I saw these issues years ago and had this same idea. I was told by teachers it wouldn't work. So I moved on. I always questioned why the physics,math, and industry have always used the outside flux of coils or magnets rather than inside the coils or aligned magnets where all the flux lines can be used where they are the strongest. Use all the flux or 90% of it. Good to see.
One of the better overview videos of linear shaft motors. Do you know if such linear shaft motors could generate enough force (two per axis if necessary but not more) to use in a diy benchtop CNC machine (capable of readily machining aluminum, gantry or perhaps vertical mill design, something with a cutting area vaguely around ~60x90cm, z maybe 15-20cm)?
Sick to death of the word "Patent". Open source is where the world needs to be, not this corporate CRAP! So WSM take your patent and shove it where the sun don't shine!
Ya, Communism is quite popular these days isn't it. Lets open source everything, lets extend from intellectual property to real property, afterall both are worth capital. Nobody owns anything, scratch that, government regulates everything for the "common good" as they'd say. Lets see how that goes.
@@benjamindemontgomery6317 No really, just few days back about Tesla AI he made it clear he won't open source it and wants to make money. My understanding is he opens up patents that would otherwise make it difficult for a startup to succeed in the same space, which is certainly a great thing. But he like to make money so he can make more cool things. People vote with their dollar.
So, a guy/girl spends a couple of years and several hundred hours working alone in their basement on some new device that is going to have value to society. It costs them thousands or maybe 10's of thousands to develop. Then they want to release it into the world but they're a little guy and they know big companies can step in and ruthlessly copy the device without paying them anything for their hundreds or even thousands of hours of work. A patent (even just pending) at least, perhaps, makes the people who want to rip it off think twice. The creator has a chance of recompense for their massive effort. How else are they supposed to protect themselves besides a patent (assume copyright, trademark, trade secret are not relevant in this case...it's purely a new device of some kind)? I get the patent system is really abused by trolls and litigious companies and so on, but it does seem to me they have value in this case. If an inventor could somehow manufacture a mass quantity very quickly and beat everyone to market they might not need a patent but that's not how it works in the vast majority of cases. I see comments against patents all the time but I don't see what the alternative is (for the case of individual inventors who don't want to go broke working for free for years). But maybe you just meant the 'dark side' of patents, not what they were originally intended for. All of that said, for a lot of products an inventor develops, companies they license to won't anyway want to patent it unless it's going to be a blockbuster since actually chasing after infringers in court can be hugely expensive (but I still think the patent pending has some value and it only costs about $70 to file a ppa for it).
Sick to death of patent trolls but not patents. Big companies are really bad at developing new stuff, because most corporate management has no imagination. Small companies and individuals are great at developing new stuff, but only if they have money. People only invest money in small companies if they have some guarantee they will get it back with interest. Big companies would just copy developments by small companies without patents. Small companies with great products only have value if their products can't be copied, so big companies are mostly interesting in buying the patents for products from small companies, when they slurp smaller companies. Another great example of why patents are good and bad is big pharma. Drugs take huge amounts of money to get to market, due to FDA etc. They can only patent stuff they develop, not stuff they discover. We therefore have some amazing drugs, although they are expensive, because big pharma needs to recover their money and give some of it to shareholders, while the patent is active. In comparison, no drug company is spending any money on new antibiotics, because they cannot patent a newly discovered antibiotic, unless they make it synthetically, which is difficult. Which is a major factor why we have an increasing problem of antibiotic resistance. The Soviet Union had no concept of ownership and patents. They copied from the west endlessly and there was no point in anyone going it alone to develop anything new, because they wouldn't benefit from their efforts. By the 1980s, they were so far behind the west, it was embarrassing. Look where all that ended up!!! However, in some areas they did some amazing research, like bacteriophages, which have never been exploited in the West, although they could be used in place of antibiotics. As these are naturally occurring and therefore difficult or impossible to patent by big pharma, it took a government to back the research and development. As each phage is specific to a particular bacteria, a huge infrastructure was required to identify individual bacteria and produce phages to combat them, all doable in the Soviet Union, but difficult in the West.
