OldBill Posted August 17, 2007 Report Posted August 17, 2007 Well...I certainly agree with one statement: "The name Dante Donatelli will go down in history."....... Probably right next to L. Ron Hubbard. Quote
mhc70 Posted August 19, 2007 Author Report Posted August 19, 2007 Well...I certainly agree with one statement: "The name Dante Donatelli will go down in history."....... Probably right next to L. Ron Hubbard. A better guess would be next to Daniel Bernoulli and Giovanni Venturi, and it has nothing to do with all three being Italian. Quote
OldBill Posted August 20, 2007 Report Posted August 20, 2007 No... if we're talking Italian, someone more like Carlo Ponzi comes to mind. However, this is easy to resolve: just whip out your credit card and make a 'charitable contribution' - and then see what kind of "inside revelations" you become privvy to. Listen...I'm from the valve industry, and I have a story: Back in the early 50's a guy named George Raftis had a simple idea for a valve design - knowing it would solve a number of problems for the mining industry. He simply placed a rubber sleeve snugly inside a steel cylinder, wherein they were crimped together at both ends. Then, by applying a little air pressure between the two members, the rubber sleeve collapsed inward and pinched off the flow of mining slurries. Worked great! Simple, easy design - one moving part. The best part was that these highly abrasive slurries, used to chewing up hardened-steel materials for breakfast, were no match for the rubber sleeve - it would hold up for years before wearing out.And again, it was so simple that probably even my brother could build his own version of it out in his garage in about 2 hours, for under $20. So, George got himself a good patent attorney, came up with the right set of claims, and went into business. Fifty years later, with two huge manufacturing plants (see RedValve.com) and 2nd & 3rd generation Raftis' running the place, he has successfully fought off would-be copies of his valve - and won numerous suits against people who thought it was 'too simple' to protect with patents. The patent system works, and only charlatans and shamen would try to convince you (in huge all-caps type - a dead giveaway) otherwise. The dynalever will ultimately sit on the shelf right next to the 100-mile-per gallon carburetor and all those other nifty things that the oil companies and car makers conspired to quash. But not until someone milks it for all it's worth. Quote
mhc70 Posted August 20, 2007 Author Report Posted August 20, 2007 The patent system works great for mediocre inventions that only add to the viability of the machines that they were designed for. Read the reports found at this link and then tell me a patent is still worthy for something of this magnitude. Reports Quote
Zythryn Posted August 20, 2007 Report Posted August 20, 2007 All of the information you have provided, have come from one source.Where is the independant journal papers in Science or Nature? Where is the energy production replacing nuclear plants or dams?If they aren't willing to release the specifics due to fear of it being somehow controlled or buried by the big businesses of the world AND they are planning to release this to the world as free energy, just how do they expect to to that??I mean, it is difficult to 'give' this gift to the world, while at the same time refusing to release any details or share the information about how it is done.Please tell me you haven't actually given these people any money??:eek2: Quote
OldBill Posted August 20, 2007 Report Posted August 20, 2007 OK MHC70 - I read the reports, and now fully agree that something of that magnitude is not worthy of a patent. I was particularly impressed that in the same report where Ted Carnes says the laws of conservation of energy are not violated, he describes where a 1 HP input produces a 4HP output. I'm sure those dolts at the US Patent Office would be much too bureaucratically officious to ever turn a sympathetic ear toward that kind of a concept - so screw 'em! Quote
mhc70 Posted August 20, 2007 Author Report Posted August 20, 2007 All of the information you have provided, have come from one source.Where is the independant journal papers in Science or Nature? Where is the energy production replacing nuclear plants or dams?If they aren't willing to release the specifics due to fear of it being somehow controlled or buried by the big businesses of the world AND they are planning to release this to the world as free energy, just how do they expect to to that??I mean, it is difficult to 'give' this gift to the world, while at the same time refusing to release any details or share the information about how it is done.Please tell me you haven't actually given these people any money??:eek2: Ted Carnes and Richard P. Olenick are both respected in their fields and the independant sources. In 2005 congress changed the laws regarding intelletual property and Dante is using donations to the charitable org. Onegift4power. Then once the fund drive is over he will give the donators first right of refusal for a license to lease a power plant, similar to what xerox did when they did not want their technology reverse engineeered. Hope that helps. Quote
