Thanks for that.  So far, I now have publicized this, my first isotopic invention, an amazing optical waveguide, but there is also my isotope-modified hafnium semiconductor dielectric, which will probably eventually be a bigger money-maker.  The total revenue (profits) for the optical fiber industry seems to be about $60 billion/year.  https://www.thomasnet.com/articles/top-suppliers/fiber-optics-manufacturers-suppliers/   I think I will be entitled to at least 2% of that in the form of royalties, so I will be making at least $1.2 billion per year on that.   The IC industry, at least the cutting edge of it which might use my hafnium dielectric, has profits of $200 billion per year.   https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets/012216/worlds-top-10-semiconductor-companies-tsmintc.asp   I hope, within 5 years, to make at least 1% of half of $200 billion, or about another $1 billion per year.  So, maybe a total of $2.2 billion.

If even one of these inventions "works", I will probably deserve a Nobel prize.  Oddly, it should probably be in Physics, rather than Chemistry, seeing that my BS from MIT (1980) is  in Chemistry.   One of the reasons I say this, is in comparison with a 1988 discovery of the GMR (Giant Magnetoresistance Ratio) invention, that allowed the detection of small, fast magnetic field changes, using extremely thin layers of material.  That invention relatively quickly was turned into a consumer product, specifically the read-heads present on hard-drives. In 2000, a typical hard drive stored 2-4 gigabytes.  Because GMR read heads began to be used, by today hard drives of 4 TERAbytes are common, and the largest one is about 16 terabytes.  Without this vital application, GMR would have merely been an obscure physics curiosity.  

The GMR invention was awarded its Nobel prize in 2007.    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_magnetoresistance   Very quickly, but because it was a very important invention, and its value had been dramatically demonstrated.  

However, I will probably never receive a Nobel.  One reason is that if I did,  I would probably be one of the least, if not the least, academically-qualified candidate ever to receive a Nobel.  (I actually have never checked, but it's probably true.)

But the second reason is that I have no intention of waiting for them to give me an award.  If I'm right, soon enough I hope to be fantastically rich, and I want to re-finance the Nobel prizes, the science ones, and perhaps add my own version of them.  Alfred Nobel was rich enough to finance his awards so as to give (only) one of each, in a small number of fields, each year.   That may have been sufficient in, say, 1910, but the vast increase in science and engineering since then has made one award per year wildly inadequate.  And there are so many new fields, that limiting it to the few that Nobel considered important in 1896 is terribly insufficient.    I am very surprised that yet another "Immensely rich individual" has not done this, but I will do it, hopefully within 5-10 years.   The really rich ones shouldn't wait until they die, and I won't, either.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPLNhqca0Qc             Probably one of the top three funniest commercials ever to be made.  I call it:  "VW Funeral"

There have been controversies about the failure of worthy recipients to receive any Nobel, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies   .  This is presumably because, in large part, there are not ENOUGH of them awarded, since they are too limited.   Even Einstein never received a Nobel for his Special or General Theories of Relativity.  (His award was for the photoelectric effect.  Important, but not on the scale of Relativity.).   This was utterly foolish.  Everyone in the science field recognized the truth, and importance, of Einsteins work by 1920, especially after the effect of gravity bending light was confirmed in 1919.  

And, of course, the Nobel Peace prize has been awarded to entirely unworthy candidates (Obama, for perhaps the most glaringly obvious example), or to people whose only contribution to "peace" was their stopping committing war.   (Sadat).    _I_ should probably receive a Nobel Peace prize for my invention of "Assassination Politics", but somehow for all the people protesting war and nuclear weapons, I think I'm the only person who has actually figured out how to force everyone to stop keeping them and preventing war.  

After I initiate my version, and re-finance the classic Nobels, it's likely that the Nobel prize committee would not want it to look like they are simply paying me back for my generosity.  So, no Nobel for me.

                                 Jim Bell