www.pulse-jets.com

PUBLIC NOTICE:

I would like the pulsejet community to know that I wish to re-stake my claim on the Blast Compression Valveless Pulsejet (BCVP) engine concept. I may try to protect it in some way as my intellectual property. Patenting will almost certainly not work, but there are other ways.

Given that no one in the community that I know of is working on the BCVP at the moment, and that Nick Ibbitson and Graham Williams have departed from my concept far enough to consider it a separate design, even adopting a separate name (Albion Phoenix if I am not mistaken), I presume that no one in the community will have a problem with my move.

If anyone does have a problem, please let me know, either through the forum or privately, so that we can come to some mutually satisfactory accommodation. As they say at weddings, speak now or forever hold your peace.

There's no great hurry, but please don't wait too long.

Good luck with this Bruno. You still have intellectual property rights on your report (as far as copyright) but as you said it is too late to patent that design. However, the world of patenting is a funny place and if you tweak the design/concept/wording a little you will probably find you will be able to patent it. As your report was theoretical there is plenty of space for you to come up with a working design and patent that.

There is hope!

My most oscillatory Bruno,

Whatever do you mean? With respect to the origins of the BCVP concept, if you were indeed first to document
the idea, your previous publications to this effect have (at least) established your so-called claim to "primacy".
No one has, or will, dispute this fact. So why the sudden proclamation, for which no effect can be expected, if
we ignore persons lacking basic understanding of intellectual property law? Barring the appearance of a prior
inventor, whose documented work pre-dates your first publication, you will always be the "father of the BCVP".

Unless you have the legal (and financial) means to compel remuneration from others, you are barking at the wind.
Not that such behavior from you would be in any way surprising. Given your complete incompetence, in any of the
areas needed to manifest your BCVP concept (assuming that this is physically possible), what is it that you want?

One thing that you need to realise, is that mathematics is the language of science, and it is within this domain
that true descriptions, and ultimately, true understanding, of the pulsejet can be found. From this perspective,
the BCVP, and the "Phoenix", belong to a larger class of engines called 're-entrant pulse compression devices'.
You have no standing whatsoever, to claim "primacy" in this area - or to interfere with the activities of anyone
working within an overall framework of RPC devices. By your own admission and that of Graham C. Williams, or
his colleagues, the BCVP concept appears to be a non-starter (at least in its published form); so why your post?

All of your comments on this topic, whether on the old forum, or the new, or in the emails that you have posted
to me, have been archived; it is unfortunate that you quickly forget your own words, only to find them reversed.

FWIW, I have no interest in any RPC devices. From a mathematical perspective, it is always possible to describe
single-combustor systems of equal, or greater, efficacy in comparison to any logical (closed-solution) RPC device.
I will keep an open mind, but as Shakespeare titled a play, RPC devices are, perhaps, "Much Ado About Nothing".

Enjoy the BCVP at your pleasure. I, for one, will always associate this concept with you... And there you have it.

Regards,
M.
__________________
"Aye, and the old man's boasts were exceeded only by his belching."

milisavljevic wrote:My most oscillatory Bruno,

Whatever do you mean? With respect to the origins of the BCVP concept, if you were indeed first to document
the idea, your previous publications to this effect have (at least) established your so-called claim to "primacy".
No one has, or will, dispute this fact. So why the sudden proclamation, for which no effect can be expected, if
we ignore persons lacking basic understanding of intellectual property law? Barring the appearance of a prior
inventor, whose documented work pre-dates your first publication, you will always be the "father of the BCVP".

Unless you have the legal (and financial) means to compel remuneration from others, you are barking at the wind.
Not that such behavior from you would be in any way surprising. Given your complete incompetence, in any of the
areas needed to manifest your BCVP concept (assuming that this is physically possible), what is it that you want?

One thing that you need to realise, is that mathematics is the language of science, and it is within this domain
that true descriptions, and ultimately, true understanding, of the pulsejet can be found. From this perspective,
the BCVP, and the "Phoenix", belong to a larger class of engines called 're-entrant pulse compression devices'.
You have no standing whatsoever, to claim "primacy" in this area - or to interfere with the activities of anyone
working within an overall framework of RPC devices. By your own admission and that of Graham C. Williams, or
his colleagues, the BCVP concept appears to be a non-starter (at least in its published form); so why your post?

