A space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state is provided comprising a hollow superconductive shield, an inner shield, a power source, a support structure, upper and lower means for generating an electromagnetic field, and a flux modulation controller. A cooled hollow superconductive shield is energized by an electromagnetic field resulting in the quantized vortices of lattice ions projecting a gravitomagnetic field that forms a spacetime curvature anomaly outside the space vehicle. The spacetime curvature imbalance, the spacetime curvature being the same as gravity, provides for the space vehicle’s propulsion. The space vehicle, surrounded by the spacetime anomaly, may move at a speed approaching the light-speed characteristic for the modified locale.
So I guess technically it isn’t a Warp drive since it is sub-light speed. Perhaps that’s the Impulse engine?
In any case, I was under the (mis)apprehension that you could only patent stuff that could actually be made. This seems wacked.
Just another example of the staggering ineptitude of the USPTO. Of course this invention fails all the traditional rules by which a patent should be awarded, of which perhaps the most insignificant is its obvious scientific impossibility.
Really, it’s very sad if it’s not some patent examiner’s idea of a joke. You’d think that an examiner would have to have at least the equivalent a C in high school science to get the job…
The USPTO goes through patents the way editor’s assisitants go through unsolicited novel manuscripts: They Do Not Get Examined In Detail, because one person has to read 300 a day, and it’s not humanly possible.
The difference is, with novels, the first sign of error gets the MS thrown into the slush closet, where it will be lucky to be read by an intern before it’s thrown out.
With patents, if its not obviously a perpetual motion machine or something equally obviously junk, it gets stamped. The court system will deal with it if it’s bad or unoriginal.
So “The space vehicle, surrounded by the spacetime anomaly, may move at a speed approaching the light-speed characteristic for the modified locale.” is not obviously junk?
So “The space vehicle, surrounded by the spacetime anomaly, may move at a speed approaching the light-speed characteristic for the modified locale.” is not obviously junk?[/quote]
That’s pretty bad, but imagine yourself a liberal arts grad in a $12 an hour desk job, and the only diligence you can get done is making sure it doesn’t include certain keywords like “zero point energy” or whatnot.
I’m a co-inventor on a patent just issued for an application that was submitted in March 2000. Someone is doing a lot more than sitting around rubber-stamping perpetual motion patents. Pity we couldn’t have gotten that guy…
But my point is really that a brief glance at the first paragraph of the warp-drive abstract should have been enough to throw the patent away. If the examiner can’t even make the simple determination that the application is bullshit, what can he do? Did he just do a keyword search on “warp drive” and find no previous patents, and so it was an automatic approval? I guess the lesson is to not use any conventional terms of art in your application.
IMO, only hardware patents with real prototype devices should be permitted. You may not have to submit the prototype with the patent, but you should at least allege to have made the thing you’re patenting. And yes, my “invention” is a lame e-commerce software patent.
