"Administrative order C0-2007-0024 Consent order" (PDF). ^ Alabama Securities Commission (26 September 2008).
Perpetual motion machine manual#
Patent and Trademark Office Manual of Patent Examining Procedure Wholly inoperative inventions "incredible" utility, U.S.
^ Park, Robert L (2000), Voodoo Science: The road from foolishness to fraud, Oxford, UK & New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 8–9, 102–106, ISBN 0198604432."NBS report short-circuits energy machine – National Bureau of Standards". "Report of Tests on Joseph Newman's Device". ^ US National Bureau of Standards (June 1986).Quigg, 681 F.Supp 16 83-0001 (United States District Court, District of Columbia 17 February 1988). The device is referenced in the Big Black song "Newman Generator", recorded for their 1987 Peel Session. The company agreed to pay the State of Alabama $7,000 in administrative assessments and investigative costs. Eight of the investors declined the offer, electing to retain their investment the ninth did not reply. In January 2008 the company tendered offers of rescission to its nine Alabama investors, offering to reverse the sales. In August 2007 the Alabama Securities Commission issued a cease and desist order to the "Newman Energy Corporation", alleging it had sold unregistered stock in the company. The case is now cited in the USPTO's Manual of Patent Examining Procedure as an example of an "inoperative" invention that can't have any utility, concretely as a perpetual motion machine. During the hearing, Newman refused to have the machine tested by independent experts, and senator John Glenn pointed out that his supposedly independent expert actually had a prior business relationship with him. He obtained a hearing on 30 July 1986 in front of several senators, but he was unsuccessful. Newman argued that he had been mistreated by the patent office, and tried to have his motor legalized directly by the US Congress. The court therefore upheld the rejection of the patent application. In every case presented in the NBS report, the output power was less than power input from the battery pack, and therefore the efficiency was less than 100%. The National Bureau of Standards (NBS), now known as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), by request of the patent office, tested the device for several months and got negative results. However, the judge ordered Newman's machine to be tested by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS). Schuyler concluded that evidence to support Newman's claim was overwhelming and found no contradictory factual evidence. Patent Office, Washington, DC was chosen by the court to make the final decision to award the patent or not award the patent to Newman. Schuyler, Jr, former Commissioner of U.S. The United States District Court requested a master of the court to make the final decision. The application was eventually rejected in 1983, which set off a lengthy court battle. In 1979, Newman submitted an application for his device to the United States Patent and Trademark Office. According to proponents of the Energy Machine, the most crucial part of the design concerns what happens as a result of mechanical commutation. Newman claims that the motor derives its power by converting some of the mass of the copper in the coils into usable energy, in application of Einstein's mass–energy equivalence. Newman outlined his claims about there being a fundamental electromagnetic interaction in all matter ultimately derived from only one type of force particle propagating at the speed of light. By adding rolls to the armature of a motor, a larger and larger counter-electromotive force is generated on the motor.
0 kommentar(er)
