4 ms·

This set off one of those "hey, didn't I read about this a long time ago? Like quite a few decades ago?" bells. A quick trip down memory lane, and here's an ar

by nkoren 8y ago

This set off one of those "hey, didn't I read about this a long time ago? Like quite a few decades ago?" bells. A quick trip down memory lane, and here's an archive of one of the stories I was following, back in the day: http://rexresearch.com/marks2/marks.htm http://rexresearch.com/marks2/marks.htm. Lumeloid was broadly the same as what NovaSolix proposes -- cheap ultra-high-efficiency PV with optical rectennas -- albeit using polymers rather than carbon nanotubes. I had high hopes that these would be just around the corner in the 1990s, but alas the technology seems to have vanished into the mist. I'm curious to know why: was it a failure of the technology? Financing? Personalities? Alas its demise seems have been undocumented. Hopefully NovaSolix will fare better; at least today there is complementary infrastructure (far better batteries, electric cars, etc.) which makes investment in any kind of solar tech much more viable than it would have been in the 1990s.

makmanalp 8y ago
I wonder if the older iteration counts as prior art now?
new299 8y ago
Outside of the patents for Lumeloid were there any publications? I skimmed Alvin Marks’ parents. A few things stuck me. There are a lot of them, like hundreds? They mostly have one inventor (for something like this, I’m used to seeing teams). None of the patents I looked at showed any supporting real data. Usually if something is working, early experimental data is shown to support the concept. They are pretty broad (their are patents for “space train” and “Quantum 3D displays”. My gut tells me it probably just didn’t work. The basic approach doesn’t look hard to replicate, and I’d expect to see some publications if it worked. So if anyone knows of any publications I’d be curious to see them.
agumonkey 8y ago
There's a 10min interview from 1991 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMGyob166Cg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMGyob166Cg crazy to think that so many things were already done and fell below the radar
- Retric 8y ago
  Plenty of perpetual motion patents, does not mean they work. The system is designed to protect ideas, not validate them.

by nkoren 8y ago

makmanalp 8y ago

I wonder if the older iteration counts as prior art now?

new299 8y ago

Outside of the patents for Lumeloid were there any publications? I skimmed Alvin Marks’ parents. A few things stuck me. There are a lot of them, like hundreds? They mostly have one inventor (for something like this, I’m used to seeing teams). None of the patents I looked at showed any supporting real data. Usually if something is working, early experimental data is shown to support the concept. They are pretty broad (their are patents for “space train” and “Quantum 3D displays”. My gut tells me it probably just didn’t work. The basic approach doesn’t look hard to replicate, and I’d expect to see some publications if it worked. So if anyone knows of any publications I’d be curious to see them.

agumonkey 8y ago

There's a 10min interview from 1991 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMGyob166Cg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMGyob166Cg crazy to think that so many things were already done and fell below the radar

Retric 8y ago
Plenty of perpetual motion patents, does not mean they work. The system is designed to protect ideas, not validate them.