This document in English is available in pdf at: goo.gl/sqcqod
CONCERNED CITIZENS: How can you claim that your 3D-Flow invention can meet the needs of the four major experiments at CERN and PET? Some physicists argue that it is impossible because the problems and the triggering needs of each experiment are very different.
CROSETTO: I’m not the only to claim this, as several scientists, senior experts in the field for over twenty years, have put this in writing (see citations at “goo.gl/GIC5aR” and a few complete letters at “goo.gl/VXBx33“).
These include those who today are leaders of the two largest ongoing experiments at CERN: Joel Butler, Spokesperson of the CMS experiment, the largest collaboration with over 5,000 scientists, and Andrew Lankford, Deputy Spokesperson of the large ATLAS experiment at CERN, with almost the same number of scientists. Several experts have acknowledged the validity of my invention not only for making various triggers (called by the ‘Trap’ by newspapers) but also to offer great benefits in other applications. One of these is very important for building a ‘trap’ for tumor markers, which makes an early and effective diagnosis possible to save millions of lives.
Butler, in a 1995 letter (goo.gl/ZJh0Kg) stated: “The 3D-Flow project is the only detailed study demonstrating the feasibility of executing several level-1 trigger algorithms of different experiments.” Lankford, in a 1993 letter (goo.gl/8jaxDH) writes about my invention: “… a technique to perform fast, programmable triggers …”. Livio Mapelli, another CERN leader of the ATLAS experiment, also a member of the panel of the major scientific review of my basic 3D-Flow invention held at FERMILAB on December 14, 1993, in a letter dated 1993 (goo.gl/l5vvvU) wrote about my invention: “… higher flexibility, coming from the programmability of algorithms and not only of parameters …”
Scientists who pose these questions may not be aware of the scientific acknowledgment of my invention by the FERMILAB commission (goo.gl/zP76Tc) and of my 45-page peer-reviewed article published by one of the most prestigious scientific journals at World (Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Sec. A, vol. 436, 1999, pp. 341-385). Or maybe they do not know my invention because for the last twenty years my presentations at conferences and articles at the IEEE scientific community (which has more than 400,000 members, where proposals are submitted and discussed to receive funding for funding) have been suppressed. My articles as well as presentations have been rejected at IEEE conferences with the exception of Chairman Ralph James, who allowed me to present in 2003 (goo.gl/RiIn0B) and 2013 (goo.gl/qpnNxd).
Scientists who have written letters of recognition of the validity of my invention have realized that the architecture of my 3D-Flow system described in one page at “goo.gl/NQ8Cck” has the ability to perform both the 3×3 algorithm of CMS and ATLAS 4×4 or 5×5 or 7×7 for jets, and perform operations similar to a computer that can solve many problems using a different sequence of instructions.
The peculiarity of my 3D-Flow system is the synergy between arithmetic communication and logic instructions that together with the processor and system architecture offer the great advantage of sustaining an ultra-high input data rate but at the same time performing complex algorithms to recognize objects (recognizing new particles, signals from tumor markers, or signals indicating the presence of a terrorist or other person in a crowd wanted by police). The 3D-Flow processor has the ability to perform up to 26 addition, subtraction, comparison operations, etc. every three nanoseconds.
I explained an analogy of my invention to Dallas Montessori media school students at a middle school in a video (See “goo.gl/tKGUjw” at minute 7:58). The problem was to analyze for 30 seconds the contents of new envelope arriving every six seconds. The video shows how this problem was solved without losing any information contained in the envelopes. Students at the door of each classroom managed communication that allowed the group of students within each classroom to analyze the contents of each envelope for 30 seconds.
Students in the class can receive instructions to run the CMS algorithm, ATLAS, find the tumor marker, and so on.
Sign the Petition at: goo.gl/dzmYCz
CONCERNED CITIZENS: What benefits would we have with a single system like yours?
CROSETTO: It would save money by developing a single 3D-Flow system with a 12-person team for two years, which could be used in the four major experiments at CERN, in many other physics experiments and other applications.
