Notices
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Would this patent actually work?

  1. #1 Would this patent actually work? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Greetings,

    I've come across an interesting patent and am curious as to if it could work or not?

    Patent US3951134 - Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves - Google Patents

    If so, it would revolutionize the way that patients are diagnosed, or help with those needing biomedical sensors to monitor physical illnesses. It makes you wonder why it is not being pursued?

    In support of this patent, I suggest the following research dissertation: http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/et...Das_thesis.pdf

    Opinions? (Honest ones)

    Thanks!


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,229
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    I've come across an interesting patent and am curious as to if it could work or not?
    "Brain waves" as detected by EEG leads are static (slowly varying) electrical potentials; the brain doesn't respond to electromagnetic signals in any useful way. So I'd say no.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    I've come across an interesting patent and am curious as to if it could work or not?
    It looks as if the inventor (or, at least, the assignee) knows a lot about RF engineering but little about the functioning of the brain.

    In support of this patent, I suggest the following research dissertation: http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/et...Das_thesis.pdf
    I can't see any connection. (Apart from the fact it deals with electromagnetic radiation.)
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope cosmictraveler's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Key West, Florida, Earth
    Posts
    4,788
    Microwaves, another form of electromagnetic therapy, are used in some cancer treatment centers to heat and destroy tumor cells. High-energy radio waves can also be used to "cook" cancer cells, a process calledradiofrequency ablation (see Hyperthermia).
    In addition, powerful electromagnetic fields (stronger and of a different type than those produced by radionic devices) may be able to change the responses of some of the body's cells. Early evidence suggests that these electromagnetic fields may help broken bones, but more study is needed.

    Some researchers have reported that pulsed electromagnetic stimulation may reduce frequency of migraine headaches, but larger, well-controlled studies are needed to prove any benefit. Very early studies found that electromagnetic energy may reduce some kinds of pain, but the methods and results still need to be checked by others to learn if they hold true. One 2010 review analyzed two studies and found that electromagnetic treatment did not seem to help heal bedsores. Scientific studies are looking at whether these powerful electromagnetic fields may help with other problems. These studies must be done in carefully controlled research settings to prove whether electromagnetic fields may be helpful. If they show benefit, it is possible that electromagnets may be used in conventional medicine in the future.


    https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...ncer%20Society[/I][/I][/FONT][/COLOR]
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
    Jimi Hendrix
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Hi!

    Billvon, you say, "the brain doesn't respond to electromagnetic signals in any useful way. So I'd say no.", but this interesting article suggests that "Magnetic Brain Stimulation May Trump Drugs For Severe Depression":
    Magnetic Brain Stimulation May Trump Drugs For Severe Depression | Popular Science

    The connection between the patent and the article is the investigation of the transmission of power through a biological medium - it is possible to do so.

    Another article that suggests head-mounted wire coils can deliver powerful yet evanescent magnetic pulses directly into focal brain regions to painlessly modulate neural activity by inducing minute electric currents.
    Could certain frequencies of electromagnetic waves or radiation interfere with brain function? - Scientific American

    What I am trying to find is how EMF signals combine in human tissue. If you applied a signal to tissue, one would think that the radiated signal would represent the summation of all of the EMF's present within that tissue. If this was the case, then you could use a receiver to receive the output waveform, then use filters to separate the frequencies. If this was possible, then you could use this technology to remotely view individuals suffering from seizures, and etc., without any physical interaction with the individual being required.

    Thanks
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    What I am trying to find is how EMF signals combine in human tissue.
    And that is the "and then magic happens" part of the patent. They just assert that the external frequencies will (somehow) be modulated by the brain's activity. I see no reason why that should be the case.

    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    What I am trying to find is how EMF signals combine in human tissue.
    And that is the "and then magic happens" part of the patent. They just assert that the external frequencies will (somehow) be modulated by the brain's activity. I see no reason why that should be the case.
    Ok. So, then you are in disagreement that if an external frequency hits tissue, it would combine with any other frequencies present. Can you direct me to any dissertations/articles/research on this?

    I always thought of tissue as being the same as an electric conductive circuit, as both are conductive. If you bombard an electrical circuit with a external frequency strong enough to be considered, then that frequency is modulated on the board. I therefore expected the same to be true of the escaping frequency?

