The discussion revolves around the recognition of a mathematical method for squaring a number and whether obtaining a patent is a viable option. Participants explore the criteria for patentability, the process of patent application, and alternative ways to gain recognition, such as publishing in journals.
Participants express differing views on the patentability of the method, with some arguing it does not meet the criteria while others defend its novelty and usefulness. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the method's patentability and recognition.
There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of "new," "useful," and "non-obvious" as they pertain to patent law, as well as the subjective nature of what constitutes a significant mathematical discovery.
A patent is an exclusive right to a product or process (method) that must fulfill three requirements. It must be 1) new, 2) useful, and 3) non-obvious. New means that it has not been done before, useful means that it has utility, and non-obvious means that it no current practitioner would think of it or develop it independently given the state-of-the-art.deep838 said:What should I do in order to get a recognition for a method I came up with?
Should I get a patent? If yes, then how?
If no, then what should I do to tell the world that I came up with the method?
deep838 said:Ok... my method is of squaring a number described here at: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=4326115#post4326115
It does meet the criteria you mentioned. Which journals would be "appropriate"? Where should I go to file a patent? the court?