Originally posted by Johnny Boy:
Originally posted by J. Arthur God:
[qb] [QUOTE] One would think that under these circumtances the law and human decency will allow the actual mechanism to be patented.
Keep in mind, a patent is not a refereed publication. A patent being granted is not an statement that the discussion within is correct.
Besides, are you going to have judges and lawyers decide whether a certain material uses your physics? You are likely going to find a difficult enough time with referees. I realise how corrupt our legal system is. As Jesus said, they suck out the gnat and swallow the camel as a whole. Unfortunately filing patents, as imperfect as the sytem is, is the only recourse one has; unless you can get an international powerful mafia on your side. Sometimes I have the feeling that the mafia has a better sense of justice than our Western judicial systems?
The referees will eventually come around because the science is sound. I have found during my publishing life that a paper with an incremental addition to scientific knowledge is accepted far easier by referees than one that moves outside dogmatic boundaries. Nonetheless, although the papers I have submitted which fall under the latter category have been violently opposed initially, they were all qouted extensively once they have passed the bigotry of referees. I know this will also eventually happen in the present case. It might take a little longer because a referee that has been weaned on BCS theory and applied it for years in his/her papers is going to balk worse than a donkey.