Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Research Frontiers (REFR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dimtint who wrote (27172)	5/21/2019 9:49:28 AM
From: dimtint	3 Recommendations Recommended By Auger50 davegreen JubilationT Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 51055

The short answer is that this is so far from any kind of commercial product it's not worth thinking about., Also, it shows it occluding, not dimming. I can write more some other time maybe. But really, this is almost a joke--I checked the date. I'm going to get together some palm pilots , glue them into a hollow core door and go into competition with Gauzy:) As for 'bistable' 2nd law of thermodynamics pretty much ensures that nothing is really bi stable in the presence of energy in this case in the form of light. I could go on and on, but basically the lawsuit highlighted the key differences between the e ink particles, which are big and migrate and the smaller spd rods that rotate fixed individually in droplets within the polymer matrix. E ink will need something similar to avoid clumping. Also those big particles are round so they will always occlude, rather than tint once they migrate. SPD particle are small and dispersed any they absorb, yes, but they also refract. E ink scatters. no, this is a joke and any time we see 7" squares in a door we know it's a joke, ask anyone whose been in this for a while.