Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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: https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

Custom Search

### Author Topic: Big try at gravity wheel  (Read 724182 times)

#### orbut 3000

• Full Member
• Posts: 247
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1275 on: March 02, 2014, 07:36:05 AM »

It's the most advanced ideal ZED and the mathematical analysis is surprisingly simple.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1276 on: March 02, 2014, 01:04:18 PM »
It is not a ZED.  It is an advanced design that outperforms all ZEDs, TAZs, etc.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1277 on: March 02, 2014, 02:30:34 PM »
Been there done that MarkE, so I know some of this stuff that you are carrying on about NOT working DOES work,, go build one yourself.

How many times must I point out your error?

The flow rate of the mediums in the 2 vessels is not the same, that breaks your special case requirements.
Flow rate never enters into it.  The form of energy is everything in the problem.  As long as the form of energy remains in potential form, the losses are inevitable.
Quote

You can keep insisting on all sorts of things that are not present,, keep it up all you want,  but it was you who said a professional is supposed to do what when there error is pointed out?  and you are refusing to do what?  by your definition that means you are what?
You have not found an error on my part.  You keep waving your hands furiously trying to conceal your error.  It is up to you to show a mechanism that you have devised (and according to you that you have already used) that transfers the "air" without suffering the energy loss shown.  So far you've proposed a number of approaches that don't work.
Quote

Again with the cheat gravity?  really MarkE.  Huge losses,, my oh my,, are you hoping that if you keep saying that that it will make it real?  it won't make it real MarkE.
The gravity cheat is HER/Zydro's claim as the supposed basis for their claim of free energy.  Both claims are false.
Quote

Don't forget that by your description then a hydraulic jack takes twice the input energy than the work from the output,, after all that is 2 cylinders under pressure interacting,, directly even.
No webby that is your misunderstanding.  A hydraulic jack does not operate as your two cylinders in your set-up.

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1278 on: March 02, 2014, 04:03:28 PM »
Webby, I've been trying to find the photos you posted at one time, of your scale model sitting on your garden table. I am not sure whether MarkE has seen that photo.

Since it's the one Travis paid you for, perhaps MarkE would like to see it. I know I sure would like to see it again. Can you please re-post those pix?

And if you have another, more sophisticated scale model, please post pix of that one, too.
--TK

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1279 on: March 02, 2014, 09:43:40 PM »
Thanks, Webby, those are the ones I was thinking of. I'm sure it will help MarkE to evaluate and understand what you've been telling him.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1280 on: March 02, 2014, 09:59:11 PM »
Alrighty MarkE.

Show the numbers for a simple condition.

This is using the simple 90 degree lever.

What is the work needed to be added into the system to stop the acceleration of the weights by gravity as the horizontal weight transitions from horizontal to the rest position.
Again it appears that you do not understand.  Move your "air".  Account for the energy.  If the energy remains stored as potential you are bound to the losses.
Quote

Can this work be performed by another lever correctly designed to lift another weight.

Is there stored energy in the increase in GPE of that second lever and weight.
Lifting weights, cocking springs etc keeps the energy in potential form.  They all suffer the losses.
Quote

As a note on this exact setup I used a gear and lever for the second lever because I also allowed that lever to over-rotate and apply that GPE back into the main lever to continue the motion of lifting the vertical weight to horizontal.  No pendulum effect because the acceleration was not allowed, but the motion still happened, it did not make it all the way but it was within a few degrees of rotation of getting there, frictional losses and non-perfect pivots consumed some of the energy.
You are still describing schemes that store their energy in potential form.  If that's your end game, you have lost.  A pendulum works only because all of the potential energy converts to kinetic and then back.  Any attempt to build a pendulum that stores energy only in either form will suffer ~50% energy loss each cycle.  A Q of 2 system dies out very fast.
Quote

The stored potential in the cylinder.

The method I have brought forward is to allow that potential to be expressed as a force over distance into an external system that then converts the work into another packet of force over distance.
webby, it is your claim that you have already realized and measured a system that does not have the losses I have pointed out.  If you wish to reclaim any credibility at all you need to show the supposed mechanism that you used to transfer the "air" without the huge losses that I have pointed out.  After all you say that you have been using such mechanisms for decades.  Each of the methods you have proposed to date fails to address the underlying problem.  They are all non-starters.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1281 on: March 02, 2014, 10:01:28 PM »
The pictures are helpful.  They do not show any means to get the "air" from one side to the other without the huge losses.

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1282 on: March 02, 2014, 10:07:13 PM »
Thanks TK I have added it to the list

Wayne Travis
He has promised verification
He has promised newspaper coverage on his discovery
He has promised scientific journals coverage
He has promised a production line
He has promised open sourcing
He has promised run data
He has promised simple physics can show how this device works
He has promised that he has already given out the information required.(But you must look properly)
He has promised that his optimized system is over 600% efficient.
He has promised that he always keeps his word and tells the truth
He has promised it will all be happening soon (over two years ago)
He has promised that he's leaving the forum and won't be back
He has promised a 50 kW "field unit" at Trinity Baptist Church, within 3 months of funded.(over 3 years ago)

Bump. This took a lot of work on Powercat's part, because Travis has removed the old newsletters from his re-designed websites. I imagine his lawyers read him the riot act over making so many clear claims that he could not support with evidence.
Maybe Travis doesn't realize that the internet never forgets.

