Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 493864
  • *Total Topics: 14514
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 5
  • *Guests: 113
  • *Total: 118

Facebook

Author Topic: What's wrong with this  (Read 28142 times)

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #30 on: December 28, 2014, 02:49:26 AM »
@ MarkE

"At the bottom of the tank the float entering has zero impetus to enter the fluid section, magic valves or not." from MarkE

Agreement, not in dispute, I never implied or said otherwise !  Why do you ASSUME here otherwise ? CONDISCENTION ?

"The only way to get that float into the fluid section is to displace a volume of fluid equal to the float volume." from MarkE

Agreement, not in dispute, I never said otherwise ! 

The above kind of a reply is a pain in the neck.  It's such a waste to spend time takeing words out of ones
mouth which one has not him self placed there.  Those who are into such a poor style of communication
should refrain from posting in other people's topics at all.  Those who habitually / deliberstely do so have a mental
disorder.

Perhaps they really are shills, if not they at least give people good reason to suspect so.
 
                            The following is another "style" of reply.  It is an example of poor communication and some
thing we can all work on.  I'm playing fair here by giving you fore warning. I don't have to, except,  to
keep from falling to this kind of perons level, and because I don't really wish to cause you any harm.
................................................
Mark, sometimes when you come into a topic, it's like a vampire has come into the room sucking all of the life out of it,
while at the same restoreing that once fresh air with the smell of some rotting carcus he's been feeding on.
Yes that's It, vampire breath.

I think it's like a suffocating ASSUMING / CONDESCENIG  air.

Is this because you have some kind of a disability?  Is this, perhaps the cause of this assuming /condescending
behavior ?  Has this allways been a issue for you in your life?  An issue perhaps from a controlling mother or father
that used a similar method ?
............................

Now let's look at the kind of effect this poor style of comunication may have upon the recipient as well as it's effects upon
the complexion of the OU community as a whole. 

What kind of an effect might it have is practiced upon you for example.  Try to keep your empathy intact here.
                                   Not good huh ? 
We wouldn't approve of this kind of communication would we?

Consider now, that this "style of communication method" is something that a person may have endured for some course
of time which is not just a day, but perhaps for a week, or months or even a year.


Not done yet

           floor





Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #30 on: December 28, 2014, 02:49:26 AM »

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #31 on: December 28, 2014, 03:14:16 AM »
@ MarkE

"At the bottom of the tank the float entering has zero impetus to enter the fluid section, magic valves or not." from MarkE

Agreement, not in dispute, I never implied or said otherwise !  Why do you ASSUME here otherwise ? CONDISCENTION ?
Establishing clear lines of what is and is not in dispute is good communication.  In any dispute it is important to understand what is agreed upon and what is not, so that attention can be focused on the actual crux of the dispute.
Quote

"The only way to get that float into the fluid section is to displace a volume of fluid equal to the float volume." from MarkE

Agreement, not in dispute, I never said otherwise ! 
Again, good, that's one less thing in the way of the proof that the proposed machine does not work as you propose.
Quote

The above kind of a reply is a pain in the neck.  It's such a waste to spend time takeing words out of ones
mouth which one has not him self placed there.  Those who are into such a poor style of communication
should refrain from posting in other people's topics at all.  Those who habitually / deliberstely do so have a mental
disorder.

Where did I say that you said otherwise?  It seems to me that you would do well to take note of your complaints concerning assumptions.  I made a series of true statements as part of the groundwork of disproving your proposal.  Here you complain that I did so even as you acknowledge that you agree with the truth of my statements.
Quote

Perhaps they really are shills, if not they at least give people good reason to suspect so.
 
                            The following is another "style" of reply.  It is an example of poor communication and some
thing we can all work on.  I'm playing fair here by giving you fore warning. I don't have to, except,  to
keep from falling to this kind of perons level, and because I don't really wish to cause you any harm.
................................................
Mark, sometimes when you come into a topic, it's like a vampire has come into the room sucking all of the life out of it,
while at the same restoreing that once fresh air with the smell of some rotting carcus he's been feeding on.
Yes that's It, vampire breath.

LOL, I hope you can see the irony in what you just wrote.
Quote

I think it's like a suffocating ASSUMING / CONDESCENIG  air.

Is this because you have some kind of a disability?  Is this, perhaps the cause of this assuming /condescending
behavior ?  Has this allways been a issue for you in your life?  An issue perhaps from a controlling mother or father
that used a similar method ?
............................

Speaking of assumptions and speculation ...
Quote

Now let's look at the kind of effect this poor style of comunication may have upon the recipient as well as it's effects upon
the complexion of the OU community as a whole. 

What kind of an effect might it have is practiced upon you for example.  Try to keep your empathy intact here.
                                   Not good huh ? 
We wouldn't approve of this kind of communication would we?

You have been treating the board to a barrage of ad hom attacks against me.  Do you think that those attacks have advanced your proposed buoyancy scheme?  Do you think that it has countered my explanation of why your scheme does not work?
Quote

Consider now, that this "style of communication method" is something that a person may have endured for some course
of time which is not just a day, but perhaps for a week, or months or even a year.


Not done yet

           floor
Well, whenever you would like to get back to the topic as you introduced it in the OP you are welcome to do so by me.

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4903
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #32 on: December 28, 2014, 04:13:26 AM »
Quote MarkE: If it is gas tight, then by definition gas cannot enter or leave.
Answer-incorrect.

Quote MarkE: but it sounds like you want to change the volume of your submerisble.
Answer correct.

Quote MarkE: Once what is eliminated?
The question was very clear-->What GAS can return most of it's energy to the source once it is eliminated.

Quote MarkE: it all depends on whether the mass falls through a fluid or a vacuum.
Quote TinMan:but remains in the vessle to be used once again once the vessle has reached the ocean floor.

Quote MarkE: it all depends on whether the mass falls through a fluid or a vacuum.
So 500kg's of grass is heavier than 500kg's of bricks ???
Regardless of being in a vacume or in a fluid,the continual force would be 500kg's over a distance of 3.2 kilometers.

This one would not be a waste of $20 000. This is one that would work.


Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #33 on: December 28, 2014, 04:51:05 AM »
@MarkE
As I said

"The title of the topic is What's wrong with this.
The subject, is the conversation we are having, not the floating device."


Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6048
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #34 on: December 28, 2014, 04:53:49 AM »
So floor
this is like "charm School" for Mark E??


Wow......




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #34 on: December 28, 2014, 04:53:49 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #35 on: December 28, 2014, 05:04:59 AM »
@MarkE

As I said

"The title of the topic is What's wrong with this.
The subject, is the conversation we are having, not the floating device."

As I said before

"The title of the topic is What's wrong with this.
The subject is broadly speaking, how to improve the OU forum through self
improvement.

This is not an attack upon you or any other particular person.
However, I will say that for you to think the topic is about you or for some other to think so
does seem rather narcissistic ?

As is stated previously I respect both your knowledge and experience.

              floor


Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #36 on: December 28, 2014, 05:25:20 AM »
Not done yet

For the record


        floor

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #36 on: December 28, 2014, 05:25:20 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #37 on: December 28, 2014, 05:34:07 AM »
Quote MarkE: If it is gas tight, then by definition gas cannot enter or leave.
Answer-incorrect.
Then you have a different definition of gas tight than I do.
Quote

Quote MarkE: but it sounds like you want to change the volume of your submerisble.
Answer correct.

Quote MarkE: Once what is eliminated?
The question was very clear-->What GAS can return most of it's energy to the source once it is eliminated.
Again once what is eliminated?  Which noun does the pronoun "it" refer to that is eliminated:  the gas, energy added to the gas by the source, energy in the gas above and beyond that added by the source, or the energy source?
Quote

Quote MarkE: it all depends on whether the mass falls through a fluid or a vacuum.
Quote TinMan:but remains in the vessle to be used once again once the vessle has reached the ocean floor.
You are changing the order of the questions.  The question as stated was: 
Quote
Quote
What is the total energy of a 500kg mass falling 3.2 kilometer's?
To which the answer was:

Quote
Quote
MarkE: it all depends on whether the mass falls through a fluid or a vacuum.

Quote MarkE: it all depends on whether the mass falls through a fluid or a vacuum.
So 500kg's of grass is heavier than 500kg's of bricks ???
How could you possibly infer such a thing from the dependency on what if any surrounding fluid mass has to be displaced?
Quote

Regardless of being in a vacume or in a fluid,the continual force would be 500kg's over a distance of 3.2 kilometers.
Tinman, the GPE change required to lift a mass in air is:  Ge*h*m*(1-pair/pmass).  In water it is: Ge*h*m*(1-pwater/pmass).  Do you see how when the density of the mass is less than the density of water that the sign reverses and work is required to submerge the mass, and is released allowing the mass to rise.  How much work do you think that it takes to sink or raise 500kg of water in a column of water?
Quote

This one would not be a waste of $20 000. This is one that would work.
2000 years of human experience with buoyancy says that you are most certainly mistaken.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #38 on: December 28, 2014, 05:38:31 AM »
@MarkE
As I said

"The title of the topic is What's wrong with this.
The subject, is the conversation we are having, not the floating device."
Yes you keep saying that even though your statement is inconsistent with the content of your OP:

Quote
Quote
    ***
    Posts: 236
        View Profile
        Personal Message (Online)

What's wrong with this
« on: December 14, 2014, 06:05:50 PM »

    Quote

If Ou can be done any where, then it can be done any where ?

Please find the attached file OUfloater 3.pdf

Cheers
       floor
* OUfloater 3.pdf (348.04 kB - downloaded 95 times.)

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #39 on: December 28, 2014, 05:43:41 AM »
@ MarkE

Where was I ?

Ah yes.

"Consider now, that this "style of communication method" is something that a person may have endured for some course
of time which is not just a day, but perhaps for a week, or months or even a year." quote from floor.

More than a few people have had nervous break downs, gone into the loony bin, or commited suicide from attacks through
social media.  Some one very dear to me lost his boy friend.  This was by his suicide.  And yes is was spurred by
an orchistrated attack via social media.  An attack that had gone on for only a few weeks.  A teenager.

Doing such a thing to another human being, holds no appeal to me.

not done yet

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #39 on: December 28, 2014, 05:43:41 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #40 on: December 28, 2014, 05:58:15 AM »
@ MarkE

Where was I ?

Ah yes.

"Consider now, that this "style of communication method" is something that a person may have endured for some course
of time which is not just a day, but perhaps for a week, or months or even a year." quote from floor.

More than a few people have had nervous break downs, gone into the loony bin, or commited suicide from attacks through
social media.  Some one very dear to me lost his boy friend.  This was by his suicide.  And yes is was spurred by
an orchistrated attack via social media.  An attack that had gone on for only a few weeks.  A teenager.

Doing such a thing to another human being, holds no appeal to me.

not done yet
And yet, you fail to see the irony in your own posts.  It's a curious world.

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4903
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #41 on: December 28, 2014, 07:43:53 AM »
@ MarkE

Dude-come on :o

Quote:Again once what is eliminated?
Are you serious ::)
Question was-What GAS can return most of it's energy to the source once it is eliminated.
Now,if we eliminated the source,then the energy return would have no place to go.
I placed !GAS! in red letter's incase it is still confuseing for you.

Quote: You are changing the order of the questions.  The question as stated was:What is the total energy of a 500kg mass falling 3.2 kilometer's?
And your answer Mark was,Quote:it all depends on whether the mass falls through a fluid or a vacuum.
That is bollock's. It dose not matter wether a mass is falling through a fluid or a vacuum,the energy displacement remains the same for the parameters of the mass and distance i gave.This i thought you would know.

Quote: Then you have a different definition of gas tight than I do.
No i do not. You only assume that in order for the gas to be removed from the vessle,that is has to escape the vessle.Not correct.

Quote: Tinman, the GPE change required to lift a mass in air is:  Ge*h*m*(1-pair/pmass).  In water it is: Ge*h*m*(1-pwater/pmass).  Do you see how when the density of the mass is less than the density of water that the sign reverses and work is required to submerge the mass, and is released allowing the mass to rise.  How much work do you think that it takes to sink or raise 500kg of water in a column of water?
The questions were-What is the total energy of a 500kg mass falling 3.2 kilometer's?
What is the total energy of a 500kg mass being raised 3.2 kilometer's.

I said nothing about trying to lift a 500kg mass through water,i asked what is the total energy of a 500kg mass being raised 3.2 kilometers-remember,we are talking about buoyancy here,so the vessle is raising itself.

Quote:2000 years of human experience with buoyancy says that you are most certainly mistaken.
Has man stood on mar's?,is it impossible.

My system will work in acordance with all laws of physics as we know them today.A mixture of todays tech can be used to make it happen.

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 690
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #42 on: December 28, 2014, 07:56:30 AM »
It's not a question of irony it's a question of why you are pretending  not to uderstand what's
going on here.

