dr. Best Ultimate Single Chip Two Antennas LRL

[Max]

I believe, if I am a triumphalist, as you say; it is only because I have a complete understanding of the topic which we are speaking - based on a very long and arduous collection of all the available data.

That is not to say I am not willing to change my mind in light of new data; ...only that at this time, there is no new data forthcoming.

Provide me with some valid new data...........

Data from him ???

It's like squeeze water from a stone...

Nothing from him... apart PaloAlto statistics...

[J_Player]

I believe, if I am a triumphalist, as you say; it is only because I have a complete understanding of the topic which we are speaking - based on a very long and arduous collection of all the available data.

That is not to say I am not willing to change my mind in light of new data; ...only that at this time, there is no new data forthcoming.

Provide me with some valid new data...........

No data forthcoming?
Hmmm... Are we talking about another secret technology following the road to oblivion?

Maybe somebody else with the same idea will publish some successful experiments with improvements that make the project usable with repeatable test results. Could that save it from oblivion? Of course anyone who did that would receive the merit for his efforts.

Best wishes
J_P

[Theseus]

I'm not very triumphalist like you!

I believe, if I am a triumphalist, as you say; it is only because I have a complete understanding of the topic which we are speaking - based on a very long and arduous collection of all the available data.

That is not to say I am not willing to change my mind in light of new data; ...only that at this time, there is no new data forthcoming.

Provide me with some valid new data...........

[Max]

Mineoro, in contrary, make a brilliant idea how to market "pistol, nothing inside". Not to mighty GE, not to speculative Kaiser, not to tie Naval, but to naive gold hunters.

Someone said, naive will never run out, because every second born one new.

Mineoro! What a nice company!

Must be rebranded as PanamericanPaloAltoCorporation... of Pantanal.

And they must change also logo... from that funny comic to some serious PaloAlto... so the user will know what expect him/her after buy!

Kind regards,
Max

[WM6]

But I do understand the concept that an inexperienced businessman can make bad choices in how to market his idea.

J_P

Mineoro, in contrary, make a brilliant idea how to market "pistol, nothing inside". Not to mighty GE, not to speculative Kaiser, not to tie Naval, but to naive gold hunters.

Someone said, naive will never run out, because every second born one new.

[Qiaozhi]

Sinclair Flat Screen Pocket TV

Do you remember this? ->

http://www.crashonline.org.uk/18/sinclar4.htm

[J_Player]

"If you produce the pistol, we’re going to have to fight you."

The interview
http://www.ieeeghn.org/wiki/index.ph..._the_Interview

Hi Esteban,
I think the example you show is not a good example of the hobbyist experimenter you started with.

General Electric was also interested in his flat cathode ray tube, but Aiken declined their offer, telling them he had chosen the Kaiser group to fund his project. While developing his tube at Kaiser group, he found the Naval Research Center was interested in his flat tube for heads-up displays in jet planes. So they demonstrated a prototype and the government was interested. But when they told the government they must pay millions of dollars to develop production models and set up a plant and get into production, the government was not interested. They were only interested if the product could be implemented at a competitive price compared to other available heads-up display methods which came into use at the time. Kaiser then went to RCA and offered their flat tube to be used in the new RCA color technology. This is the story that we see in the article you posted. Their final decision was as you read -- they were too heavily invested in their own tubes to decide to accept his offer. But the story did not end there. Kaiser also went to other TV tube manufacturers who also did not want to sign a license for these flat tubes either. Not after his visit to RCA. When they found that nobody was interested in paying them to produce or license their flat tube design, Kaiser stopped funding the project. Too bad Aiken didn't choose the offer by GE. They weren't heavily invested in new dot matrix tubes like RCA, and they also had the capacity to fund production costs without problems from stockholders. Who knows?

But lets take a look at the patents Aiken filed. He was not the only person who had patents for flat cathode ray tubes. In fact he was not the discoverer of the concept. Many thought of it before, and a few did enough experimenting to make workable methods. Dr. Dennis Gabor (inventor of 3D holograms) patented a similar tube about the same time in London. And if you check your old copies of "Radio and Hobbies" magazine you will see there were new flat screen ideas published every couple of years from the 1940s. Also note a more affordable version of these flat screen cathode ray tubes were put into production for a few years in miniature hand-held TVs, but became extinct when plasma and LCD flat screens were developed. William Aiken was not involved in the development of these flat panel screens, only the flat cathode ray tube.

