13.304 D. “Discussion and conclusion [TO BE COMPLETED] Fc ai gl cuurlea t7e cdo mr epsaurl et ss tihnec leusdt iimn ga t et hs eo f eefqf eucattsi oonf 5 bwoitthh tahcet udaattoar o faRn edf . f2l u. Ai ds cwo me i gphatr,e dt hwe i tmh et haes u r e d pressures are significantly lower, being about 26% low at z/L = 0.25, decreasing to 19% low at z/L migh=t 0b.4e2e.Sxipneccetetdhetopoinsscirbelaeseefftehcets of such sources of discrepancy as solid and fluid friction pC required to lift the weight—at least in the process of r“Taiosimngy tkhneoiwt—letdhgise,aipnpetwaros ctoenstuuprpieosrtoMf srciSetnratiifnic’sdcelaviemlo.”pment there has never been a c ase i n bwehei nc h vti ho lea tl ea dw. sI ho fa vcel a 5s s0i cyael a rpsh yosf i cdsi rwe chte pn e ur ssoenda li ne xtpheeri ri e np cr oe puesri nsgp ht he rees eo lfaawpsp, l li ec aa bd ii lni tgy mhea vt oe ibme lpi er vo ev et hma yt If i nc aa nnc inaol amf foari er sq. ”u( Ue snt ii vo enr st iht ey mE nt ghianne eI rci anng Pmraokf ee stswo ro apnl du sr et nwoowenqeuda sl cfiievne t, ias nt . d) t h u s NOTE: The differential test model proves that less than 4% efficiency differential is required for the diamond-shaped actuator to produce its full fluid requirement by pumping the fluid from a conventional piston. This fact leaves 22% remaining work potential in each operation, allowing a reciprocating machine to run itself and produce external mechanical work with no external energy input. E. “I chose to write to you on my personal, rather than business stationary. I figure that you get enough of the formal business stuff. Most importantly, you should understand that in building your piston system, you conformed to the laws of Newtonian Mechanics. Those laws helped you build something better than was before, but at the same time, restricted you to the valdity of CPE. More simply, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Take it all, or take none of it. Them’s the rules.” (Scientist used by the NRC to assess “out of the box” inventions) F. “I have understood novelty of the diamond-shaped actuator and its potential advantages. Also, I do not question validity of experimental data that you and Mr. Blanchard collected. Quite contrary, I trust that the experiments and all measurements were conducted professionally. Our views differ with regard to the system that uses the diamond-shaped actuator to produce useful mechanical work without spending any external energy. Even in this case I do not challenge validity of your experimental data (that is, I trust that the system worked at some point). I only think that the data is incomplete -- some part of the process went unnoticed. Thus, I trust that the system can work, but you/we do not have a proper explanation for how it works.” (NRC scientist) Quotes A to F are typical of comments based on unconditional acceptance in the Laws of Thermodynamics. Not one has provided any scientific or technical logic to support their position specifically addressing the invention’s design drawings they possessed. SIEMENS, via one of their controls experts, peer reviewed the detailed control drawings and initialled the drawings with no changes, confirming the control circuits. Pages 13.305 to 13.310 present the SIEMENS assessment. Pages ten to fifteen of the link below present the same, plus other scientists/ engineers assessments in the report. Patent examiners from the PCT (Patent Co-operation Treaty), European, USA and Canadian patent offices examined the design data and granted the patents. Rejection should be based on technical assessment of the actual invention, with supporting arguments. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ee6829b4abd4867f862c3ca/t/61e6fb5a7ea4d658250bc320/1642527582218/SCIENTIFIC+AND+ENGINEERING+OBSERVATIONS+AND+OPINIONS.pdf
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODY1ODQy