#### mondrasek

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1301
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1283 on: March 02, 2014, 10:11:14 PM »
The pictures are helpful.  They do not show any means to get the "air" from one side to the other without the huge losses.

MarkE, no air is moved in or out of the model webby1 is showing.  The model he is showing is a multilayer ZED (I forget how many layers, but more than 3) that is only moving water in and out again.  Very similar in function to the model we are working on in the Mathematical Analysis thread.

Webby1 began with his air transfer analysis attempt to try to explain how he began to understand the interactions that occur in this model.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1284 on: March 02, 2014, 10:30:00 PM »
MarkE, no air is moved in or out of the model webby1 is showing.  The model he is showing is a multilayer ZED (I forget how many layers, but more than 3) that is only moving water in and out again.  Very similar in function to the model we are working on in the Mathematical Analysis thread.

Webby1 began with his air transfer analysis attempt to try to explain how he began to understand the interactions that occur in this model.
Mondrasek, webby's stated scheme shuffles "air", actually displaces water between two submerged volumes.  The process is lossy for the reasons I have already repeated numerous times.  They are the same reasons that the transition from State 2 to State 3 in your example loses stored energy.

#### mrwayne

• Hero Member
• Posts: 975
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1285 on: March 02, 2014, 10:45:20 PM »
Bump. This took a lot of work on Powercat's part, because Travis has removed the old newsletters from his re-designed websites. I imagine his lawyers read him the riot act over making so many clear claims that he could not support with evidence.
Maybe Travis doesn't realize that the internet never forgets.

No Geppetto,

You removed the title "Current Objectives" and replace them with "Promise" - and ignored the context - that was a lot of effort.

Again, Sorry for the wasted effort........

Should have just called and asked, I gave you my phone number.

The truth - doesn't fit your creative narrative.

Wayne
« Last Edit: March 03, 2014, 01:41:32 AM by mrwayne »

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1286 on: March 02, 2014, 11:43:39 PM »
MarkE,

Where are the numbers.
Exactly webby:  Where are YOUR NUMBERS?  Remember this is your claimed scheme.  You are the one who promised to show it four weeks ago.  And to this day all that we have from you is hand waving.  So please: live up to YOUR PROMISE and show your work.
Quote

If all things remain as potentials then what work was done for any loss to happen.
That is a completely ignorant question, especially since the losses have been shown for weeks.
Quote

Work is force over distance,
No, work is the integral of force applied through a distance IE it is the integral of F*ds.
Quote
just in case you forgot, the available work from the stored energy in the lifted vessel is returned with a specific force curve and that happens over a distance, that means by DEFINITION that I can interact with that work and convert it into the same amount of work but with a different force curve.
No that is bull shit as has been shown.  Just because one stores energy in a potential does not mean that a large portion of that energy is not lost when changing how the energy is distributed.  That there are large losses when moving energy from one potential store to another potential store through a force gradient has been proven many times in many disciplines.  Springs, capacitors, weights, hydro dams they all are subject to the same issue that the integral of s*ds is proportional to the square of s.  Divide s into n equal parts, and the result is:  0.5*n*(s/n)2 = 0.5*s2/n.
Quote

It takes work to move the air into the next vessel, there is work available from the lifted vessel.

I have stated this many times in different ways MarkE, so why is it that you say I have not.
You have waved your hands around making the same false assertion over and over again.  I have shown you the specific physics and supporting math that falsifies your assertion.  You have failed to show a single case where your assertion is correct.

#### mondrasek

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1301
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1287 on: March 02, 2014, 11:55:00 PM »
Mondrasek, webby's stated scheme shuffles "air", actually displaces water between two submerged volumes.  The process is lossy for the reasons I have already repeated numerous times.  They are the same reasons that the transition from State 2 to State 3 in your example loses stored energy.

Sorry MarkE, I was referring to the photos of the physical test system that webby1 has posted the pictures of.  Those pictures are of a physical model of a representative multi layer ZED.

I apologize if I misunderstood your post to be referring to the previous air transfer system that webby1 has tried to use to explain how he began to understand the interactions of the model he recently posted pictures of.

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1288 on: March 03, 2014, 02:24:16 AM »
No Geppetto,

You removed the title "Current Objectives" and replace them with "Promise" - and ignored the context - that was a lot of effort.

Again, Sorry for the wasted effort........

Should have just called and asked, I gave you my phone number.

The truth - doesn't fit your creative narrative.

Wayne

To the contrary, Pinocchio . You said you could do something that you cannot do. And now you admit that your "objectives not met" apparently include being able to build what you said you already had built, years ago.

Watch out, someone might sharpen that growing pencil nose of yours.

#### Newton II

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 309
##### Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #1289 on: March 03, 2014, 02:40:31 AM »
I think the whole problem can be solved by making it an impact system using a pressure relief valve.  You have to set the relief valve in such a way that it opens when the cylinder reaches  bottom of the container where pressure is maximum. When pressure relief valve opens,  the air inside the cylinder comes out with tremendous force pushing the cylinder up in opposite direction due to sudden impact.

Sudden impacts (impulse) can sometimes cause miracles!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relief_valve