On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bob Higgins <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > The Motorola deal fell through because Patterson wanted to retain more >> control of his technology . . . >> > > He was a fool. He told me he wanted a 100% market share. I said "you will > end up with 100% of nothing." I was right. > I think that description of Patterson is not as kind as Dennis described. Apparently Patterson's son was well established in business and he wanted to do what he could to get his grandson [as you say, his granddaughter's husband, Jim Redding] also firmly established in business. He may have been worried that with the Motorola deal, the way it was structured, he wouldn't be setting his grandson up the way he wished. > He took his secrets to the grave. > That is not the way that I recall Dennis telling me. Dennis said that Patterson was unable to replicate it himself after running out of his supply of NASA microgravity plastic beads and running out of his original plating solutions. So, I believe Patterson went to his grave without ever knowing what was the key missing (or changed) ingredient - he had lost the recipe. Perhaps he could eventually have re-discovered his recipe, but was apparently unmotivated after the loss of his grandson, and until his passing. Some original beads still exist - at least with Dennis. I asked Dennis why someone hadn't done a detailed micro/nano structural analysis by potting a bead and gradually sectioning it and doing ICP-MS on the metals. Dennis said that George Miley has done some of this, but has not applied what he learned to replicating the Patterson Cell. I don't think Miley's detailed analysis has been published.