    Thanks!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    Ok. So, then you are in disagreement that if an external frequency hits tissue, it would combine with any other frequencies present.
    It would certainly "combine" with the other frequencies. As in, they would all be present. Modulation, as far as I know would require some sort of non-linear behaviour.

    Can you direct me to any dissertations/articles/research on this?
    No. And that's the problem. I am not aware of anything that supports their claim. And they don't provide any.

    I always thought of tissue as being the same as an electric conductive circuit, as both are conductive.
    Note that the brain's activity is not due to the flow of electrical current through conductors. It is a chemical process (e.g. pumping ions through membranes). Their patent would require that the RF signal interfered with these chemical processes. There is no evidence this happens (look at all the studies on the healt effects of radio transmitters/mobile phones, for example).

    But actually, worse than that, they claim the RF signal would be modulated. This implies that these chemical processes can affect the RF signal. This seems even more implausible.

    If you bombard an electrical circuit with a external frequency strong enough to be considered, then that frequency is modulated on the board.
    That is not generally true. If you connect a microphone to a piece of wire and put it in an RF field, the signal in the wire will not be modulated.

    But worse: they claim a signal will be transmitted. And that definitely won't happen. For that you need a relatively complex RF modulator and transmitter circuit.
    Last edited by Strange; June 9th, 2014 at 01:59 AM.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,743
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    Greetings,

    I've come across an interesting patent and am curious as to if it could work or not?

    Patent US3951134 - Apparatus and method for remotely monitoring and altering brain waves - Google Patents

    If so, it would revolutionize the way that patients are diagnosed, or help with those needing biomedical sensors to monitor physical illnesses. It makes you wonder why it is not being pursued?

    In support of this patent, I suggest the following research dissertation: http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/et...Das_thesis.pdf

    Opinions? (Honest ones)

    Thanks!
    I agree with Strange. Firstly the brain does not emit EM radiation and secondly if it did this would not modulate an external EM signal. The whole thing looks like ballocks.

    I'm surprised the US Patent Office granted the patent. I suspect in the UK it would have been thrown out on examination, on grounds of inutility. Though I seem to recall the US authorities are more willing to allow patents for inventions that depend on suspicious theories than their UK counterparts. But in any event the patent will now have expired, as it was published more than 30 years ago.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    Ok. So, then you are in disagreement that if an external frequency hits tissue, it would combine with any other frequencies present.
    It would certainly "combine" with the other frequencies. As in, they would all be present. Modulation, as far as I know would require some sort of non-linear behaviour.

    Can you direct me to any dissertations/articles/research on this?
    No. And that's the problem. I am not aware of anything that supports their claim. And they don't provide any.

    I always thought of tissue as being the same as an electric conductive circuit, as both are conductive.
    Note that the brain's activity is not due to the flow of electrical current through conductors. It is a chemical process (e.g. pumping ions through membranes). Their patent would require that the RF signal interfered with these chemical processes. There is no evidence this happens (look at all the studies on the healt effects of radio transmitters/mobile phones, for example).

    But actually, worse than that, they claim the RF signal would be modulated. This implies that these chemical processes can affect the RF signal. This seems even more implausible.

    If you bombard an electrical circuit with a external frequency strong enough to be considered, then that frequency is modulated on the board.
    That is not generally true. If you connect a microphone to a piece of wire and put it in an RF field, the signal in the wire will not be modulated.

    But worse: they claim a signal will be transmitted. And that definitely won't happen. For that you need a relatively complex RF modulator and transmitter circuit.

    But I find in this on-line book:
    RF/Microwave Interaction with Biological Tissues - André Vander Vorst, Arye Rosen, Youji Kotsuka - Google Books

    where it states at the bottom of page 11 that "As another example, a human body placed in an applied electric field develops an induced electric field such that the sum of the applied field and the induced field satisfies the boundary conditions at the surface of the body. The total field in the body is the sum of the applied field and the induced field."

    So............ We can apply a rf signal to the body, and it will be induced..... That explains these guys: Modifying an EEG headset for lucid dreaming

    But, we can't get the signal back out because the body is not a transmitter........ You say that you could with the use of an RF modulator and transmitter circuit. What would that circuit look like?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,229
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    Ok. So, then you are in disagreement that if an external frequency hits tissue, it would combine with any other frequencies present.
    It would combine with any other frequencies present - and do nothing. The brain does not respond to EM radiation (other than through heating, which is why it's a bad idea to dry your hair in a microwave oven.)

    I always thought of tissue as being the same as an electric conductive circuit, as both are conductive. If you bombard an electrical circuit with a external frequency strong enough to be considered, then that frequency is modulated on the board.
    Only if it is received and rectified (and/or passed through a nonlinear element.) The brain does neither.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    But I find in this on-line book:
    RF/Microwave Interaction with Biological Tissues - André Vander Vorst, Arye Rosen, Youji Kotsuka - Google Books

    where it states at the bottom of page 11 that "As another example, a human body placed in an applied electric field develops an induced electric field such that the sum of the applied field and the induced field satisfies the boundary conditions at the surface of the body. The total field in the body is the sum of the applied field and the induced field."
    That has nothing to do with "monitoring and altering brain waves".

    So............ We can apply a rf signal to the body, and it will be induced..... That explains these guys: Modifying an EEG headset for lucid dreaming
    That is just an EEG. Nothing to do with anything in the patent.

    But, we can't get the signal back out because the body is not a transmitter........ You say that you could with the use of an RF modulator and transmitter circuit. What would that circuit look like?


    I don't understand why you are posting random links which have nothing to do with the original subject. This is getting pointless.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor astromark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,015
    ~ Please stop pocking that USB plug in your ear... It will not work. ~
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,743
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TheNewGuy View Post
    Ok. So, then you are in disagreement that if an external frequency hits tissue, it would combine with any other frequencies present.
    It would certainly "combine" with the other frequencies. As in, they would all be present. Modulation, as far as I know would require some sort of non-linear behaviour.

    Can you direct me to any dissertations/articles/research on this?
    No. And that's the problem. I am not aware of anything that supports their claim. And they don't provide any.

    I always thought of tissue as being the same as an electric conductive circuit, as both are conductive.
    Note that the brain's activity is not due to the flow of electrical current through conductors. It is a chemical process (e.g. pumping ions through membranes). Their patent would require that the RF signal interfered with these chemical processes. There is no evidence this happens (look at all the studies on the healt effects of radio transmitters/mobile phones, for example).

    But actually, worse than that, they claim the RF signal would be modulated. This implies that these chemical processes can affect the RF signal. This seems even more implausible.

    If you bombard an electrical circuit with a external frequency strong enough to be considered, then that frequency is modulated on the board.
    That is not generally true. If you connect a microphone to a piece of wire and put it in an RF field, the signal in the wire will not be modulated.

    But worse: they claim a signal will be transmitted. And that definitely won't happen. For that you need a relatively complex RF modulator and transmitter circuit.

    But I find in this on-line book:
    RF/Microwave Interaction with Biological Tissues - André Vander Vorst, Arye Rosen, Youji Kotsuka - Google Books

    where it states at the bottom of page 11 that "As another example, a human body placed in an applied electric field develops an induced electric field such that the sum of the applied field and the induced field satisfies the boundary conditions at the surface of the body. The total field in the body is the sum of the applied field and the induced field."

    So............ We can apply a rf signal to the body, and it will be induced..... That explains these guys: Modifying an EEG headset for lucid dreaming

    But, we can't get the signal back out because the body is not a transmitter........ You say that you could with the use of an RF modulator and transmitter circuit. What would that circuit look like?
    No it explains nothing. What they are saying in the book extract applies equally to a lump of meat. Nothing whatsoever to do with nerve action potentials. The EEG gizmo is obviously crank rubbish as well.

    You are believing junk, I'm afraid, and clearly do not have the necessary understanding of science to realise it for what it is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Computer Architecture Patent Studies
    By Patexia Kyle in forum Computer Science
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2013, 06:41 PM
  2. Can we patent facts about nature?
    By varcreat in forum Physics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 16th, 2008, 10:56 AM
  3. MY WORK
    By james99 in forum Art and Culture
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 3rd, 2008, 10:17 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •