NavList:

   

Reply

Gary,

I am way out of my league here, but have dabbled in some patent
efforts back in the 60s.  Then, an inventor was required to "reduce
the invention to practice".  He did this by finding an expert in the
field with credentials, to state in writing that the invention indeed
works.  This relieved the Patent Office from having to ascertain
themselves that the invention worked.  Once done, and the results
from the expert were signed and dated, the inventor had a period of
time in which to actually file for patent protection.  It seems to me
this period was two years.  Meanwhile the inventor was free to
divulge the workings of his invention without fear of losing his rights.

Ken Gebhart
On Jul 6, 2009, at 2:28 PM, glapook@pacbell.net wrote:

>
> It's interesting that Wimperis describes the Bygrave slide rule in
> this book which was published in February, 1920 while Bygrave's patent
> application is dated March 29, 1920, a month later.
>
> gl
>
> On Jul 6, 12:05 am, "Gary J. LaPook"  wrote:
>> Attached is one more reference work that mentions the accuracy of the
>> Bygrave.
>>
>> The flat Bygrave is just as accurate as the cylindrical one.
>>
>> gl
>>
>> glap...@PACBELL.NET wrote:
>>> Attached are two more reference works mentioning the accuracy of
>>> the Bygrave.
>>
>>> Look at page 795 of NACA report 131
>>
>>> gl
>>> Linked File:https://www.NavList.net/imgx/naca-report-131.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>  Wimperis-Bygrave.pdf
>> 306KViewDownload
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply