Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants

[Jed Rothwell]

Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:


> > Otherwise there is no point. If it cannot be replicated, it is not
> > science. If the researcher wants to cash in on the discovery, that is
> > fine. He or she needs to file for a patent before publishing the paper.
>
> May be you see the point. With 3 months reports you in average write 2
> weeks patents...
>

I do not understand what you mean here.

If a 3-month detailed report would interfere with writing a patent, the
researcher can submit an abbreviated report saying something like: "A
patent is now being written. When it is filed, in approximately two months,
a more detailed report will be sent." That should satisfy everyone. The
patent application should be written promptly.

If the researcher cannot do things this way, he should seek money from a
venture capitalist instead of a philanthropist.

Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants

[Jürg Wyttenbach]

On 18.08.2023 17:27, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Otherwise there is no point. If it cannot be replicated, it is not 
science. If the researcher wants to cash in on the discovery, that is 
fine. He or she needs to file for a patent before publishing the paper.


May be you see the point. With 3 months reports you in average write 2 
weeks patents...


But so far we wrote reports/papers to avoid that others can patent 
useful stuff. I think basic research should be public like MFP:


J.W.

--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis

+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06

Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants

[Jed Rothwell]

Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

> Jed, I do not object reporting, but these blood suckers like to have
> detailed reports...This would be OK for 10x more money...
>
Everything must be published in enough detail to replicate the experiment.
Otherwise there is no point. If it cannot be replicated, it is not science.
If the researcher wants to cash in on the discovery, that is fine. He or
she needs to file for a patent before publishing the paper.

To replicate, you usually need a very detailed report. Unless the
experiment is a "me too" replication of something already described in the
literature. There is not much point to that.

Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants

[Jürg Wyttenbach]

Jed, I do not object reporting, but these blood suckers like to have 
detailed reports...This would be OK for 10x more money...



Further:: A little bit more advanced experiments need high level 
equipment. Like a multi target PVD coater, a good galvanostat and access 
to a decent XRF just to name 3 gadgets, where a good PVD starts at 50k$ 
without any addons like expensive targets.


I think that providing gadgets would be the better approach than 
spending money. That way you can switch it between groups or groups 
could provide some services (like PVD,XRF) to other groups.


E.g. we just evaluate access to a good PVD. With the proper machine and 
the correct targets you can do one process step in one day. Then for 
months 50k stay idle doing nothing...



J.W.

On 18.08.2023 16:50, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

Not a single experienced researcher will spend more than a few
seconds to read such outraging nonsense as writing progress
reports every 3 months for e.g. 25k $ funding is just a bad joke...

I have given several researchers funding, with no strings attached. I 
definitely want a progress report every 3 months. It is not reasonable 
to take someone's money and then not tell them what you are doing with 
it. A short but substantive report every three months is entirely 
reasonable.


==> Get maximal information for a minimum of money.

When I contribute money to an experiment with no strings attached (no 
intellectual property for me), then I stipulate the results be 
published in full, on a timely basis. The researcher would be free to 
file for a patent before publishing, but it must be published. No 
philanthropist wants to pay for research that remains secret. There is 
no point. So not only would I get "maximal information" but so would 
anyone else in the world. This is entirely reasonable.


Do you expect people to give money unconditionally? What would be the 
point of funding research with no progress reports that will remain 
secret? That is not science. You need to look at this from the point 
of view of the person giving the money.




--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis

+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06

Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants

[Jed Rothwell]

Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

> Not a single experienced researcher will spend more than a few seconds to
> read such outraging nonsense as writing progress reports every 3 months for
> e.g. 25k $ funding is just a bad joke...
>
I have given several researchers funding, with no strings attached. I
definitely want a progress report every 3 months. It is not reasonable to
take someone's money and then not tell them what you are doing with it. A
short but substantive report every three months is entirely reasonable.

==> Get maximal information for a minimum of money.
>
When I contribute money to an experiment with no strings attached (no
intellectual property for me), then I stipulate the results be published in
full, on a timely basis. The researcher would be free to file for a patent
before publishing, but it must be published. No philanthropist wants to pay
for research that remains secret. There is no point. So not only would I
get "maximal information" but so would anyone else in the world. This is
entirely reasonable.

Do you expect people to give money unconditionally? What would be the point
of funding research with no progress reports that will remain secret? That
is not science. You need to look at this from the point of view of the
person giving the money.

Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants

[Jürg Wyttenbach]

This is the same method IH (international heat did use)

==> Get maximal information for a minimum of money.


Not a single experienced researcher will spend more than a few seconds 
to read such outraging nonsense as writing progress reports every 3 
months for e.g. 25k $ funding is just a bad joke...



J.W.



On 17.08.2023 19:22, Jed Rothwell wrote:

See:

Anthropocene Institute Advances Solid-State Fusion Energy at ICCF-25

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230817380396/en/Anthropocene-Institute-Advances-Solid-State-Fusion-Energy-at-ICCF-25 




Exploration Grants

The Anthropocene Institute is connecting funding sources with 
researchers and scientists exploring the area of Solid-State Fusion 
(SSF), which we define as a nuclear reaction in the solid phase of 
matter, releasing heat that is in excess of input energy. . . .


https://solidstatefusion.org/grants/ 




--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis

+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06

[Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants

[Jed Rothwell]

See:

Anthropocene Institute Advances Solid-State Fusion Energy at ICCF-25

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230817380396/en/
Anthropocene-Institute-Advances-Solid-State-Fusion-Energy-at-ICCF-25


Exploration Grants

The Anthropocene Institute is connecting funding sources with researchers
and scientists exploring the area of Solid-State Fusion (SSF), which we
define as a nuclear reaction in the solid phase of matter, releasing heat
that is in excess of input energy. . . .

https://solidstatefusion.org/grants/