|
|
|
| Authored by: PolR on Sunday, October 14 2012 @ 09:08 PM EDT |
You ask:
> Should the determination of patentable subject matter
> depend upon whether a fluidics computer rather than a
> digital computer is used?
The answer is "no". Your computing method is the fluid dynamics
equivalent of patenting:
A method of modeling mathematical equation comprising:
(A) Selecting a mathematical equation to be modeled;
(B) Making marks on paper with a pencil;
(C) Interpreting the marks on paper according to their meanings.
This sort of thing should not be patentable no matter how the computation is
being performed. It is an obvious charade which patents mathematics while
pretending the claim is written to a physical process.
Also this claim is overly broad because it patents all calculations as long as
they are achieved using these broadly stated means. No specific process is
patented. This is like patenting the principle of making an integrated circuit
dedicated to a calculation without claiming a specific circuit.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 02:59 AM EDT |
The hardware is, as always, patentable.
The problem is people attempting to patent the use of software on hardware which
was invented by someone else, and designed for the purpose of running software.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 02:47 PM EDT |
I have a computer science degree (a B.Math) and I thought the whole article made
complete sense. Before criticizing you might want to learn a bit more about the
subject matter.
If you don't believe that software is math, that indicates to me that you either
don't know what software is, or don't know what math is (or likely both).
Software is abstract -- symbols are abstract, and software is nothing but
mechanized symbol manipulation as PolR shows. Mathematical algorithms
(algorithms that can be executed by a machine, without any "human
interpretation" involved) are abstract. Software is this. Its not
physical or tangible. It's not a machine, even if you embody it in a physical
machine--the software is the abstract data, not the physical marks on paper or
the magnetic fields on your hard drive or the electron charges in your
computer's capacitors. Those are just physical representations of the abstract,
symbolic, MATHEMATICAL thing.
Software is math in every possible way. A machine is not math, a machine is a
physical thing. Software is intangible--it is an abstraction, an idea, a
collection of symbols which can exist entirely in your head and nowhere in the
physical universe. That's not possible for anything that is actually a machine.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 12:12 AM EDT |
As in I saw one in the mid 1980s, and it was called obsolete back then. But
it has its uses, as in you can build a non-metallic, non-electric computer,
whether of the digital or analog variety.
These days, the electronic digital computer is so fast that simulations have
replaced most analog computers. Very few mechanical processes are fast
enough to require the speed of an analog computer.
BTW, can I use electrons as the fluid in this computer? (methinks this is
another completely bogus patent)
(Christenson)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
