In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 10 Apr 2011 13:05:17 -0700: Hi Jones, [snip] >The original 1997 patent filing by Mills was never granted, which allows him >to periodically update it as a "continuation-in-part". > >http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2009/0129992.html > >"This is a continuation-in-part of co-pending application Ser. No. >09/009,294, filed Jan. 20, 1998. The priority of the following U.S. >provisional applications is also claimed: Ser. No. 60/053,378, filed Jul. >22, 1997; Ser. No. 60/068,913, filed Dec. 29, 1997; Ser. No. 60/074,006, >filed Feb. 9, 1998, and Ser. No. 60/080,647, filed Apr. 3, 1998." > >IOW - by not granting Mills earliest patent application in the normal time, >the USPO has probably done him a favor, in a way - allowing him to claim >more than before and/or refine his application and perhaps incorporate >significant differences which can be partly or wholly based on the work of >others. > >My question to Robin - were you aware of all the emphasis on Si ? > >Jones
I haven't really been following Mills patent updates, but years ago I sent him an email wherein I suggested that a Hydrino electron might "jump ship" to a heavier atom, releasing a lot of energy in the process, and suggested that good targets for such a reaction would be Si and O because they were so plentiful in the crust. Perhaps that influenced him in some way to devote some effort to Si? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
