Water Flows Uphill

An anonymous reader writes "The BBC are reporting James Dyson's new garden feature, a waterfall with water flowing uphill. Apparently, he wanted to recreate an Escher drawing."

Sigh...

[lingqi]

Before someone tries to market their own uphill water feature, they had better be warned. James Dyson - no stranger to court battles over patents - has presumably taken care of the necessary legal business.

Now, why would he do that? I know it might be a rhetorical question, but honestly though - all he would do, I presume, is to limit this neat but useless (admit it - this is as useless as your lava-lamp and plasma-ball (no seminal jokes please)) thing out of mainstream for a long time - instead of giving him eternal fame, etc.

Now - an interesting question to think about is what part of our pattern-recognizing brain is responsible for *falling* for such a visual illusion? Research like this can shed light on the workings of the mind, I think.

Re:Immediate dissapointment

[D+iz+a+n+k+Meister]

Yeah, I would have dipped my finger into the "upward" flowing water to see which side the water ebs on. :-(

Re:It's not a new phenomenon

[mrklin]

No, it's not capillary action. What a typical Slashdot reader response, had you read the article before commenting you would know that he used pumps.

Futhermore, this is not meant as a confirmation of laws of gravity and conservation of momentum (as if they need further confirmation - in case if one still doesn't believe in this thing called gravity?). I mean, you think someone who does not believe in gravity would change his mind after he sees this!?

Oh, lastly, I am 100% sure this really does not impresses the chicks at the parties when you say "hey, here is a fun thing to discuss..."

Re:Sigh...

[Abcd1234]

Forget about the usefulness of the invention for a moment (patents have never been concerned with the merits of the invention), this guy created something new and unique, and something which, to some, could be pretty valuable. After all, the exact things you list as examples (lava lamps and plasma balls) have made tons of cash (hell, I have a lava lamp on my desk). So why shouldn't Dyson be allowed exclusive rights to his invention and any monetary rewards it generates for a time? That's exactly what patents were created for! To allow the "little guy" to innovate, and benefit from those innovations.

Re:Immediate dissapointment

[MikeFM]

They have uphill waterslides that just shoot the water uphill. Why couldn't you build an uphill waterfall that way.. which would allow your boat to flow uphill.

Re:Sigh...

[WG55]

Now, why would he do that? I know it might be a rhetorical question, but honestly though - all he would do, I presume, is to limit this neat but useless (admit it - this is as useless as your lava-lamp and plasma-ball (no seminal jokes please)) thing out of mainstream for a long time - instead of giving him eternal fame, etc.

James Dyson would be a fool if he were to patent this invention and then not license it out to anyone. Many inventors are quite liberal with their licensing policies, and want to make sure that their invention does enter the "mainstream".

Water running uphill

[Ashtead]

I have seen sections of water-slides where the water flow actually goes uphill for shorter distances. Then there is the everyday action where water flows upwards inside a pipe. Except we're so used to this, so making a display of it doesn't prove interesting.

Still, this does look really cool even though it is a trompe l'oeil.

Re:England's Dean Kamen

[jamesh]

ah. obviously no feminists read slashdot.

you'd have been lynched by now.

And don't think posting as an AC will protect you.

They'd find you. :)

Here's how it works...

[Anonymous Coward]

I managed to work this one out after about five seconds... The water is pumped up between two sheets of glass that form that edge of the waterfall, the water then goes down the slanted bit (not up, your brain just tells you that it is going up because 'why would it go down?') and also over the vertical drop. Take this and multiply by 4. Easy.

On another point, this is just another example of Dyson taking somebody else's idea and passing it off like he invented it. Industrial vortexes had been used for years, yes he did do loads of work making it small but when it comes down to it his aggressive defence of 'his' IP would be like psion sueing everyone who tries to make a small computer, having seen a larger one.

Re:Dyson didnt invent this , Derek Phillips did !

[Usquebaugh]

Rather like a certain Mr. Edison.