Posted by Frogwatch on July 24, 2009, 4:16 am
One problem you will find with almost all examples of using the
fresnel equations is that they neglect absorption. The reason for
this is because it involves an imaginary part of the waves causing the
equations coefficients to be 2x2 matrices making the whole thing
messy. You may be able to find a derivation somewhere with the
absorption. In general, I would simply use the equation for
absorption I gave that is called the Debye-waller factor
Posted by Morris Dovey on July 24, 2009, 3:54 pm
That's exactly what I found (or rather, didn't find). I worked with what
I could find until I thought my head was going to explode, then took a
break to try to digest what I had, and to attempt to catalog what I
...and realized that I already had sufficient understanding to formulate
a practical solution for the problem at hand. It's strange how it
sometimes works out that way when one has the right mentors. Kahlil
Gibran wrote this about teachers:
"If he is indeed wise he does not bid you enter the
house of wisdom, but rather leads you to the threshold
of your own mind."
And that's exactly the way it's played from this end. (Full text at
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/Misc/Verse.html#teach for anyone who's
The step across the threshold was a very small one, and the solution was
verified with an almost trivially simple experiment conducted and
photographically recorded on my living-room floor.
The solution doesn't lend itself to DIY implementation, so I took what I
had to a patent attorney. Last week he completed his search and
concluded that my solution and the information I provided meets the
"novel" and "non-obvious" requirements, and that my photos demonstrated
that it was reasonably reducible to practice.
I've asked him to proceed with the filing and asked him to exercise the
"no disclosure for one year" option so I can pursue additional patent
protection outside the US.
I'm near bursting at the seams to tell all (I even have a web page with
description, drawings, and photos all ready to install on my web site),
but my friendly PA cautions me that I should deal with the patent and
commercialization issues first.
More on all this later (in a year or less)...
...for now, many thanks to all who've been so patiently helpful!
DeSoto, Iowa USA
Posted by Frogwatch on July 24, 2009, 5:07 pm
You may consider filing a "provisional or pre-patent application"
which is generally two pages and then you have a year to decide to
file a ful application. It is generally much less costly than a full
application and gives you a year to shop the idea around and decide if
you want to spend the money (roughly $0,000 using an attorney) for a
Being a small businessman with limited resources, I generally only
patent in the USA unless whoever I license to requires foreign
patents. My attitude is that the USA and maybe Canada represents most
of the high tech market anyway. You might consider patenting in only
a single major Euro country thus preventing somebody else from having
a real Euro market unless they work with you.
Good luck and I love to see people doing this.
David OHara (aka Frogwatch)
Posted by daestrom on July 24, 2009, 10:13 pm
Morris Dovey wrote:
Well, best of luck. We'll be looking for you in the news :-)