Dr. Stiffler's Slow Burning Water

[lamare]

I further realize that a Patent is only worth the funds you have to defend it and this I have experienced as I was lucky enough to have a grandfather that was a very good inventor that was ripped off from all he developed by individuals that felt theft was a better income than honest work. In the US my grandfather was the inventor of a number of patents, of which the following was for the crook a multimillion dollar device.

@Doc:

Good to see that you appear to realize that patents are basically a big lie. They are not there to protect "the inventor", they are there so the big companies can rip the inventor!

A good example is the story of Edwin Armstrong, as can be found in Lawrence Lessings' "free culture":

Free Culture - Introduction (by Lawrence Lessig)

Interestingly, some of Armstrongs earlier patents were used in the 1930's (IIRC) by multinational Philips to crush small producers of radio equipment, amongst which was the company of an uncle or grandfather of Theo de Raadt (Theo de Raadt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ), founder and leader of the OpenBSD and OpenSSH projects, and a founding member of the NetBSD project. There was a patent fight, and eventually the small businesses, operating together under the name "BORN" ( Bond van Ondernemers in de Radiobranche in Nederland - Wikipedia - Dutch ) won the litigation, because a famous radio engineer Idzgerda (who was the first broadcaster in The Netherlands The first Kurhaus radio-concerts ) found a way to work around Armstrongs patents.

However, even though they won the litigation, they lost. Philips was the only company that produced the bulbs they needed and simply refused to sell them anymore bulbs. And that basically ment the end of independent production of radio equipment in The Netherlands.

Also interesting is the story how Philips was able to build up their company, exactly because in The Netherlands we had a patent-less period between 1869 (IIRC) and 1910:

Royal Philips — Vrijschrift

The conclusion by Eric Schiff about the usefulness of patents to actually stimulate innovation:

All in all, the results for the two industries surveyed are in line with the tentative findings previously obtained for the Dutch economy as a whole. Industrial progress as such was not stifled by the absence of a patent law; in the case of the two particular industries it is, in fact, difficult to avoid the impression that this absence has, on balance, furthered rather than hampered development. Specifically with respect to technical improvement during the period when no patents were granted, the history of the two industries reveals that energetic and often successful efforts in this direction were made by the producing firms. Whether these efforts would have been even more intensive under a patent system it is difficult to say. But, with the possible exception of the 1911 episode at Eindhoven where the anticipated operation of the new patent law apparently did have some advance impact, the impression gained from the two examples is that in industries where technical talent of high order was available, there was no need for the stimulus of expected patent protection to translate its potentialities into achievements.

[carbideTip]

Again, a supposed OU device shelved because of "possibility of litigation".

[DrStiffler]

Again, a supposed OU device shelved because of "possibility of litigation".

@carbideTip

This statement by you can't be farther from the truth. What you need to say is that the technology is just not being made publicly available. I hope no one really thinks I missed what this is do you?

@All

A full spectral analysis of the flame has been conducted as well as thermal output measurements. It is fully understood as far as this is concerned. It still is open on why a SEC Exciter is so effective at doing it.

As far as protection or proof of first development, that was taken care of long before the 2008 video's were ever posted. There is nothing that gets me more upset and stirs the creativity and defense.

Patents are a joke, but they are part of a process no matter how flawed and they must be considered as part of a important technology.

[rickoff]

That is a good idea and many banks have employees that are public notaries
and they notarize paperwork for free - if you have an account. So print
it out, go get a free notary (they record it in their book with date and
description) and then make a copies and mail it to a few trusted people.
Tell them not to open it but just store it. They can be willingly subpoenaed if needed at a later time.

Then you'll have personal record, you'll have friends that received copies
of your notarized copy and the notary public will also have a record in
their book of the notarization. And of course anything mailed will have the
postal stamp with date.

Hi Aaron,

Printed copies of notarized documents are not legally valid, unless the same notary public notarizes each of the copies after they are printed.
And a word about postal envelopes - a canceled stamp and date, or even a certified receipt mean absolutely nothing as proof that the present contents are actually the contents which were mailed. There are ways to open envelopes and reseal them (steaming is one way, and freezing is another). And as far as patents go, I believe the rule is that the first person who applies for a patent will win out regardless of how many people can prove they developed the same concept earlier, but failed to submit a patent application.

Oh, and regarding US patent application searches, yes, you can only search ten years back, but of course that covers scads of patents. You could probably go back even further in the apps if you know the app #, unless they toss out applications that are not approved for a patent. At WIPO(International Patent) search, you can go back quite a ways. I know that, for example, the original Reed magnetic motor application (WO 90/10337) is dated February 1990, and the publication date is September 1990, 7 months later.

Rick

[Michelinho]

@DrStiffler,

So you have watched the flame under infrared? The biggest part of the flame is in the invisible range? Nicely done with just 2 watts.

