ROGER DUBE
Scientist of the Future
Turning Poison Gas to Good Use
Alchemy
By
Carson Barbeau age 13
1/25/2010
Mrs. Halterman
Science Period 4
Scientific process can be a winding path from research, information gathering, tedious work and sometimes recognizing the beauty of an accident. This paper followed that walk from me deciding to find a scientist I might want to study and ending up somewhere else, but somewhere familiar. Allow me to explain.
First, I wanted to find a scientist who is alive and I wanted someone who had invented smart bombs or worked on smart missiles. I wanted to know about them because it is a resent thing and its interesting. I began with the internet, and searching much of the information is classified or in foreign languages. What I learned; however, is vehicle guidance systems have seekers with a “pitch and yaw control” which is an apparatus that often is controlled by laser. I found a paper by Roger Dube, a physics Professor at RIT about lasers and use of measurements in relationship to directing these little bombs. This peaked my mind’s attention because my grandfather was a physicist and I have a related cousin at RIT. I went to the University website and actually emailed the professor about my interest. I also emailed Bill Broza who is a student in the nanotechnology department and he knew the Professor, but has not taken a class from him. This round about method led me to choose Dr. Dube, by chance but also his name was just so amazingly cool and many of his patents and research were interesting. So began my research paper on a Scientist. My first question was how efficient is Dr. Dube’ process of laser zapping methane into useful gas
.
“I’m sure as a young scientist you can appreciate that we cannot determine the overall efficiency of converting methane gas to longer chain hydrocarbons until we have a working process in the lab. At this time in the project, all of our focus is on making that work. The concept is that by exciting methane molecules in certain modes using finely tuned laser light, we might be able to increase the reaction of methane into longer chains (such as ethane, butane, etc) and do so with gain. The key questions are: how much gain can we get, and how much overall energy did we have to expend to get that gain.
You asked about the laser power consumption – an efficient 100 milliwatt laser will require 40 watts to operate, so the laser itself is only about 1/4 of one percent efficient. So we need lots of gain (at least a gain of 400!) to make this worthwhile! That’s what the team is focused on!”
Dr. Roger Dube
Professor, Center for Imaging Science
Rochester Institute of Technology
Roger Dube attended Cornell University College of Arts and Sciences as a physics and math major. He was developing new experiments for the freshman physics lab and got a National Scholarship grant to work on the Kapitza-Dirac project at Harvard for a summer. Roger is a Native American and at this early age he lobbied Cornell to have programs to attract Native Americans. Something not mentioned in his story is that there are few Native American scientists as few black scientists as well.
He went on to Princeton to the doctorate program. His thesis was about measuring mass to light ratios in galaxies far away where we have no way of viewing. Next he went to Kitt Peak in Tucson Arizona and worked on array detectors and Charge Injection Devices. Basically tiny machines to measure light and make things click. These are used in digital cameras today.
A year later Dr. Dube moved his family next to Pasadena. His wife Jeri and their children were off to California to work for CalTech/JPL. He worked on the same spacecraft my grandfather worked on. Dr. Dube did not like California at all. He likes hiking and camping and the smog in Pasadena in those years was terrible.
In a year he took a job soon after at University of Michigan and travelled back and forth working on a project in Tucson with optics, soft wear and deflection of starlight. Around this time IBM in Tucson recruited him to be a staff scientist. Dr. Dube loved working for IBM and developed holographic storage in crystals. Dr. Due said IBM allowed him to be creative and he worked long hours because he loved the science. IBM moved him to their Yorktown facility. He was promoted and became the Head of the atomic force microscope project. This project got a Nobel Prize. Dr. Dube was well received by the scientific community with this world renowned award.
He fell into a friendship with another scientist in Florida and they started researching authentication of persons over the internet. His book “Hardware Based Computer Security Techniques to Defeat Hackers,” is very important with today’s internet. Companies have hackers who for fun or to steal money crack into banks, businesses and even our government computers. He used physics to make cryptographs and math to create code like models that can’t be cracked because they change. Dr. Dube used his early education to apply math and physics to making random cloaking for computers. I thought it was a cool idea to clock a computer to protect it because it was hiding under something.