Also note his story is no way similar to the Alonso story or average hobbyist story. Aiken was not a hobbyist, but an engineer working for the government when he first got his idea. And he tried to sell it to people who did not want it under his terms or cost proposals (remember I told you experiment must do something useful that other people want done). But I don't see someone else receiving the merit for Aiken's discovery. I see nobody wanted to buy his discovery. Merit was not taken from him by some physics doctor as you claim. Aiken is still listed as the inventor of the first flat screen cathode ray TV. See here: Google "william ross aiken" http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

But I do understand the concept that an inexperienced businessman can make bad choices in how to market his idea.


To finish the flat screen idea, do you think Alonso will be putting flat screens on the Mineoro FG detectors to show GPS maps with an "X" to mark the location of treasure?
This is one I would like to see.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Esteban]

"If you produce the pistol, we’re going to have to fight you."

The interview

http://www.ieeeghn.org/wiki/index.php/Oral-History:William_Ross_Aiken#About_the_Interview

[Esteban]

Hi Esteban,
I think Alonso was wrong.
It was never necessary for an experimenter to convert a discovery to formulas in order to obtain the merit for his work. There are only two things necessary for an experimenter to receive the merit for their work.

First is their experiment must do something useful that other people want done. Second the experimenter must explain what his discovery does. He does not need scientific formulas of a master or doctor. Simply to publish his work in a magazine or trade journal. This immediately establishes him as the experimenter who discovered something new. Same as the experimenters names are shown in the old magazines you post.
I can show you plenty of examples to prove this is true, starting with some early experimenters a century ago who proved it.

For example Thomas Edison became famous for inventing the light bulb after years of experiments with many methods until he settled on the light bulb. He did not hide his secret, and he was not a master or doctor. He simply made it to do something useful for people and published the news. It seems the news spread fast so many people were byying his light bulbs to replace their candles. I don't remember ever reading any converted for formulas for his light bulbs. But because the details of his experiments were published, later experimenters made better light bulbs and many variations he did not think of. They improved lighting technology in ways Edison could never achieve. If he hid his light bulb secrets because he knew he was not a master or doctor to convert some formulas, then he would have died long ago with nobody knowing he was an early experimenter of light bulbs. But he did not hide his light bulb secrets, and we see he is remembered a century later as a famous discoverer of the method for early light bulb... So not true he needs doctor or master!

The same is true for hundreds of others who make experiments that they publish in magazines and trade journals. The only time when I see people are not remembered is when they make secret discoveries. There are two roads to oblivion for secret discoveries. One is the secret discovery is kept by an experimenter, who improves his discovery as much as he can, but keeps it secret. Then he eventually dies and his secret dies with him. After he is dead, somebody cleans out his workshop and throws away all the unknown secret junk hidden in the corner. No merit for the secret experimenter in this case. Result is the secret discoverer does not receive merit, and his work ends in oblivion.

The second road to oblivion for secret experimenter is when he continues working on his secret discovery and someone else makes the same discovery somewhere else, but does not make it secret. Then we see the person who publishes his discovery will receive the merit, not the person who hides his discovery in his secret bunker. After the person who publishes the discovery receives the merit, and is remembered as the discoverer, others who read about his work will make more experiments that can improve it in ways he did not think of, while the person who hides his discovery will see no improvement other than what he could think of. Eventually the secret experimenter will find out that another person also discovered and made great improvements. Then he may try to claim he is the discoverer. But who will care what he claims? His work is antique without more improvements like the person who published his experiments. People will laugh at the secret discoverer and ask why he only shows his discovery after another person makes the discovery. The result again is the secret discoverer does not receive merit, and his work ends in oblivion. But the difference here is someone who publishes the discovery receives the merit, not the first discoverer who hides his discovery.

So I say no...
Alonso is wrong to believe a physics master or doctor is necessary for an experimenter to receive merit for their discovery.
What I see is it is necessary to publish your work to receive merit.

Best wishes,
J_P

Nobody remember him... Maybe the industry of "fat" screen no permits flat screen. I have a collection of these guys who published his inventions...

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/04/09/flat-screen-tv-in-1958/

[J_Player]

Simple, when such experiments was made by hobbyist, his name and experiments are buried... Only a doctor in Physics emerges! Alonso told a friend this: "If I ventilate the secret, other will to obtain the merit". And he know this, because you must to be doctor or master, and convert it in formulas (but I think we can't, at first sight, due conditions as mineralization and excess of wet in air, wet in air dispersse much the phenomenon, except when very light rain, because micro-drops acts as a "bridge" –this I have observed!!!–).

