What Was a "Hieronymous" Machine?

[MrDibble]

@Wendell_Wagner

As you can see, it was a fairly absurd idea that for certain sorts of machines, you didn’t have to build the machine itself. You could just draw a diagram of the machine on paper and that would do the job of the machine as well as making it out of the components (vacuum tubes or whatever) that it was built of.

Aah, that’s where Hubbard got the idea from…something like this (with more technobabble) features in Battlefield Earth.
ETA: something I pointed out 8 years ago, dammit! Fucking zombies!

[Half_Man_Half_Wit]

@TriPolar

[…] but I find plumbing to be the least interesting scientific discipline, […]

This just might be my favourite SDMB post ever.

[LSLGuy]

@Exapno_Mapcase

Your spelling is as bad as mine. That’s Trinopus spelled TriPolar.
…

Touché Good Sir. I see that wrecks my play on words. Damn. Maybe he’ll prefer this (I hope he’s a he).

TriPolar’s post was long, thick, and thoroughly probed the depths of the matter.
Or how about
TriPolar’s pole was a magnum.

There, that’s better.

In all seriousness: TriPolar, that was a damn fine piece of writing.

[Czarcasm]

@Lumpy

I thought the U.S. Patent Office still officially required anyone trying to patent a perpetual motion machine to produce a working model.

It appears that you are correct.

The USPTO Manual of Patent Examining Practice states:

With the exception of cases involving perpetual motion, a model is not ordinarily required by the Office to demonstrate the operability of a device. If operability of a device is questioned, the applicant must establish it to the satisfaction of the examiner, but he or she may choose his or her own way of so doing.
And, further, that:

A rejection [of a patent application] on the ground of lack of utility includes the more specific grounds of inoperativeness, involving perpetual motion. A rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 for lack of utility should not be based on grounds that the invention is frivolous, fraudulent or against public policy.

[Hari_Seldon]

Let me just point out that to make an integrated circuit, all you have to do is draw (for certain values of the word “draw”) it on a piece of properly doped silicon. Not pen on paper, but still pretty amazing.

Back in 2009 someone mentioned a reactionless drive. I once read somewhere (sorry, I’ve forgotten, but it was someplace reliable) that a reactionless drive was, in principle, possible. The theory used general relativity and the effect would be measurable only near the event horizon of a black hole. Not likely to be tested real soon now.

[Half_Man_Half_Wit]

@Hari_Seldon

Back in 2009 someone mentioned a reactionless drive. I once read somewhere (sorry, I’ve forgotten, but it was someplace reliable) that a reactionless drive was, in principle, possible. The theory used general relativity and the effect would be measurable only near the event horizon of a black hole. Not likely to be tested real soon now.

You’re probably thinking of spacetime swimming, which involves the possibility of translating an object in a curved spacetime by merely undergoing internal deformations.

[TriPolar]

@LSLGuy

Touché Good Sir. I see that wrecks my play on words. Damn. Maybe he’ll prefer this (I hope he’s a he).

TriPolar’s post was long, thick, and thoroughly probed the depths of the matter.
Or how about
TriPolar’s pole was a magnum.

There, that’s better.

In all seriousness: TriPolar, that was a damn fine piece of writing.

Thanks. Yes, I’m a he. It was a long time ago but I remember that writing it turned out to be easy because it was pure nonsense reflective of the subject matter itself. I forgot all about the conclusion, I think I just pulled it out of my ass when I got bored.

[Kulp]

Hi
Can any body explain about this instrument.
You help is realy appreciated
Thanks

[LSLGuy]

The fact it contains the word “homeopathic” means it’s made of pure bullshit. Beyond that it doesn’t matter.

Whatever it claims to be, whatever it claims to do, it’s simply a lie. Probably one intended to take your money.

[Kulp]

Thank you