<HTML>Steven Myers <info@thepump.org> wrote:
>
>I would like to address some of the questions posted on this thread.
Yes, I noticed that you have entirely failed to address the issue of cavitation. I have a few more
direct questions for you:
#1. At which academic institution did you qualify as a fluid mechanics engineer?
#2. Exactly what degree or other qualification in fluid mechanics did you receive?
#3. In what year was this degree or other qualification awarded?
(Oh, and just in case you feel that it is unfair of me to demand these answers from you without
providing my details, in my case the answers are:
#1. King's College, University of London
#2. BSc (Hons) -- relevant joint-major topic: Aquatic Resource Engineering
#3. 1975)
>
>Question:
>No mention of the necessity for air (snifting) valves?
>
>We do not think that the Great Pyramid water pump was a hydraulic ram pump. No hydraulic ram
>water pumps are like the Great Pyramid water pump. The Great pyramid water pump and
>hydraulic ram water pumps operate differently and these pumping systems have different
>components.
However, as a fluid mechanics engineer you undoubtedly recognise that the principles of operation
(i.e. using elastic rebound of a compressible body of air) are the same. Ergo the some problems
resulting from the solubility of air in water exist. How have you accounted for this?
>
>Question;
>Very nice device, but anyone trying to pretend that the GP is a triple hydram cascade could at
>least present the supporting math.
>
>Answer:
>We do not feel the Great Pyramid water pump is a hydraulic ram pump.
Very neat attempt at a side-step, Mr Myers, but the responsible action of doing a mathematical
model (trivial exercise for any fluid mechanics engineer) before spending money on a physical
model applies no matter what kind of pump you wish us to believe that it is.
>
>Question: I also note (http://www.thepump.org/ppbook.htm) that the
>accompanying book, that we are encouraged to part with $25 for, is "hard to find" and "is not
>available from Amazon.com or Barns [sic] & Noble". I wonder why.
>
>Answer:
>The book is privately published and the proceeds fund some of our activities.
#1. Ah, somehow I suspected it might be a case of vanity publishing.
#2. Given your shortage of financial resources (as indicated by the appeals on your web site for
various items of equipment), surely it is in your interest to make it more widely available and less
"hard to find" by selling it through major booksellers. Why have you not done so?</HTML>