All of your comments on this topic, whether on the old forum, or the new, or in the emails that you have posted
to me, have been archived; it is unfortunate that you quickly forget your own words, only to find them reversed.

FWIW, I have no interest in any RPC devices. From a mathematical perspective, it is always possible to describe
single-combustor systems of equal, or greater, efficacy in comparison to any logical (closed-solution) RPC device.
I will keep an open mind, but as Shakespeare titled a play, RPC devices are, perhaps, "Much Ado About Nothing".

Enjoy the BCVP at your pleasure. I, for one, will always associate this concept with you... And there you have it.

Regards,
M.
__________________
"Aye, and the old man's boasts were exceeded only by his belching."

????

Are you for real, or do you only get hard when you troll?

Number yourself lucky count chocula, that I don't have access to your IP.

Ben, et al. I'd ban his IP range effective immediately. It's Ivar, just in a new wrapping.

milisavljevic wrote:My most oscillatory Bruno

My, I must have stepped on your toe pretty hard, huh? :o)

I don't think this is really necessary, but in the unlikely case of someone else feeling like M. does, here's an added explanation of my intentions.

My aim is to warn the people in our small community that my interest in the BCVP concept has been rekindled and that I may try to find a way to protect the concept for possible commercial exploitation after all -- despite the fact that it has been more or less public property for years.

I may ultimately be unsuccessful, but I do wish to try. More importantly, my rekindled project may again prove to be a dud as an engine, in which case protection will hardly be needed anyway.

I wanted to let people know about this, so that I do not clash with anyone else's projects -- though I do not really think anyone is doing anything with the concept at the moment.

Just in case someone is planning anything, I'd like to know that. so that we can talk and come to some kind of amicable understanding.

The superior education and experience of an individual does not bestow creativity or an ability to innovate in a given subject.

Sadly for some it is impossible to realize that no matter how hard they try, creativity and flashes of genius do not come from a book but from within a person, it is not transferable or learnable in any way, a life time passing exams and hanging the results on your wall does not bestow a creative ability.

A bitter pill for some,the fact that Bruno conceived the BCVP with out a background or education in this or any related field marks his work as innovative, creative and also can be argued an act of genius, others with the relevant education, experience and ability in mathematics have realized no more than the improvements of a capable engineer in their given field.

Arguing he lacks knowledge and has no education or ability to use the tools of science raises his achievements to a higher level rather than belittles him:-)

During the many years I have known Bruno and the thousands of words in correspondence we have exchanged he has never once claimed superior education, ability or knowledge! the only things he has ever claimed is simply "this is my idea" "I thought of this", all this he has done with a pencil and paper from his humble armchair with out the benefit of a university education or degree to make it easier, he did it the hard way with only original thought and creativity as tools at his disposal.

Few people can claim to have done so much with so little and inspired so many, his only crime is to have incurred your jealousy.

Viv
PS having said that he is still pig headed, stubborn and needs to cut down on the beer and get some exercise:-)

Viv wrote:The superior education and experience of an individual does not bestow creativity or an ability to innovate in a given subject.

Sadly for some it is impossible to realize that no matter how hard they try, creativity and flashes of genius do not come from a book but from within a person, it is not transferable or learnable in any way, a life time passing exams and hanging the results on your wall does not bestow a creative ability.

Respectfully Viv, this is BS. In order to obtain a Master of Science, one must not only pass courses, but write a thesis. This thesis (experimental and theoretical) must truly be new or novel - one spends time searching what has been done, to ensure what he/she is doing, hasn't been done before. The same goes for a PhD.

Viv wrote: Few people can claim to have done so much with so little and inspired so many, ...

To me this reads quite like what Sir Winston Churchill once wrote.

------

As far as what M. wrote, well, isn't he entitled to speak his mind?

To use something I read somewhere else on this forum.

That's M., being M.

Bruno, in one of his posts on the old forum, For people with weakness for hard data and exact science], drew first blood.

Why is it ok for others to be a bit acidic, and now nail this guy, M., to the cross?