The most fascinating project he is and has worked on is using Laser light on methane gas to create clean fuel. Think of it! Methane gas comes from human made sources such as cars, livestock, manure, coal mining, waste water treatment plants, garbage dumps, and burning crops like in the Central Valley in the winter. All this junk we as humans put in the air (some smaller amount is naturally made by wetlands and permafrost letting out gas.) If we could find a good use for all the garbage gas (methane the human like trash) that is hurting our ozone and is poisonous to our world as a fuel it would be amazing. Dr. Dube has found a way to convert methane into liquid methanol. This could stop all greenhouse gas problems. The National Science Foundation gave him a grant and he has jobs available for college students and others to help him finish the project. Often college science students work with professors to work out the bugs in their theories or inventions. Right now it is pretty expensive to convert the methane, so the important thing is to find a way to make it cheaper.
Dr. Dube started Gate Technologies. His own company Gate is also owned by his friend R. L. Morgenstern. In 2007 he started teaching at RIT. He loves teaching in a university where the students are amazingly smart.
Dr. Dube has 30 US Patents and a few more in process. Many of the patents are for monitoring anomalies, file protection, storing information on holograms, and holographic things. He has a mind that keeps asking questions and looks at the world from a different angle to solve problems. Dr. Dube’s college students who work at the center for Imaging Science collects information for agencies like the World Bank and United Nations. For example when the Haiti earthquake occurred they first hand had cameras which had images of the streets of Haiti from above. Dr. Dube and his students were one of the first to collect money for Haiti relief effort because they saw the devastation often before the news. Dr. Dube has a great heart.
So you, just like I wanted to know. Did Dr. Dube work on smart bombs? He didn’t answer the question. I think he didn’t because he laughed off the question.
http://www.cis.rit.edu
http://wwweurekalert.org.pub_releases/2009-10/riot-rss102209.php
http://www.enyclopedia.com.doc/1G1-189971565.html
http://www.carboncapturereport.org/cgi-bin/biodb?PROJID=10&mode
National Science Foundation website numerous pages viewed
Hardware Based Computer Security Techniques to Defeat Hackers: From Biometrics to
Quantum Crytography, by Roger R. Dube, J Wiley (publisher), September 3, 2008.
1/19/2010
Water Emergency??! Thanks Moulton Niguel Water
Moulton Niguel Water District Acts Great as Police Force BUT FAILS TO HAVE A WORKING PLAN
| Name (plus bio) | Position |
|---|---|
| Galen D Powers | Senior Founder |
| Daniel M. Powers | CEO |
| Richard S. Fiore | President |
| Pam Newman | CFO |
| Peter E. Racobs | Vice President |
1/11/2010
Can a Trust be Changed? How to Prove Trust Income to Fannie Mae Freddie MAC
TRUSTS CAN BE changed after Death of Settlor
There are some fourteen types of Trusts but those I am discussing Irrevocable and Intervivos (Living) Trusts
Trusts are regulated by California CIVIL codes as primary source and probate/ IRS laws as to tax payments.
A Trust is a contract. The Settlor puts specific assets into the hands of the Trust and designates how they are to be dispersed.
Unless the settlor made the trust irrevocable when s/he created the trust, the settlor can cancel or change the trust. Even if a trust is irrevocable, it is possible that it can be changed in one of the following situations:
The law says that if all beneficiaries consent, they can petition the Court to change or end the trust.
The Court considers: if the trust must continue in order to carry out the purpose of the trust or if the reason for changing or ending the trust outweighs the interest in carrying out the purpose of the trust
The law says if the settlor and all beneficiaries consent, they can change or end the trust.
If any beneficiary does not consent to change or end the trust, the other beneficiaries, with the consent of the settlor, can petition the Court to partially change or end the trust as long as the interests of the beneficiaries who do not consent are not seriously affected.
If the Court decides it is costing more to administer the trust than the trust is worth, the beneficiary or trustee can ask the Court to end or change the trust, or appoint a new trustee. If the trust principal is worth $20,000 or less, the trustee can end the trust.
The law says the Court may change or end a trust if circumstances have changed and continuing the trust would defeat or weaken the trust.
The Court can remove a trustee and make the trustee pay the beneficiaries for any loss to the trust. Sometimes the Court will remove the trustee or suspend the trustee’s powers while the case is pending if there is reason to believe the beneficiaries’ interests are at risk.
Some trust documents say the trustee will be liable only for willful misconduct or gross negligence. But, California law is strict, and the Court can remove a trustee for any of the following reasons:
• Breach of trust;
• Trustee has more debts than assets or otherwise unfit to act as trustee;
• The trust cannot be administered because of hostility or lack of cooperation between co-trustees;
• The trustee does not want to be the trustee;
• The trustee's payment is excessive;
• The law says some people must be disqualified from serving as a sole trustee. The people who cannot serve as a sole trustee are listed in Probate Code Section 21350.
The beneficiary has 3 years from the date of receiving the trustee’s report to ask the Court to remove the trustee.
If the trust document says that a beneficiary's share of the trust income or principal cannot be transferred (a spendthrift provision because perhaps settler was worried about beneficiary’s ability to be prudent or was too young), you cannot collect money owed until the income or principal is actually paid to the beneficiary. Beneficiary can petition the Court to order the trustee to pay you from the trust assets due to the beneficiary.
See Probate Code Section 15300,
If the settlor owes beneficiaries and the settlor has the power to revoke the trust in whole or in part, you can make a claim against the property during the settlor's lifetime.
In some cases, you can make a claim against the settlor for the maximum amount available to the settlor under the terms of the trust, up to all of the property contributed by the settlor to the trust.
See Probate Code Section 18200
Despite "irrevocable" language, the trust may have been drafted with sufficient flexibility to permit adaptive changes, either through the use of a "trust protector" or "powers of appointment" (IRC Sec. 1041).
The language in the original Trust agreement will specify how payments/dispersements are made
Civil Code Sec. 3399 permits the "reformation" of a written contract when the writing, through fraud or mistake, fails to express the intention of the parties. This code section codifies the traditional equitable action to correct a written document. A court will not create a new agreement for the parties [See Getty v. Getty, 1987 Cal. App. 3d 1159 (1986)], changing the Trust document might be appropriate in cases where, for example, poor drafting failed to carry out the settlor's intentions.
Probate Code Sec. 15409 shades a broad umbrella under which a court may modify the administrative or dispositive provisions of a trust, or may terminate the trust, if "owing to circumstances not known to the settlor and not anticipated by the settlor, the continuation of the trust under its terms would defeat or substantially limit the accomplishment of the purposes of the trust."
A trustee or beneficiary asks the assistance of the court under Sec. 15409 by filing a petition. The court must be convinced that there are "circumstances not known and not anticipated by the settlor" that would defeat or impair the trust's purpose, the statute does not require consent by the remaining beneficiaries or trustees to the requested change.
Also a court may order modification or termination of a trust under Probate Code secs. 15403 and 15404. While both offer potentially broad-reaching assistance, it is important to note that various levels of consent are required under each of these provisions.
Under Probate Code Sec. 15403, if all beneficiaries of an irrevocable trust consent, they may compel modification or termination of the trust unless the court finds that a material purpose remains for continuance of the trust and that purpose outweighs reasons advanced for termination or modification.
Probate Code Sec. 15404 offers an even broader avenue of relief: If the settlor and all beneficiaries consent, they may compel termination or modification of a trust without any need for court action. Section 15404(b) further allows a court to compel modification or partial termination of the trust over the objection of non-consenting beneficiaries, provided that the settlor consents and that the request does not "substantially impair" the rights of the non-consenting beneficiaries. Because this procedure requires the settlor's consent, a trust cannot be set aside under this provision after death
Probate Code secs. 15411 and 15412 offer additional avenues for redress. These provisions permit a court to combine or divide a trust or trusts "for good cause shown."
In reality, records show probate courts routinely approve trust amendment petitions if the beneficiaries unanimously consent to the proposed changes. However, where a disgruntled beneficiary lodges an objection, counsel will be required to argue the merits of the case and to demonstrate that the appropriate statutory test has been met.
Beyond these statutory options, California case law underscores the inherent equitable power of the courts to reform or modify a trust--an additional source of relief for clients.
One of the earliest California cases in this field, Lissauer v. Union Bank & Trust Co. [45 Cal. App. 2d 468 (1941)], established that when a drafting error has rendered the trustor's intention ambiguous, the trial court may consider extrinsic evidence (that is, evidence outside the four corners of the document) to determine the trustor's
California Court of Appeal in Stewart v. Towse [203 Cal. App. 3d 425 (1988)] authorized the modification of two irrevocable trusts to change the named successor trustee, confirming that trial courts have the inherent equitable power to modify the terms of a trust "where such modification is necessary to preserve the trust or serve the original intentions of the trustor."
Based on these codes and cases sited, most any Trust can be changed.
In order to show a lender what the trust income is Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac want to see the Borrower’s Federal Tax Returns and the Trust Tax Returns. What you really need to show is the total amount of assets held by the Trust ie:
Total assets in cash are $ X and real estate $ X rents monthly $X
Showing that the income can continue out 36 months is all you need. Assuming your borrower has received monthly stipend of X dollars ( in reality the funds should have been passed to a separate Tax Identification Number) The Trustee of the Trust could write a letter saying: the Trust allows a regular stipend and also any additional costs she may from time to time submit for payment such as education, sporting equipment, …blah blah… and Trust has X amount of cash managed at 4% interest..”
There are some fourteen types of Trusts but those I am discussing Irrevocable and Intervivos (Living) Trusts
Trusts are regulated by California CIVIL codes as primary source and probate/ IRS laws as to tax payments.
A Trust is a contract. The Settlor puts specific assets into the hands of the Trust and designates how they are to be dispersed.
Unless the settlor made the trust irrevocable when s/he created the trust, the settlor can cancel or change the trust. Even if a trust is irrevocable, it is possible that it can be changed in one of the following situations:
The law says that if all beneficiaries consent, they can petition the Court to change or end the trust.
The Court considers: if the trust must continue in order to carry out the purpose of the trust or if the reason for changing or ending the trust outweighs the interest in carrying out the purpose of the trust
The law says if the settlor and all beneficiaries consent, they can change or end the trust.
If any beneficiary does not consent to change or end the trust, the other beneficiaries, with the consent of the settlor, can petition the Court to partially change or end the trust as long as the interests of the beneficiaries who do not consent are not seriously affected.
If the Court decides it is costing more to administer the trust than the trust is worth, the beneficiary or trustee can ask the Court to end or change the trust, or appoint a new trustee. If the trust principal is worth $20,000 or less, the trustee can end the trust.
The law says the Court may change or end a trust if circumstances have changed and continuing the trust would defeat or weaken the trust.
The Court can remove a trustee and make the trustee pay the beneficiaries for any loss to the trust. Sometimes the Court will remove the trustee or suspend the trustee’s powers while the case is pending if there is reason to believe the beneficiaries’ interests are at risk.
Some trust documents say the trustee will be liable only for willful misconduct or gross negligence. But, California law is strict, and the Court can remove a trustee for any of the following reasons:
• Breach of trust;
• Trustee has more debts than assets or otherwise unfit to act as trustee;
• The trust cannot be administered because of hostility or lack of cooperation between co-trustees;
• The trustee does not want to be the trustee;
• The trustee's payment is excessive;
• The law says some people must be disqualified from serving as a sole trustee. The people who cannot serve as a sole trustee are listed in Probate Code Section 21350.
The beneficiary has 3 years from the date of receiving the trustee’s report to ask the Court to remove the trustee.
If the trust document says that a beneficiary's share of the trust income or principal cannot be transferred (a spendthrift provision because perhaps settler was worried about beneficiary’s ability to be prudent or was too young), you cannot collect money owed until the income or principal is actually paid to the beneficiary. Beneficiary can petition the Court to order the trustee to pay you from the trust assets due to the beneficiary.
See Probate Code Section 15300,
If the settlor owes beneficiaries and the settlor has the power to revoke the trust in whole or in part, you can make a claim against the property during the settlor's lifetime.
