From: Teslaalset
The most remarkable takeaway of US20140034116A1 is that the
inventors point out that using ionized 1/1 (light) Hydrogen, only two Nickel
isotopes are suitable: Ni62 and Ni64. This is particulary interesting since
they published this in their provisional patent application back in August
2012. Rossi and Defkalion started talking about specific Nickel isotopes
being essential during the course of spring 2013. Rossi amended his claims
in April 2013 claiming Ni62 is essential for the overall process.Yes, that detail is interesting ... maybe even prescient ... but it would only be patentable IF (big if) in the specifications, the inventor described a reactor which had actually been "reduced to practice" (instead of being an educated guess based on theory) and in which the enriched isotopes had been actually used, instead of the bulk metal. It is not possible in US patent law to claim priority for use of a bulk element by specifying an active alloy in that element. This application reads like the inventor is trying to patent a theory. It is almost a certainty that this application will not be granted as drafted. OTOH - the inventor has nuclear industry credentials, and has written a book, of sorts... but none of that inspires confidence that he has written an enforceable patent. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/15/zuppero_solar_system/ http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=4534
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