Take care,

Michel

[1NRG24Seven]

Hi Aaron,

Printed copies of notarized documents are not legally valid, unless the same notary public notarizes each of the copies after they are printed.
And a word about postal envelopes - a canceled stamp and date, or even a certified receipt mean absolutely nothing as proof that the present contents are actually the contents which were mailed. There are ways to open envelopes and reseal them (steaming is one way, and freezing is another). And as far as patents go, I believe the rule is that the first person who applies for a patent will win out regardless of how many people can prove they developed the same concept earlier, but failed to submit a patent application.

Oh, and regarding US patent application searches, yes, you can only search ten years back, but of course that covers scads of patents. You could probably go back even further in the apps if you know the app #, unless they toss out applications that are not approved for a patent. At WIPO(International Patent) search, you can go back quite a ways. I know that, for example, the original Reed magnetic motor application (WO 90/10337) is dated February 1990, and the publication date is September 1990, 7 months later.

Rick

Rick, Then what does the phrase "public domain" mean?.....24

[1NRG24Seven]

Dr Stiffler you mention in video number three the bubbling inside the flame, could it be simply that since the water level was at or just above the funnel that your wick was getting wet and so the flame would be mixed with non split water vapor causing that action? Try it again with water level just below funnel so no chance of water wicking up into the the cotton and fiberglass packing material, see if you still observe the same bubbling in the flame. Or maybe you have already tried that and might be willing to comment on it here.

Just a thought....24

[Rod74]

re:

Hello Dr. Stiffler,

I've only been a reader of this forum for awhile and this is my first post. I was disabled retired from the military and became unable to work..the only thing that has kept me sane is Lidmotor and Jonnydavro and I've been watching their videos teaching myself circuitry since I can't do anything anymore.


This technology you are working with, the US Navy is currently working on. They have someone in California under a Navy Contract using the John Kanzius method of turning salt water into burnable hydrogen. They are trying to use the Fischer-Trospche process to turn those carbons (CO2)/hydrogen into jetfuel/diesel. I suspect the new Ford Class Aircraft Carrier may use it's nuclear reactors and make it's own jetfuel using the process.

I have been following this technology and there have been 2 explosions at the labs where people are working on this in California.

I do not think you would be able to patent anything in this realm since the Navy is involved (National Security). Be extremely cautious. I would no longer discuss this technology in the public forum.

Read the bottom of this link:

Fischer–Tropsch process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Be careful Doctor. This sort of technology has many enemies foreign and domestic and would threaten peoples wealth.

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Hello Dr. Stiffler,

I've only been a reader of this forum for awhile and this is my first post. I was disabled retired from the military and became unable to work..the only thing that has kept me sane is Lidmotor and Jonnydavro and I've been watching their videos teaching myself circuitry since I can't do anything anymore.


This technology you are working with, the US Navy is currently working on. They have someone in California under a Navy Contract using the John Kanzius method of turning salt water into burnable hydrogen. They are trying to use the Fischer-Trospche process to turn those carbons (CO2)/hydrogen into jetfuel/diesel. I suspect the new Ford Class Aircraft Carrier may use it's nuclear reactors and make it's own jetfuel using the process.

I have been following this technology and there have been 2 explosions at the labs where people are working on this in California.

I do not think you would be able to patent anything in this realm since the Navy is involved (National Security). Be extremely cautious. I would no longer discuss this technology in the public forum.

Read the bottom of this link:

Fischer–Tropsch process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Be careful Doctor. This sort of technology has many enemies foreign and domestic and would threaten peoples wealth.

Hi and welcome, I would be interested if you know anything more of the experiments that the navy are doing as this may be involving the work I have been doing for many years. If you do not want to post anything here please PM me on this forum with an e-mail address so as we may talk. If you want to see what I am talking about go to the none electrolytic splitting of H2O thread.

The work of Dr. Stiffler is on a similar basis to mine, similar on the basis that we use HF to break the water molecule and not electrolysis.

Mike

[DanDMan]

Has anyone saved these videos

I lost my drive to a crash which had a copy of these videos and I noticed they have been removed. Might any of you guys be kind enough to link me to another copy of the videos with the flame burning?

I know the value of this from the second I saw it and hope to recompile this important info.

[RAMSET]

ongoing Open source investigation and experiments

Gentlemen
These videos were removed sometime back
YouTube - Can Water be Burned ---https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsX-j53_FDg
YouTube - Can Water be Burned #2 -----https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAVRCUDVyuY
YouTube - Can Water be Burned #3 (slow burning water)----https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aanRgpfv144

We are investigating and experimenting with this tech ,all is to be open sourced.
did anyone save a copy of these vids that they can send a link or post ?

Also A note To Dr. Stiffler
I hope all is well and would love to hear from you about this tech and where it has gone.

respectfully
ChetKremens@gmail.com