Breakthrough Invisibility Cloak & Absorber Technologies Receive Patents

I snow... I snow!

THE INVISIBLE HAM....disparage the efforts, ripoff the technology...and pretend the swine doesn't exist. When you accomplish this, you are qualified to write history books!

PERFECT!

;-)

 

CONNECTING THE DITS AND DOTS

(Bear with me here…its worth the effort) Suggest you read/capture before PRC pulls some of these links down from the web....

There certainly seems to be something fishy about PRC and their ‘take by whatever means’ approach to cloaking and stealth related technologies…..

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/china/...student-takes-his-homework-home-china-n893881 (watch the video)


Hmmmm. What are they up to? Looks like they want to, and are making, stealthy warcraft….

https://www.yahoo.com/news/metamaterials-could-china-apos-apos-132543341.html


SINA identifies a plant /city which is making 100’s of thousands of ‘supermaterial panels’….

https://mil.sina.cn/sd/2018-03-11/detail-ifxpwyhx0625776.d.html?vt=4&cid=65898






And that same plant shows up on this China State TV show…a PRC version of ‘NOVA’




As the music starts building to a crescendo of triumph we find….what is that…..the INVISIBLE HAM’S RIPOFFED TECHNOLOGY! (at 42:15)_




And now PRC is boasting long range stealth bombers able to attack the USA…


https://www.businessinsider.com/chi...aining-for-strikes-against-us-targets-2018-8/


Oh those goofy invisible hams and their wild speculations!

Is it 'hype..or hope'?

The Invisible Ham knows that Elpis is on our side....

;-)

--------------------------------------
"The Future... I snow"

 

Fantastic Chip.

 

There is an overview paper :
D. H. Werner and S. Ganguly, "An Overview of Fractal Antenna Engineering Research," IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine 45, No. 1, 38 (2003).
reference [14] Werner D.H., Fractal Radiators, proceedings of the 4th annual 1994, I.E.E.E. MOHAWK valley section dualuse technologies and applications conference, Suny institute of technology at Utica/Rome, New York, pp 478-482, May 23-26.

 

Well, those aren't them.

This is typical of what I see from PRC.... claims of prior attribution asserted but not shown.

None of these references teach the art on the subject matter of this thread.

Go ask your buddies what the reference is, for example, on "Minkowski Island". You won't find its origin on the DXCC list. Or Islands on the Air....

Speaking of ISLANDS.... what's up, exactly with the SPRATLY ISLANDS?

The fact is your colleagues make claims of new work on that done by others.

You should ask Shuman about what he thinks, today, of the alleged 'overview' paper BTW.

Tell your colleagues to go do their own work. A cordial admonishment.

BTW the 'first to invent' on fractal element antennas--which you seem to want to deviate to, way from the subject-- goes to 1987/1988. Werner's 1994 talk does not teach the art and thus is not prior art. Furthermore he does not show enablement.

Are you aware that I had to SHOW ENABLEMENT on 8,253,639 (the world's first cloaking patent)? Yep.

Perhaps we will hear next that Jules Verne invented the moonshot....

Everyone knows Smashing Pumpkins did it...



You will notice that no one has sought to dispute the priority of invention of the source patent on fractal element antennas. Why? Because there was no prior art teaching that novelty.

You should translate what the announcer says at 42:15 on the State Television show previously referenced..

Go ahead.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Nice alliteration

Proper prior preparation prevents piss poor performance!

 

Penultimately promulgated and propagated---propitiously!

 

Perpetual profusion probably primarily perfectly parachutes perfidiosly.

Edit: adjective

 

Probably profusely prorated by putrid problems, practically.

 

Ouch! You got me!! Proud of it

 

Worthy opponent!

 

Ok great, now take back all those mean things you said about me. Saying I was harrasing you, but you were wrong and wouldn't admit it.

But seriously, congratulations on your patents and your forthcoming prosecution of them. The hard work begins.

I'm wondering, why divulge in a patent rather than keep a trade secret?

 

Trade secrets, in my experience, have great value in PROCESSES, such as manufacturing processes. But anything you put out in the marketplace can and will get a tear down, and to protect that type of copying, IMO, patents work best.

A foreign power 'Using' an American invention as a tool to threaten American existence --AND BRAGGING ABOUT IT-- is a new one on me. IMO anyone stupid enough to try that will be stupid enough to get caught--and crash and burn.

IMO---

PRC is a great country that has done amazing things for its people the last 30 years. But seeking a place on the world stage requires respect and coexistence. Let's hope they learn that.

 

Excellent. Thanks!!