Quote:
Originally Posted by Kybosh
I met Dan Nocera at a conference a couple months back. He was telling myself and my colleagues about this stuff and to keep an eye out for the publication (It is in Science journal/magazine for those that are interested). If I recall correctly, photosynthesis is about 8% efficient while his system does that portion of photosynthesis at something like 30% efficiency. Don't quote me on this, however.
Dan Nocera is a very interesting guy. I would describe him as an egomaniac but the guy knows his stuff and was a hoot to hang out with. At one point late into the night he said to me "See that plant? I $#^@ing OWN that plant". I'm not joking in the slightest, hilarious.
If anyone gets the chance you should go see him talk. His lectures are geared towards whoever the audience is so you don't necessarily have to be a chemist to enjoy it.
|
Who would own the patent/intellectual rights or whatever it would be called to this device/technology re. possible royalties and future earnings?
Nocera and his post-doc? MIT? The funding bodies?
It's my understanding that PhD students' work remains the intellectual property of the supervisor, and was wondering how it worked further up the chain.