (regardless of its scientific
merits or lack thereof) in the guise of a "model process" is both
frivolous and bizarre.  I am at a loss to understand the motivations of
the original poster in doing this.

On the other hand, I did not intend to "shut down" discussion of the
actual hypotheses presented.

-Johnathan


Reply via email to