In contrast, we have experiments that have developed their own Level-1 Triggers over the years, employing hundreds, even thousands, of researchers and technicians without providing a tool that can filter a desired object. A lot of money and energy was spent on building Level-1 Triggers that were not fully programmable and had to be trashed. Subsequent triggers were also designed and built for individual experiments, continuing this costly waste.
CONCERNED CITIZENS: But nowadays aren’t the advantages of the invention overtaken by new technology?
CROSETTO: The reason my 3D-Flow invention is well-timed and competitive is because it is independent of technology. The wheel invented over 5,000 years ago continues to have great value and technological advantage because the concept is independent of technology. The construction of the wooden wheel may have evolved to rubber wheels, plastic, metal roller bearings, carbon fiber wheels, but year after year, centuries and millenniums, the concept is the same and will continue to be used with emerging technologies.
My 3D-Flow invention offered tremendous benefits in 1992 as recognized by the scientific review at FERMILAB and has continued to offer enormous benefits over the last 25 years, even while less efficient and more expensive projects have been funded.
In fact, confirmation that my 3D-Flow system is very competitive and advantageous compared to all other approaches used or planned in the future is evident by the fact that no researcher, including Joel Butler and Andrew Lankford, head of the largest and most expensive physics experiments in the world, have not been able to identify or provide the reference to any more performant and cost-effective project than my 3D-Flow system to be compared publicly.
A further confirmation of the advantages and benefits of my invention compared to current alternative systems occurred when the Director of the United States Department of Energy (who was my superior when we both worked at the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas, and who now manages over a billion dollars per year to fund particle physics research) repeatedly urged me both in writing and by telephone in the period from May to December 2015 to submit a formal research grant proposal to the Department of Energy. The confirmation came from the enormous advantages of my 3D-Flow invention using current technology. If Jim Siegrist had not asked me to submit a formal proposal to DOE, prompting me to adapt my 3D-Flow invention to current technology, then the 59 quotes I received from several industries with irrefutable cost and performance advantages would not have made this confirmation so clear.
In order to respond consistently to this request, I had to address the adaptation of my 3D-Flow invention with several industries, asking them to provide quotes for the realization of the components of my invention with current technology. I had to request at least two offers to different companies for each component.
The result has demonstrated the feasibility of my invention with DISRUPTIVE advantages and benefits compared to current alternative systems.
These advantages are summarized in two pages for applications in physics (goo.gl/AoszvQ) and two pages in applications for medical imaging (goo.gl/QLuA1n) with details in 271 pages (goo.gl/w3XlZ1) relative to a project proven feasible by 59 quotes from highly reputable industries.
In this process of adaptation to new technologies, in September 2015 I conceived additional synergies between the various components that lead me to the new 3D-Flow OPRA (Object Pattern Recognition Algorithm) system that can replace the 4,000 electronic boards of the CERN CMS Level-1 Trigger (goo.gl/mPHw5Y) costing over one hundred million dollars (and replacing the trigger for other experiments) with 9 x 3D-Flow OPRA electronic boards at a cost of just $100,000, capable of delivering tremendously higher performance at one thousandth the cost of CMS. The costs of the 9 electronic cards and the crate housing them can be verified in the quotes.
In applications for the diagnosis of cancer at an early curable stage (see “goo.gl/YcAJDy” and more information at “goo.gl/JMKyek“), my 3D-CBS and 3D-Flow OPRA inventions create for the first time a paradigmatic change in Molecular Imaging because they offer at the same time three benefits that no other equipment can offer: a) a diagnosis of diseases such as cancer at a highly curable early stage; provide more accurate information to the physician to improve diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring of treatments to assure that all tumor cells have been eliminated by the treatment; b) require only 1% of the radiation compared to current over 10,000 PET; c) a 4-minute, low-cost examination covering all organs of the body. Hence, screening on specific organs such as: mammography, PAP-test, colonoscopy, and PSA will be superfluous. The 3D-CBS invention can reduce cancer deaths by over 50% through an effective early detection while reducing healthcare costs.
Sign the Petition at: goo.gl/dzmYCz
This post is also available in: Italian