In this space, visitors are invited to post any comments, questions, or skeptical observations about Philo T. Farnsworth's contributions to the field of Nuclear Fusion research.Subject: Re: T-D reactions
Date: Jan 19, 08:43 am
Poster: Richard HullOn Jan 19, 08:43 am, Richard Hull wrote:
>Richard,
>
>The 1970 Fuser Patent No. 3,533,910 shows R.L. Hirsch as it's inventor. However, how is it that
>Fig. 1 is identical to Fig. 11 of P.T. Farnsworth's 1968 Pat. No. 3,686,883?
>
>The only major difference that I see is the addition of lithium in the form of Spodumene.
>I agree that this was a big step forward for the
>Fuser. However, why was not Farnsworth listed as
>one of it's inventors?
>
>Respectfully,
>
>-BAP
This is a matter of preference. Patentors may reference or cite examples as they choose. This in no wy bears on their efforts, unless a prior patent covers their invention.
The patent office often overlooks other patents which predate stuff they allow to be patented. This is what "interference cases" are built around.
To use the exact same drawing, Hirsch would have only required permission from ITT to use the drawing.
Farnsworth was legally out of the loop as the patents were all assigned to ITT which always remained on moderately friendly terms with Hirsch.
If we are talking about a moral and intellectual responsiblity, that is another matter. That which feeds the ego doesn't feed the bull dog.
Chalk it up to another example of genius foiled as much genius always is. Tesla, Armstrong and Farnsworth are classic 20th century examples of true genius demonstrated and thwarted. It is fitting that each man was separtely remembered in a special four stamp inventor series of US postage commerative stamps in the 1970s!
Richard Hull
Richard Hull