an illness cured s...fast!
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 4:23 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote:
> You r a young dude!
>
>
> On Friday, January 25, 2013, Peter Gluck wrote:
>
>> let's try, how old are you Terry? I'm 75.25
>> Peter
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
>>
>>> On Fr
You r a young dude!
On Friday, January 25, 2013, Peter Gluck wrote:
> let's try, how old are you Terry? I'm 75.25
> Peter
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Terry Blanton
>
> > wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Peter Gluck
>> >
>> wrote:
>> > dry Ni/H systems high temperature
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Peter Gluck wrote:
> let's try, how old are you Terry? I'm 75.25
Mentally, about 19; chronologically, 59. But no one is promised tomorrow.
let's try, how old are you Terry? I'm 75.25
Peter
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Peter Gluck
> wrote:
> > dry Ni/H systems high temperature, (4-800 C) Ni as rod with nanosurface
> or
> > powder, hydrogen from bottle- sounds differen
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:17 AM, Peter Gluck wrote:
> dry Ni/H systems high temperature, (4-800 C) Ni as rod with nanosurface or
> powder, hydrogen from bottle- sounds different I think.
May we both live to see the ensuing litigious joust results.
dry Ni/H systems high temperature, (4-800 C) Ni as rod with nanosurface or
powder, hydrogen from bottle- sounds different I think.
Peter
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:41 AM, Peter Gluck
> wrote:
> > and this, dear Terry could be an obstacle fo
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:41 AM, Peter Gluck wrote:
> and this, dear Terry could be an obstacle for new Ni-H patents?
Nickel wire (tube)
Potassium carbonate
Pressurized, heated, nascent hydrogen
Excess heat
Sounds familiar to me.
and this, dear Terry could be an obstacle for new Ni-H patents?
Peter
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:32 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Peter Gluck
> wrote:
> > Randy Mills says hsi process has nothing to do
> > with Rossi's or Piantelli's. And he is not interested
>
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Peter Gluck wrote:
> Randy Mills says hsi process has nothing to do
> with Rossi's or Piantelli's. And he is not interested
> in ny communiction with these individuals.
> The problem is that his CIHT is progressing very
> slowly.
I'm talking about the March 24, 19
Randy Mills says hsi process has nothing to do
with Rossi's or Piantelli's. And he is not interested
in ny communiction with these individuals.
The problem is that his CIHT is progressing very
slowly.
peter
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> As far as the NiH reaction goes,
As far as the NiH reaction goes, I doubt anyone could defend a patent
since it was placed in the public domain by Mills years ago.
Processes for increasing the efficiency should be defendable, however.
I wanted to call Rossi's attention about his moral obligation to tell
better lies. Surely he cannot do anything real against this very well
conceived an written patent.
I start to have very serious doubts if he is progressing on the way from
enhanced excess heat to energy source. A good partner cou
Edmund Storms wrote:
>
> Also such challenges can prevent a patent from being granted in the EU.
> Remember Patterson and F-P.
>
That is true. I had forgotten about that. Still, Rossi is not an
influential person.
- Jed
No the action is not at the patent office. The action is in the courts
that oversee patents. Also such challenges can prevent a patent from
being granted in the EU. Remember Patterson and F-P.
Ed
On Jan 24, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
And then Piantelli tes
Formally, anybody can object against a granted EU patent within 9 months.
Looking to Piantelli's claims not only pure Nickel but also Nickel alloys
are applicable.
So, it's basically impossible for Rossi to claim Piantelli's setup cannot
work.
Even stronger, Rossi's catalyzer is possibly related to
Rossi's patent description is untestable and has not much in common with
what he is really doing.
I bet thta Rossi does not want a patent for what he does or tries to do,
This action now is just smoke, circus, game playing.
Peter
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:27 PM, Edmund Storms wrote:
> And then P
Edmund Storms wrote:
And then Piantelli tests Ross's patent and finds it not to work. Meanwhile,
> the lawyers get rich . . .
Piantelli has no influence with the patent office either.
This discussion makes no sense. You cannot walk in off the street, declare
yourself a patent examiner, and inf
And then Piantelli tests Ross's patent and finds it not to work.
Meanwhile, the lawyers get rich and while the elephants are fighting,
the mice eat the corn. Being one of the mice, this is good news.
Ed
On Jan 24, 2013, at 12:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The title of your article is "Rossi w
I meant his tests are NOT going to be admitted as evidence.
Believe me, that patent office has never heard of Rossi, and it does not
want to hear from him. He has no influence. Stop worrying about him.
- Jed
Peter Gluck wrote:
It is not about opinion, Rossi says he has tested
> the apparatus according to the patent with high fidelity and has
> demonstrated it does not work.
>
The patent office does not care what he says. He is not a patent examiner.
His tests are going to be admitted as evidence.
-
It is not about opinion, Rossi says he has tested
the apparatus according to the patent with high fidelity and has
demonstrated it does not work.
I show why this cannot be true, and suppose
that it is true, it would be a loss for him.
The method is the key.
I have not spoken about opinion.
Peter
The title of your article is "Rossi wants to destroy the Piantelli patent."
Rossi has no power to destroy any patent, any more than I can destroy a
football player's contract with the NFL. Rossi has no say in this matter,
and no influence with the patent office in any country. However, Rossi does
22 matches
Mail list logo