mhc70 Posted August 20, 2007 Author Report Posted August 20, 2007 OK MHC70 - I read the reports, and now fully agree that something of that magnitude is not worthy of a patent. I was particularly impressed that in the same report where Ted Carnes says the laws of conservation of energy are not violated, he describes where a 1 HP input produces a 4HP output. I'm sure those dolts at the US Patent Office would be much too bureaucratically officious to ever turn a sympathetic ear toward that kind of a concept - so screw 'em! The laws of conservation of energy say nothing about developing energy. If you read R. Olenicks reports he explains how Dante has found gaps in many laws of Physics. This has been done many times through the centuries, Galileo was hung for his beliefs that today are known as fact. Quote
OldBill Posted August 20, 2007 Report Posted August 20, 2007 Well then ... let's all hope that those unselfish donors are also magnanimous enough to relinquish their right to license Dante's technology, thus clearing the way for him to keep his promise of gifting it to the world.Also, Galileo may very well have been hung, but he was never hanged. He died of natural causes on January 8, 1642. Quote
Michaelangelica Posted August 29, 2007 Report Posted August 29, 2007 What about this onei thnk it has just bee patentedGamma Power Systems Company BackgroundGamma Power Systems Pty Limited is an Australian owned company, which was set up in March 2003 to investigate power production from different sources.The company to date has been pure research and development and we have made advances in solar energy collection design, so that we can now bring a unique power generation design to the world as an alternative to existing thermal production techniques. Existing TechnologyExisting green energy systems are a good adjunct to conventional thermal power generation and a step in the right direction. Wind Power and Wave Power use the natural effects on the earth in an attempt to harness energy, however, these only produce power when the waves are running or the wind is blowing Solar power using conventional Solar Power Panels is very restricted since it only allows power to be collected whilst the sun is shining. Hydroelectricity only works when excess water is available, in fact, most green energy systems apart from Hot Rock (Geothermal) technology are intermittent and therefore only marginally useful in today’s preplanned electricity distribution systems as they don’t provide consistent base load power. The cost to produce power using conventional green energy methodology is very expensive. This causes governments to have to subsidize the green component of power production to endeavor to cut our carbon emissions so that we may be good world citizens.Some governments have been looking at nuclear power, but this is because they see no other viable solution, however nuclear is also expensive compared to coal powered generation and introduces waste disposal problems.Scientists are currently trying to collect energy from zero point energy and cold fusion with billions of dollars being directed towards these endeavors. This energy is sub-atomic, difficult for most to understand, expensive and hard to get at, otherwise they would have already conquered this method of power production.StatCounter - Free Web Tracker and Counter New Technology What is needed is a green alternative that operates twenty-four hours a day and is cost effective, so that it can compete on a level playing field with all existing polluting, thermal technologies. We have spent many thousands of hours in research, testing many different apparatus to endeavor to find a solution. The technology that we have been researching has been the collection of solar energy, not based on light emissions from the sun but based on the collection of electrical energy that is released when the solar wind interacts with the upper levels of the atmosphere. We have made a major breakthrough that has allowed us to design a method of utilizing power from the sun whether it is day or night at the location of the power collection device. The energy available is almost incalculable, as inexhaustible as the sun and readily convertible for conventional usage. Quote
OldBill Posted August 29, 2007 Report Posted August 29, 2007 Well ... that's what is known as "dropping the first shoe" - the chest-thumping, palpable teaser. Stand by for the second shoe - inviting investors to "get in on the ground floor and reap millions!"...coming soon to a website near you. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.