32 - and yet more on where we're at

Dear Readers,

I've got some relatively good news. It seems that it may be possible to get a public demonstration of our device - and, provided that it includes enough experts - then this could be a feasible means of advancing this entire project. At its worst it will be taking the bull by the horns - assuming that the bull first allows itself to get that close.

I've been alerted to a new danger. There's enough in this technology that is new - and even yet to be tested - that may indeed be patentable. Frankly - I think that will be an inevitable consequence. But there's enough without any improvements to be directly applied - so it's not actually of that much cosequence. In other words - what's patented can only improve on what's evident already. And even where we're at - the results are pointing to a required decoupling from that supply grid. Never a bad thing.

Then too - even at this early stage - it seems that there are those who are introducing this 'nascent' technology at some relatively high Government levels - here and there. The proposal that has been advanced is that they - the investors - act as a licensing authority - that the manufacturers or users or both - pay some kind of licensing fee. No doubt there would be some kind of 'back hander' to that 'approving authority' - presumably the license grantor. This is absolutely not tenable. Especially if the technology cannot be patented. All the more do I see the need for Open Source. I can see that patenting it would allow some kind of graduated control to the implementation - that things don't become too chaotic. But to try and operate this simply by allowing a Government to control either those manufacturers or the end users - simply through financial considerations - then we're back to the monopolistic controls that we've been subjected to since that supply grid was ever first designed.

All the more reason to get this onto those academic work benches that our experts can see what is needed and how to apply it - in everyone's best interests. Frankly - I suspect that this 'first evidence' will be buried by far more interesting applications. I have a few ideas here myself. And if I can think it through then how much better would all those experts and all those skilled engineers around the globe. We indeed live in exciting times.

However. More to the point - I have lost our little waveform. Not sure where it's gone to. I think it's taken fright at the level of interest that seems to be coming forward - and just decided to withdraw until it's recovered from that fright. Nor do I blame it. I feel a bit frightened myself.

I'm going to get a stable demonstration designed and developed and will then conclude that report that was interrupted. The interruption, incidentally was due to my not getting access to the lab during the Christmas break. Then too I'll post out some invitations and trust to God that there will be a few who will come to that party. That should, at it's least, get the questions started. Which is a good thing. I've been looking forward to the time when I can share some of my own questions here.

So. Dear Reader. Now is the time to start talking. There's much that is developing. Poynty's forum - I'll post the link - has an ongoing discussion with an esteemed and worthy academic - a Professor Emeritus - who's kindly and bravely, showing anamolies on Lawrence Tseung's device which is a Joule Thief variant. Wonderful stuff - compelling evidence - and really good news. Other developments are on Overunity.com - but I'm not sure of the link. You'll need to check it out. It seems that all is HOTTING UP. Thank you God.

Kindet regards,
Rosemary

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=538.msg9582;topicseen#msg9582

I think that's the link.