The fraud of high temperatures in sonoluminescence now at
the Fourth Circuit appeals court
The fraud of
high temperatures in sonoluminescence now at the
Fourth Circuit appeals
court
Released by: Thomas V.
Prevenslik 2005-08-08 08:23:23
Summary:
The False Claims Act
(FCA) lawsuit alleging the Patent and Trademark
Office (PTO) fraudulent rejection of patent
application embodying sonoluminescence at
ambient temperature is now under
review.
SL is known to
produce light from bubbles in water under
ultrasound, the mechanism accepted by US science
being the high temperatures that accompany the
adiabatic compression heating of air during
bubble collapse. However, the bubbles are not
filled with air, as there is no time at
ultrasonic frequencies for the air dissolved in
the water to diffuse into the bubble, and
therefore the bubbles are filled only with
condensable water vapor. By Le Chatelier’s
principle, decreasing the volume of the vapor
bubble does not increase the temperature because
of 2-phase equilibrium with the liquid walls.
Depending on the collapse velocity, however, the
vapor is placed in a non-equilibrium state where
the temperature may increase by vapor
compression. However, Hertz-Knudsen simulations
show the vapor temperature increases less than
about 50 C, and therefore the bubble collapses
almost isothermally at ambient temperature.
Hence, SL light is produced by yet some unknown
mechanism at ambient temperature.
One
such SL mechanism at ambient temperature treats
the bubble in water as a quantum electrodynamics
(QED) cavity having an electromagnetic (EM)
resonant frequency that during collapse
increases from the infrared (IR) through the
visible (VIS) to the vacuum ultraviolet (VUV).
Prior to collapse, the atoms in the surface of
the QED cavity freely emit IR radiation. But
collapse increases the EM resonance of the QED
cavity beyond the IR, and therefore the IR
radiation from the surface atoms is suppressed
and remains suppressed for as long as the bubble
is collapsing. In effect, the suppressed IR is
trapped in the surface of the collapsing bubble
of increasing EM resonant frequency, and
therefore undergoes continuous frequency
up-conversion to produce a broadband pulse of EM
radiation from the IR through the VIS to the
VUV, the process called cavity QED induced EM
radiation.
During collapse, the
frequency up-converted IR may escape or be
absorbed by the water surrounding the bubble.
Because of the transparency of water in the VIS,
some of the suppressed IR radiation escapes the
bubble surface to be directly observed as SL
light. The remaining suppressed IR is frequency
up-converted to VUV radiation that is absorbed
in the water to indirectly produce VIS light,
e.g., OH* radicals are produced that form Ar.OH*
excimers with Ar dissolved in the water, the
decomposition of the Ar.OH* excimers in the
shock of bubble wall collision producing
spectral lines that superpose on the broadband
pulse of EM radiation produced by cavity QED
induced EM radiation.
The PTO rejection
relied on prior art in laser driven photonics to
argue that cavity QED effects cannot occur
unless the cavity walls have highly reflecting
surfaces. However, this PTO argument is
irrelevant to cavity QED induced EM radiation.
To correct the PTO, the suppressed IR is simply
trapped in the surface of the collapsing bubble
only to escape or be absorbed by the surrounding
water depending on the resonant EM frequency of
the bubble, and therefore there are no light
reflections to require highly reflective cavity
surfaces. Indeed, suppressed IR radiation is by
definition the absence of IR photons and
attendant light reflections.
DISMISSAL BY
THE COURT
On 16 July, the FCA lawsuit
against the PTO was dismissed without prejudice
by the US District Court at Alexandria on the
grounds that since
• a private
individual represents the US government in FCA
actions, and • since the PTO is a federal
agency,
the suit is an action by the US
government against itself, and therefore the
lawsuit requires dismissal. Aware of this
problem and in anticipation of a dismissal, I
moved the court for leave to amend the FCA
complaint with a Bivens claim.
Unlike
the FCA, federal employee defendants In a Bivens
action may be sued in their individual capacity
for unofficial acts performed in their official
capacity. However, the Alexandria court,
ignoring the allegations of PTO fraud in the
Bivens claim, denied my motion to amend by
ruling the PTO defendants acted in their
official capacity when they denied my patent
application.
Bivens is a recognized
cause of action for damages against federal
employees who violate an individual’s
constitutional rights under the color of federal
authority. In the fraudulent denial of my patent
application by the PTO, I was denied equal
protection in the patent application process
that is incorporated in the due process clause
of the Fifth Amendment of the US constitution.
Clearly, I was denied equal protection
under the law by PTO prejudice in the rejection
of my patent application. I am an individual not
affiliated with a high profile US scientific
organization. But if so affiliated, the PTO is
known to award patents by rubber stamping
applications even those based on ludicrous
claims, e.g., Patent No. 5,659,173 awarded to
Putterman of UCLA in bubble fusion on the
outrageous claim SL occurs at temperatures of
100 million degrees. Moreover, the PTO in their
rejection promoted as reasonable the false prior
art of Suslick, Crum, and Lohse who made and
continue to make the incredible claims that SL
in the collapse of vapor bubbles produces
temperatures from 5000 to 100,000 degrees, when
in fact the bubbles collapse near ambient
temperature.
In the official capacity of
PTO employees, there is nothing to justify the
unofficial act of denying any patent application
based on both irrelevant and false prior art,
and therefore on this issue I am appealing to
the court of appeals for the Fourth Circuit to
reverse the denial of the Alexandria court for
leave to amend the FCA action to Bivens.
