Whom to contact about my improvement on telescope optics?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the development and potential patenting of a new telescope prototype that claims to enhance magnification using existing lens technology. Participants explore the implications of this enhancement, the patent process, and the feasibility of the idea within the context of established telescope optics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about whom to contact regarding a prototype telescope that purportedly enhances lens power in a manner described as n^4.
  • Another participant suggests considering patenting the idea and provides resources for a lower-cost patent application process.
  • It is noted that under the current US patent system, one must apply for a patent before disclosing the idea to others.
  • A suggestion is made to conduct an informal patent search to determine if similar ideas have already been patented.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of the claimed magnification increase, with one participant pointing out a mathematical error in the exponentiation claim (2^4 = 16, not 8).
  • Another participant emphasizes that magnification is not the most critical factor in telescope performance, warning that excessive magnification can lead to poorer image quality.
  • Questions are posed about the novelty of the idea and what specific limitations it addresses in existing telescope technology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility and novelty of the proposed telescope enhancement. There is no consensus on whether the idea represents a significant advancement in telescope optics, and concerns about the validity of the claims are raised.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the maturity of telescope optics technology and the potential challenges in proving the novelty of the proposed enhancement. The discussion includes references to the complexities of the patent application process and the importance of technical details in such applications.

TimeDoctor
Messages
5
Reaction score
6
TL;DR
Telescope to watch distant galaxies.
Hey guys.
If you have a prototype of a new telescope, whom do you contact? This telescope uses the same lenses that we have but enhances their power in a n^4 So, if you have a lense that is supposed to magnify things twice, it'll magnify them 8 times. I just don't know whom to contact or where to go to make this a thing that can be sold and bought and used by people. Anyone knows where to go?
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: davenn
Physics news on Phys.org
TimeDoctor said:
Summary:: Telescope to watch distant galaxies.

Hey guys.
If you have a prototype of a new telescope, whom do you contact? This telescope uses the same lenses that we have but enhances their power in a n^4 So, if you have a lense that is supposed to magnify things twice, it'll magnify them 8 times. I just don't know whom to contact or where to go to make this a thing that can be sold and bought and used by people. Anyone knows where to go?
Is your intention to patent it? If so, you can look at the resources here if you want to go the lower-cost route:

https://store.nolo.com/products/intellectual-property?utm_content=sWESDRQgz_dc|pcrid|342544758139|pkw|nolo patent it yourself|pmt|e&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Ecommerce+-+Nolo+-+Official+Site&utm_term=nolo+patent+it+yourself+-+Exact

Otherwise, If you think it is patentable, you should write up the technical details including the test results for your working prototype, and have that writeup witnessed by a few close friends who have the technical backgrounds to be able to write "Read and Understood" as part of their witness signatures on each of your write-up pages.

It's probably a good idea to run this by an experienced Physicst or Engineer that you trust, before spending much money on a patent application. Most likely you are missing something, since telescope optics have been around for a long time and are a pretty mature technology. It's still probably good to keep the details of your idea private for a while, at least until you are able to figure out whether it is a workable idea or not. Good luck! :smile:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, dlgoff, anorlunda and 1 other person
If you believe that you have something new, and you want to get a patent, then you need to apply for the patent before disclosing the idea to anybody. This is because the US changed to First To File (FTF) from the previous system of First To Invent (FTI) a few years ago. The rest of the world was FTF long before the US.

It is a good idea to start with a patent search. You can do an informal patent search by yourself. The two main places to start are patft.uspto.gov and patents.google.com. Your search will not have legal standing, but it is free, and many times will tell you that somebody else thought of it first. If you cannot find any previous patents that cover your idea, then you can submit a patent application. The US Patent Office has a page that tells you everything you need to know, including how to prepare your own patent application: https://www.uspto.gov/patent.

I have had many discussions with several different patent attorneys and, while anybody can write and submit a patent application by themself, it is almost always a bad idea. There are many legal booby traps in a patent application. That said, the low cost path forward is a provisional patent application. It gives you one year to market the invention, seek financing, or show it around before filing the real patent application. During that time, you are allowed to use the term "patent pending" for your invention. The filing fee for a "micro entity" (yourself) is only $70.00 US. The USPTO fee schedule is at: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTO fee schedule_current.pdf. A provisional application does not need to cover the legal technicalities, but it absolutely must discuss the necessary technical details necessary to make it work.

If you want to have somebody evaluate it before filing a patent application, have that person sign a non-disclosure agreement first.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman, Tom.G and hutchphd
TimeDoctor said:
Summary:: Telescope to watch distant galaxies.

Hey guys.
If you have a prototype of a new telescope, whom do you contact? This telescope uses the same lenses that we have but enhances their power in a n^4 So, if you have a lense that is supposed to magnify things twice, it'll magnify them 8 times. I just don't know whom to contact or where to go to make this a thing that can be sold and bought and used by people. Anyone knows where to go?
One thing to be aware of is that magnification is one of the least important factors when using a telescope. Magnifying an image beyond a certain point in a telescope just results in a larger, fuzzier image.
Also, 2^4 = 16, not 8
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50, Keith_McClary and russ_watters
Here's a link to a Patent Office document outlining the process: https://www.uspto.gov/patents-getting-started/patent-process-overview#step1
TimeDoctor said:
This telescope uses the same lenses that we have but enhances their power in a n^4 So, if you have a lense that is supposed to magnify things twice, it'll magnify them 8 times.
I'm skeptical regarding what to me appears to be your claim to increase magnification exponentially by ##n^4##, especially considering that ##2^4=16##; not ##8## (##2^3=8##).

The limits of optical telescope performance are well-established ##-## as @berkeman said:
berkeman said:
##\dots## telescope optics have been around for a long time and are a pretty mature technology.
From skyandtelescope.org:

1591491314762.png


Please ask yourself whether you've genuinely discovered something that everyone else has missed, including what prior constraint your prototype overcomes, and what possible optical expenses it may incur in doing so.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, berkeman, Vanadium 50 and 1 other person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K