Hi Esteban,
I think Alonso was wrong.
It was never necessary for an experimenter to convert a discovery to formulas in order to obtain the merit for his work. There are only two things necessary for an experimenter to receive the merit for their work.

First is their experiment must do something useful that other people want done. Second the experimenter must explain what his discovery does. He does not need scientific formulas of a master or doctor. Simply to publish his work in a magazine or trade journal. This immediately establishes him as the experimenter who discovered something new. Same as the experimenters names are shown in the old magazines you post.
I can show you plenty of examples to prove this is true, starting with some early experimenters a century ago who proved it.

For example Thomas Edison became famous for inventing the light bulb after years of experiments with many methods until he settled on the light bulb. He did not hide his secret, and he was not a master or doctor. He simply made it to do something useful for people and published the news. It seems the news spread fast so many people were byying his light bulbs to replace their candles. I don't remember ever reading any converted for formulas for his light bulbs. But because the details of his experiments were published, later experimenters made better light bulbs and many variations he did not think of. They improved lighting technology in ways Edison could never achieve. If he hid his light bulb secrets because he knew he was not a master or doctor to convert some formulas, then he would have died long ago with nobody knowing he was an early experimenter of light bulbs. But he did not hide his light bulb secrets, and we see he is remembered a century later as a famous discoverer of the method for early light bulb... So not true he needs doctor or master!

The same is true for hundreds of others who make experiments that they publish in magazines and trade journals. The only time when I see people are not remembered is when they make secret discoveries. There are two roads to oblivion for secret discoveries. One is the secret discovery is kept by an experimenter, who improves his discovery as much as he can, but keeps it secret. Then he eventually dies and his secret dies with him. After he is dead, somebody cleans out his workshop and throws away all the unknown secret junk hidden in the corner. No merit for the secret experimenter in this case. Result is the secret discoverer does not receive merit, and his work ends in oblivion.

The second road to oblivion for secret experimenter is when he continues working on his secret discovery and someone else makes the same discovery somewhere else, but does not make it secret. Then we see the person who publishes his discovery will receive the merit, not the person who hides his discovery in his secret bunker. After the person who publishes the discovery receives the merit, and is remembered as the discoverer, others who read about his work will make more experiments that can improve it in ways he did not think of, while the person who hides his discovery will see no improvement other than what he could think of. Eventually the secret experimenter will find out that another person also discovered and made great improvements. Then he may try to claim he is the discoverer. But who will care what he claims? His work is antique without more improvements like the person who published his experiments. People will laugh at the secret discoverer and ask why he only shows his discovery after another person makes the discovery. The result again is the secret discoverer does not receive merit, and his work ends in oblivion. But the difference here is someone who publishes the discovery receives the merit, not the first discoverer who hides his discovery.

So I say no...
Alonso is wrong to believe a physics master or doctor is necessary for an experimenter to receive merit for their discovery.
What I see is it is necessary to publish your work to receive merit.

Best wishes,
J_P

[Max]

You are wright, some times I get random beebs,

There are at least three... when you opened the english pages they loaded into your browser stuff... and now you have to play with antivirus software!

What a nice company, uh ?

[mosha]

I guess you got your computer infected by some... Mineoro trojans... scan for them!

You are wright, some times I get random beebs,

[Max]

He doesn't know... he's not sure.... how come !?

patented in Brazil... oh yeah... and Obama flyes without the helicoper now...

Fairy tales... and brazilian-paraguayan snake oil company!

Panamerican Palo Alto Corporation... of Pantanal !

[Esteban]

On mineoro site they explaine the physic prinsibal that these mineoro devices work by, and Alonso make his devices based on this theory, why he dont patent it with any US patent agency and take the merits?

rgards,

Mosha.

Think is patented in Brazil, but his theory (with Damásio) maybe is not enough for the scientific world... But the columns of ions (also describes 1,000 times by J_P and used by minning company of Australia) is showed in Mineoro pages.

[Max]

On mineoro site they explaine the physic prinsibal that these mineoro devices work by, and Alonso make his devices based on this theory, why he dont patent it with any US patent agency and take the merits?

rgards,

Mosha.

I guess you got your computer infected by some... Mineoro trojans... scan for them!