------

There seems to be a perpetual disdane for science and mathematics up here. There has been much progress in the numerical analysis for pulse combustors as of late. Codes do exist.

It would be nice if someday, with a proper code, an analysis would be done to see why Bruno's engine has merit.

But, as far as I know, most of the BCVP was shrouded in secrecy.


-fde

WebPilot wrote:

Viv wrote:The superior education and experience of an individual does not bestow creativity or an ability to innovate in a given subject.

Sadly for some it is impossible to realize that no matter how hard they try, creativity and flashes of genius do not come from a book but from within a person, it is not transferable or learnable in any way, a life time passing exams and hanging the results on your wall does not bestow a creative ability.

Respectfully Viv, this is BS. In order to obtain a Master of Science, one must not only pass courses, but write a thesis. This thesis (experimental and theoretical) must truly be new or novel - one spends time searching what has been done, to ensure what he/she is doing, hasn't been done before. The same goes for a PhD.

Viv wrote: Few people can claim to have done so much with so little and inspired so many, ...
[/quote

To me this reads similar to what Sir Winston Churchill once wrote.

------

As far as what M. wrote, well, isn't he entitled to speak his mind?

To use something I read somewhere else on this forum.

That's M., being M.

Why is it ok for others to be a bit acidic, and now nail this guy to the cross?

------

There seems to be a perpetual disdane for science and mathematics up here. There has been much progress in the numerical analysis for pulse combustors as of late. Codes do exist.

It would be nice if someday, with a proper code, an analysis would be done to see why Bruno's engine has merit.

But, as far as I know, most of the BCVP was shrouded in secrecy.

-fde

Really....That's funny.

I wasn't aware the yardstick of creativity was measured by the degree.

There's a certain president who has a degree in history from Yale, and a MBA from Harvard.

I wouldn't rank him as an intellectual giant..would you?

It isn't measured by the degree, but then you can't say just because you
have one, you can't be creative.

... and then, I was speaking of MS (masters of science) and PhD's in science not the others.

... but then I would consider him a learned man, and try to listen to what he might have to say.

-fde

Easy, easy, M. is intitled to his opinion. Bruno is a big boy, he can take it. Being a man of 90% inspiration and 10% math myself, I too can be called ignorant and not get bent out of shape. It's true, though a disagreeable word, true.
M. has professed his need to contribute and it is welcome. Let's keep the flame down, it's not that bad a comment.

As to IP, build it and they will come.

Hi Gentlemen,

I thoroughly respect the study and persistence required to earn degrees from accredited institutes of higher education.

With that said, I will make the following observation.

Having been associated in My employment with numerous individuals with advanced degrees; I can state uniquivocally that (in My experience)
advanced degrees do not necessarily equate to advanced intelligence.
This holds true, especially, when dealing with the applied sciences.

Edison's " 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration " quote, only can be applied to innovation if there is that origional 1% inspiration !!!

Al Belli

Looks like the contention gremlin has moved in to stay with me:-)

Respectfully Forrest you are taking me some what out of context but thats ok as I long time subscriber to doing that myself I can live with it:-)

Yes it was a terrible paraphrase please forgive and don't inform the literary police on me:-)

Paul, damn forgot him! :-)

Viv (what happens when I press this button? oups!)

Hi,

Here's an example of an inspirationally motivated decision.

A good friend of mine, with a PhD in math., worked as a programming project supervisor for a "big name" computer manufacturer during the development of their space invaders game software. Try as they might, the programmers could not remove a programming artifact that would appear and randomly cause the player to be annihalated by some unseen force. With a rapidly approaching pre-christmas release date, He made the following announcement to the marketing group. To the instruction manual, add the following " feature "; that during play You may, on occasion, be attacked by an unseen identity that will cause Your annihalation. This became an added game " feature ".
His inspiration helped marketing release the game software in a timely manner !!!!

Al Belli

Sorry guys, I hate to add to the flames, but I need to say this.

WebPilot wrote: There seems to be a perpetual disdane for science and mathematics up here

It is definately not the math and science, but the holier-than-thou, know it all attitude that is looked down upon.


I have to say that I agree with everything Viv, and Al has said. I am constantly forced to deal with engineers who are, to put it nicely, complete morons.