In some cases, you can make a claim against the settlor for the maximum amount available to the settlor under the terms of the trust, up to all of the property contributed by the settlor to the trust.
See Probate Code Section 18200
Despite "irrevocable" language, the trust may have been drafted with sufficient flexibility to permit adaptive changes, either through the use of a "trust protector" or "powers of appointment" (IRC Sec. 1041).
The language in the original Trust agreement will specify how payments/dispersements are made
Civil Code Sec. 3399 permits the "reformation" of a written contract when the writing, through fraud or mistake, fails to express the intention of the parties. This code section codifies the traditional equitable action to correct a written document. A court will not create a new agreement for the parties [See Getty v. Getty, 1987 Cal. App. 3d 1159 (1986)], changing the Trust document might be appropriate in cases where, for example, poor drafting failed to carry out the settlor's intentions.
Probate Code Sec. 15409 shades a broad umbrella under which a court may modify the administrative or dispositive provisions of a trust, or may terminate the trust, if "owing to circumstances not known to the settlor and not anticipated by the settlor, the continuation of the trust under its terms would defeat or substantially limit the accomplishment of the purposes of the trust."
A trustee or beneficiary asks the assistance of the court under Sec. 15409 by filing a petition. The court must be convinced that there are "circumstances not known and not anticipated by the settlor" that would defeat or impair the trust's purpose, the statute does not require consent by the remaining beneficiaries or trustees to the requested change.
Also a court may order modification or termination of a trust under Probate Code secs. 15403 and 15404. While both offer potentially broad-reaching assistance, it is important to note that various levels of consent are required under each of these provisions.
Under Probate Code Sec. 15403, if all beneficiaries of an irrevocable trust consent, they may compel modification or termination of the trust unless the court finds that a material purpose remains for continuance of the trust and that purpose outweighs reasons advanced for termination or modification.
Probate Code Sec. 15404 offers an even broader avenue of relief: If the settlor and all beneficiaries consent, they may compel termination or modification of a trust without any need for court action. Section 15404(b) further allows a court to compel modification or partial termination of the trust over the objection of non-consenting beneficiaries, provided that the settlor consents and that the request does not "substantially impair" the rights of the non-consenting beneficiaries. Because this procedure requires the settlor's consent, a trust cannot be set aside under this provision after death
Probate Code secs. 15411 and 15412 offer additional avenues for redress. These provisions permit a court to combine or divide a trust or trusts "for good cause shown."
In reality, records show probate courts routinely approve trust amendment petitions if the beneficiaries unanimously consent to the proposed changes. However, where a disgruntled beneficiary lodges an objection, counsel will be required to argue the merits of the case and to demonstrate that the appropriate statutory test has been met.
Beyond these statutory options, California case law underscores the inherent equitable power of the courts to reform or modify a trust--an additional source of relief for clients.
One of the earliest California cases in this field, Lissauer v. Union Bank & Trust Co. [45 Cal. App. 2d 468 (1941)], established that when a drafting error has rendered the trustor's intention ambiguous, the trial court may consider extrinsic evidence (that is, evidence outside the four corners of the document) to determine the trustor's
California Court of Appeal in Stewart v. Towse [203 Cal. App. 3d 425 (1988)] authorized the modification of two irrevocable trusts to change the named successor trustee, confirming that trial courts have the inherent equitable power to modify the terms of a trust "where such modification is necessary to preserve the trust or serve the original intentions of the trustor."
Based on these codes and cases sited, most any Trust can be changed.
In order to show a lender what the trust income is Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac want to see the Borrower’s Federal Tax Returns and the Trust Tax Returns. What you really need to show is the total amount of assets held by the Trust ie:
Total assets in cash are $ X and real estate $ X rents monthly $X
Showing that the income can continue out 36 months is all you need. Assuming your borrower has received monthly stipend of X dollars ( in reality the funds should have been passed to a separate Tax Identification Number) The Trustee of the Trust could write a letter saying: the Trust allows a regular stipend and also any additional costs she may from time to time submit for payment such as education, sporting equipment, …blah blah… and Trust has X amount of cash managed at 4% interest..”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)