A reactionless thruster that (apparently) really works - no, seriously!

perhaps rather than sell an invention, inventors should ask for a
percentage of profits over time. If it really works, they can make
millions, while the companies dont pay anything for it untill it does.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, "ANTIcarrot"
wrote:
>
> > From: Ian Woollard
> > It isn't though. Only one guy has done it, and the measured
effect is
> > small; and all he needs is more money to make the effect big.
Honest!
>
> A significant problem here is asking others to replicate your
experiments is
> great for science, but bad for engineering and intelectual property
rights.
> Intel didn't turn to their rivals at the time and say, "We think
we've got a
> nifty little invention here that could make us billions. Here are
the
> blueprints and all the theory you need to make your own. Can you
test to see
> if we're right about it working?" This kind of thing is a big
problem for
> small inventors, even after they demonstrate their inventions work
and are
> publically aknowledged as the inventor.
>
> Guess how much money the USMC paid the inventor of the hovercraft
for use of
> his idea. Or how much the Bell Aircraft Corporation paid the Miles
Aircraft
> Company for the latter's all-moving tailplane idea and supersonic
> aerodynamics data. I'll give you a clue: It's less than the average
worth