Jose':
"I do not understand the purpose of doing it that way instead of the way that "Roger" promotes it."
How about finding ways to avoid infringements on Roger's EMdrive patents?
Best, Paul M.
The problems with that explanation are as follows:
1) Shawyer's original patents for asymmetric resonant cavities of that vintage [not superconducting] were UK patents (this refers to his patents before his association with Gilo, when finally Shawyer+Gilo applied for new patents with new designs with applicability outside the UK). There appears to be no Chinese patent, or a Worldwide patent of that vintage design. Therefore no infringement issue in China, (or in the USA concerning the designs followed by Monomorphic and other Do-It-Yourself) for UK patents.
In any case, I doubt that the Chinese Space Agency had at any time the intention to sell their EM Drives in the UK. Even if that would have been the case: Shawyer's patents of this vintage design have expired:
2) It appears that Shawyer's patents of that vintage (for example GB (11) 2 229 865(13)A 1990 ) have expired even in the UK, there is one patent (2 334 761 (13) A 1999) close to expiration. Presently valid patents with significant life remaining (starting with his -13 year old already, and having just 7 more years of life assuming 20 year life- 2004 patent covering [Claim1: An engine comprising a gimbal mounted matrix of a number of
superconducting microwave thrusters which are supplied with pulses of microwave energy via an array of switches and
enclosed in a dewar which is maintained at low temperature by liquefied gas.]) appear to cover other things like designs for superconductivity, etc. Such superconductive designs are not discussed by the Chinese patents that we are addressing.
Patent infringement law: you get a specific patent for the UK: then infringement applies in the UK. If you like to discuss infringement you have to:
1) discuss
presently valid patent
claims. Once the patent expires then there are no infringement issues. This is basic patent law, as a monopoly is given to the inventor for a finite amount of time in exchange for the monopoly. When the patent expires everybody is free to pursue the patent's design for commercial purposes. The patent infringement issue applies to
specific claims.
2) patents valid in the
geographical locality where a patent was awarded.
Chinese are very much aware of patent law. It seems to me that Yue must have had some other reason in mind to pursue this unusual design.
Also the presence and nature of the "internal diaphragm" mentioned by oyzw does not appear to have been obvious to either Monomorphic or X_Ray, as (please correct me if I am wrong) their simulations do not appear to include such an internal diaphragm providing asymmetry.QUESTION: Is the geometrical and material design of the "internal diaphragm in Yue's design" clear to anybody reading this? If so please post !
Best,
JR