I see your comment as lacking honesty. I could be wrong.

However, I don't belive that you think I'm wrong.

Did you not just observe in your own mind, the movments which were to convince youself that you
are being honest. It's easier to lie convincingly if one can set it up first in their own mind.

If you wish to remain in this LOW CLASS STATE of mind, It's not my place to try to force you to change.
But it does mess up the communicating with when one of the parties wont be honest.

                            not done yet


Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #43 on: December 28, 2014, 08:07:37 AM »
@ MarkE

Dude-come on :o

Quote:Again once what is eliminated?
Are you serious ::)
Question was-What GAS can return most of it's energy to the source once it is eliminated.
Now,if we eliminated the source,then the energy return would have no place to go.
I placed !GAS! in red letter's incase it is still confuseing for you.

Quote: You are changing the order of the questions.  The question as stated was:What is the total energy of a 500kg mass falling 3.2 kilometer's?
And your answer Mark was,Quote:it all depends on whether the mass falls through a fluid or a vacuum.
That is bollock's. It dose not matter wether a mass is falling through a fluid or a vacuum,the energy displacement remains the same for the parameters of the mass and distance i gave.This i thought you would know.
Tinman I am sorry but you are completely wrong on this point.  Something that has the same density as the surrounding fluid neither gains nor expends GPE moving up or down because for every gram of that something that moves up, a gram of the surrounding fluid moves down an identical distance, and vice-versa.  You are conflating the absolute GPE that the object has due to its height with the energy that is gained or lost by changing its height inside a fluid volume.
Quote

Quote: Then you have a different definition of gas tight than I do.
No i do not. You only assume that in order for the gas to be removed from the vessle,that is has to escape the vessle.Not correct.
Well that creates an interesting riddle:  You get rid of something while keeping it.  Are you thinking that when you compress a gas that you are removing that gas?  n remains fixed.  PV and/or T change.
Quote

Quote: Tinman, the GPE change required to lift a mass in air is:  Ge*h*m*(1-pair/pmass).  In water it is: Ge*h*m*(1-pwater/pmass).  Do you see how when the density of the mass is less than the density of water that the sign reverses and work is required to submerge the mass, and is released allowing the mass to rise.  How much work do you think that it takes to sink or raise 500kg of water in a column of water?
The questions were-What is the total energy of a 500kg mass falling 3.2 kilometer's?
What is the total energy of a 500kg mass being raised 3.2 kilometer's.
And the answer remains the same:  If the mass is immersed in some fluid then moving the mass up or down requires doing the exact opposite to a volume of the surrounding fluid equal to the volume of the object you move.  It's important to keep the books straight.
Quote

I said nothing about trying to lift a 500kg mass through water,i asked what is the total energy of a 500kg mass being raised 3.2 kilometers-remember,we are talking about buoyancy here,so the vessle is raising itself.
No buoyant object raises itself with buoyancy.  It is fluid that surrounds the submersible falling that causes the submersible to rise.  A submarine can cause that to happen by reducing its density:  IE blowing water out of its ballast tanks.
Quote

Quote:2000 years of human experience with buoyancy says that you are most certainly mistaken.
Has man stood on mar's?,is it impossible.
That is a terrible analogy.  We have 2000 years of direct intimate experience with gravity and its dependent effect buoyancy.  In all that time the behavior has been evaluated countless times and always found to behave the same.
Quote

My system will work in acordance with all laws of physics as we know them today.A mixture of todays tech can be used to make it happen.
I am sure that you sincerely believe that.  I am also quite sure that you are mistaken.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #44 on: December 28, 2014, 08:10:50 AM »
It's not a question of irony it's a question of why you are pretending  not to uderstand what's
going on here.

I see your comment as lacking honesty. I could be wrong.

However, I don't belive that you think I'm wrong.

Did you not just observe in your own mind, the movments which were to convince youself that you
are being honest. It's easier to lie convincingly if one can set it up first in their own mind.

If you wish to remain in this LOW CLASS STATE of mind, It's not my place to try to force you to change.
But it does mess up the communicating with when one of the parties wont be honest.

                            not done yet
Your diatribe is entering Theatre of the Absurd territory.  If you don't see the irony between what you espouse and what you are doing, then literally the joke is on you.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #44 on: December 28, 2014, 08:10:50 AM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: