Re: [Patents] "Betrayal of physics"

[Carsten Svaneborg <zqex@mpipks-dresden.mpg.de>]

On Wednesday 07 July 2004 19:39, Gregory Aharonian wrote:
>       So as one potential view of inventive step, one could require
> that to be patentable, a new software algorithm has to demonstrate
> some reduction in energy consumption, either by reducing energy
> consumption in an existing fielded software application, or by saving
> energy by displacing energy expenditures using other technology.
m'key.. 

Our brain uses energy to perform computations (thermodynamics
dictates that any system that perform computation must spend energy).
Of cause it's a different implementation, but from the point of statistical
physics (and information theory), i.e. the basis of your claim, this
difference is irrelevant. 

So if you figure out a method of how to argue for patenting of software
with less mental effort than other people, e.g. a reduction in the energy
consumption of your brain, this would consistitute a patentable argument?

Again. The purpose of patents is to spur innovation. All other attempts
at rationalising existence or absense of patents e.g. from the point of
view of energy expenditure, from philosophical mind-matter differences
or whatever are irrelevant.

-- 
   Mvh. Carsten
http://gauss.bacon.su.se/sql an Open Sourced patent database