On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:44:06 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:



Active Variable deadrise. Actually an interesting concept. I know fighter
places have variable wing surfaces, etc. Maybe an inflatable sponson for a
tunnel on the sides, etc. At least it is a boating content thread. But
since you are imagination restricted, would be hard for you to accept this
as an interesting concept.

Here ya go.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6158376.html

--Vic

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:44:06 -0800, "Calif Bill"
wrote:



Active Variable deadrise. Actually an interesting concept. I know
fighter
places have variable wing surfaces, etc. Maybe an inflatable sponson for
a
tunnel on the sides, etc. At least it is a boating content thread. But
since you are imagination restricted, would be hard for you to accept this
as an interesting concept.

Here ya go.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6158376.html

--Vic


Regal has a hull design that basically touts a "variable" deadrise, based on
lift.
This was an interesting read:

http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal...s/99-1511.html


Eisboch

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:07:15 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:




Regal has a hull design that basically touts a "variable" deadrise, based on
lift.
This was an interesting read:

http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal...s/99-1511.html


It takes a lawyer to claim that a shape hull shape can violate a
patent.
Every time my head creates a "new invention" I look on the internet
and see a vastly improved version already patented.
Once in a while when I forget to look on the internet, I see one of my
"inventions" already on sale at the store.

--Vic

On Mar 19, 6:41 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:07:15 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:



Regal has a hull design that basically touts a "variable" deadrise, based on
lift.
This was an interesting read:

http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal...ons/99opinions...

It takes a lawyer to claim that a shape hull shape can violate a
patent.
Every time my head creates a "new invention" I look on the internet
and see a vastly improved version already patented.
Once in a while when I forget to look on the internet, I see one of my
"inventions" already on sale at the store.

--Vic

I actually make my living by inventing things and as the saying goes,
"Theres thousands of good ideas and most of them are wrong" certainly
applies to what I do.
To enlighten some people, "Faster than light travel" is prohibited
mathematically because it results in violation of causality, ie.,
effects happen before the cause (yes, there may be exceptions). There
is nothing mathematically wrong with a variable hull.
I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ideas that didn't
work but I don't admit the ideas are dead .........yet. Sometimes,
something actually does work and you lean back and
think..........."DAMN, that is cool", being surprised it works.
It is perfectly normal for people to say "That can't work otherwise it
would've been done". You simply do not listen to such and go find out
why it hasn't been done.

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...

To enlighten some people, "Faster than light travel" is prohibited
mathematically because it results in violation of causality, ie.,
effects happen before the cause (yes, there may be exceptions).

If I can find it, I'll send you a paper written by some Russian scientists.
It was given to me by a German friend of mine who surprised me with it
following a long debate we had over some beers.

(he held two Phd's in Physics)

Basically, it describes an experiment whereby a laser beam was fired into a
tube that contained cesium in a gaseous form, then exited the tube and hit a
target sensor. They had some exotic metrology set up to measure and record
the tests.

The photons contained in the laser burst exceeded the speed of light,
according to the test results.

Eisboch

On Mar 19, 8:31 pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

...

To enlighten some people, "Faster than light travel" is prohibited
mathematically because it results in violation of causality, ie.,
effects happen before the cause (yes, there may be exceptions).

If I can find it, I'll send you a paper written by some Russian scientists.
It was given to me by a German friend of mine who surprised me with it
following a long debate we had over some beers.

(he held two Phd's in Physics)

Basically, it describes an experiment whereby a laser beam was fired into a
tube that contained cesium in a gaseous form, then exited the tube and hit a
target sensor. They had some exotic metrology set up to measure and record
the tests.

The photons contained in the laser burst exceeded the speed of light,
according to the test results.

Eisboch

Yeah, I read about that. The catch was the diff tween "group"
velocity and "wave velocity" (I forget which is which). What the
speed of light limitation REALLY says is that no information can be
transmitted faster than light. A simple sine wave carries no
information so that laser beam can exceed light speed but if you try
to modulate it to carry info it wont work, your signal travels at
speed of light.
I have just exhausted all my knowledge of this subject. Mostly a PhD
in physics is a license to bull**** authoritatively.

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:31:51 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

They had some exotic metrology set up to measure and record
the tests.

The photons contained in the laser burst exceeded the speed of light,
according to the test results.

Exotic metrology and impossible results go together.

Casady

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:23:48 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Mar 19, 6:41 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:07:15 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:



Regal has a hull design that basically touts a "variable" deadrise, based on
lift.
This was an interesting read:

http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal...ons/99opinions...

It takes a lawyer to claim that a shape hull shape can violate a
patent.
Every time my head creates a "new invention" I look on the internet
and see a vastly improved version already patented.
Once in a while when I forget to look on the internet, I see one of my
"inventions" already on sale at the store.

--Vic

I actually make my living by inventing things and as the saying goes,
"Theres thousands of good ideas and most of them are wrong" certainly
applies to what I do.
To enlighten some people, "Faster than light travel" is prohibited
mathematically because it results in violation of causality, ie.,
effects happen before the cause (yes, there may be exceptions). There
is nothing mathematically wrong with a variable hull.
I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ideas that didn't
work but I don't admit the ideas are dead .........yet. Sometimes,
something actually does work and you lean back and
think..........."DAMN, that is cool", being surprised it works.
It is perfectly normal for people to say "That can't work otherwise it
would've been done". You simply do not listen to such and go find out
why it hasn't been done.

You know who you remind me of?
Thomas Edison. With boats.
Keep at it, and you'll get there.
Or have plenty of fun trying.
Ever been down to the museum in Fort Myers?
That could be yours.
Always keep saying I'll go there, but I end up fishing instead.

--Vic

On Mar 19, 8:45 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:23:48 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch



wrote:
On Mar 19, 6:41 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:07:15 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Regal has a hull design that basically touts a "variable" deadrise, based on
lift.
This was an interesting read:

http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal...ons/99opinions...

It takes a lawyer to claim that a shape hull shape can violate a
patent.
Every time my head creates a "new invention" I look on the internet
and see a vastly improved version already patented.
Once in a while when I forget to look on the internet, I see one of my
"inventions" already on sale at the store.

--Vic

I actually make my living by inventing things and as the saying goes,
"Theres thousands of good ideas and most of them are wrong" certainly
applies to what I do.
To enlighten some people, "Faster than light travel" is prohibited
mathematically because it results in violation of causality, ie.,
effects happen before the cause (yes, there may be exceptions). There
is nothing mathematically wrong with a variable hull.
I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ideas that didn't
work but I don't admit the ideas are dead .........yet. Sometimes,
something actually does work and you lean back and
think..........."DAMN, that is cool", being surprised it works.
It is perfectly normal for people to say "That can't work otherwise it
would've been done". You simply do not listen to such and go find out
why it hasn't been done.

You know who you remind me of?
Thomas Edison. With boats.
Keep at it, and you'll get there.
Or have plenty of fun trying.
Ever been down to the museum in Fort Myers?
That could be yours.
Always keep saying I'll go there, but I end up fishing instead.

--Vic

Edison was lucky to live in an age when a new "thing", electricity was
being developed and he took full advantage of it. Today, the
analogous "thing" is software about which I know nothing but there
sure seem to be some "Edisons" of software. Not knowing much about
power boats, I cannot afford to gamble the $10,000 or so on a patent
for boating stuff. My patents all relate to x-rays which I do
understand (specialization is so sad).

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:00:37 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Mar 19, 8:45 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:23:48 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch



wrote:
On Mar 19, 6:41 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:07:15 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Regal has a hull design that basically touts a "variable" deadrise, based on
lift.
This was an interesting read:

http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal...ons/99opinions...

It takes a lawyer to claim that a shape hull shape can violate a
patent.
Every time my head creates a "new invention" I look on the internet
and see a vastly improved version already patented.
Once in a while when I forget to look on the internet, I see one of my
"inventions" already on sale at the store.

--Vic

I actually make my living by inventing things and as the saying goes,
"Theres thousands of good ideas and most of them are wrong" certainly
applies to what I do.
To enlighten some people, "Faster than light travel" is prohibited
mathematically because it results in violation of causality, ie.,
effects happen before the cause (yes, there may be exceptions). There
is nothing mathematically wrong with a variable hull.
I have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ideas that didn't
work but I don't admit the ideas are dead .........yet. Sometimes,
something actually does work and you lean back and
think..........."DAMN, that is cool", being surprised it works.
It is perfectly normal for people to say "That can't work otherwise it
would've been done". You simply do not listen to such and go find out
why it hasn't been done.

You know who you remind me of?
Thomas Edison. With boats.
Keep at it, and you'll get there.
Or have plenty of fun trying.
Ever been down to the museum in Fort Myers?
That could be yours.
Always keep saying I'll go there, but I end up fishing instead.

--Vic

Edison was lucky to live in an age when a new "thing", electricity was
being developed and he took full advantage of it. Today, the
analogous "thing" is software about which I know nothing but there
sure seem to be some "Edisons" of software. Not knowing much about
power boats, I cannot afford to gamble the $10,000 or so on a patent
for boating stuff. My patents all relate to x-rays which I do
understand (specialization is so sad).

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned lobster boats given the
history of this newsgroup and its most prolific contributor. Classic
lobster boats have a fine entry forward which flattens out as you move
aft creating a shape which gets through the chop with minimal muss or
fuss but can still get on plane with reasonable power and economy.

Varying the deadrise underway certainly presents a number of
interesting challenges - possibly with some sort of inflatable
structure?