Hi,
   if somebody can explain how, with the diagram on post 395, you could use this extra height
to do more cycles with a fixed point of reference then I'll go away.
              John.
Red sky at night shepherd's delight!

Short of adding an external power source, I do not see how one can get extra height out of even one cycle.  The input GPE translates into KE and then back into GPE.  With zero losses the bob can only get back to starting height.  With even very small losses it won't do that. 

@@Red_Sunset
Some advice for you, take your head out of Wayne Travis backside, and get a grip on reality, he is a con man that does not have a working over unity device, but with your rose tinted way of looking at science it is no surprise that you fell for it.
Look at his website, he removed the update page, so that he could stop himself  repeatedly promising things that he could never deliver, the man is a liar and a fraud.

TinselKoala,
I am not disagreeing with you on the principle point that the Grimer's idea has some issues.
But I am not impressed with,  neither your logical, neither your scientific analysis method used here.  The very graphical picture portrayed is even more unrealistic and further from a possible truth than the system you trying to disprove.
Red_Sunset

I am not concerned with whether or not I impress YOU, RS. I've seen your sycophancy and your misedutainment already in the Travis thread. In fact I would be quite surprised if you ever actually came up with a cogent argument of any kind, pro or con.

You also don't seem to understand my "very graphical picture", which is taken directly from Grimer's diagram. He seems to be saying that a pendulum bob that starts out on an ordinary circular arc when first released (at height H with zero initial velocity, on the right side of the apparatus) will, when encountering the cycloidal "block" after the first half-swing, rise higher than the release point H, over on the left side of the apparatus. Am I correct so far? Are you following? It's hard to tell just what Grimer claims, since he refuses time and time again to state a testable, potentially falsifiable hypothesis in operational terms. So please correct me if you think I am wrong about this first part.

So what I have said is that this is wrong; that the bob will not climb higher than initial release unless some extra energy is supplied from somewhere... and it's not coming from a cycloidal block, that's for sure..

And I've tried to get you, or anyone else, to imagine a simple, vertically hinged half-cycloidal block, the hinge being disposed along the line straight down from the pendulum's suspension point. The block is initially on the left side of the apparatus. When the bob has reached its maximum height on the left after encountering the cycloid block, one simply swings the block over to the righthand side about the hingeline. This allows the bob to fall on the circular arc again, converting its _gained_ GPE into KE in the normal manner, until it encounters the cycloidal block on the right side, where it will rise _even higher_ than before. Continually swinging the cycloidal block from side to side costs almost nothing, energetically, since the block isn't loaded and the hingeline is vertical. Therefore.... you now have a perpetual pendulum, at least.

Yet we have no examples of such a perpetual beast, anywhere, even though it would take a decent woodworker a morning's labor to make it. Why not? I know why... and so do you, and so does Frank.

Hi,
   Koala, if I'm reading the diagram correctly you pay for the height increase by the
bob ending up closer to the pivot, therefore you can't just swing the chops, it would
foul the cord. Once the bob gets higher than the horizontal things are going to go
wrong anyhow.
      I can' t see any comparison with Mylow, he was a total fraud. Do you remember
that farce when he visited Howard Johnson's grave?
                   John.

PowerCat  -   .................take your head out of Wayne Travis backside, and get a grip on reality, he is a con man that does not have a working over unity device, but with your rose tinted way of looking at science it is no surprise that you fell for it.
Look at his website, he removed the update page, so that he could stop himself  repeatedly promising things that he could never deliver, the man is a liar and a fraud.

PowerCat, You appear to be pretty well opinionated.

MarkE     ...............video'sof upside down cups

I agree with you on all your comments you made about the upside down cup video's.  They were only props,  intended to lead you towards understanding certain concepts of the invention.

TinselKoala..........................Yet we have no examples of such a perpetual beast, anywhere, even though it would take a decent woodworker a morning's labor to make it. Why not? I know why... and so do you, and so does Frank..

My point was that your beast was an exaggeration, far removed of what was speculated by Grimer. He never elaborated on the practical execution of his idea.  You appeared to have an alternative agenda for doing so
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can assure you that,
 I don't need a high priest trying to convince me what to believe in.  And neither would I insist in changing your believe.    My senses of reason are functioning well enough to make up my own mind based on information and evidence presented.
I can see that many members here have certain pre-conceived negative opinions on Wayne Travis and also of Renato Ribeiro, as seen in this RAR topic,  What amazes me that they want everybody to believe that their opinions are fact without an ounce of case evidence. I regret their loss!
Sure, everybody is entitled to their own viewpoint, just do not become the high priest, preaching short sighted opinions without supporting evidence.

Not finding something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It means only that you have not found it yet.

Peace,  Red_Sunset
 

Not finding something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It means only that you have not found it yet.

Or that it has been proven not to exist and you will never find it. Or any of a lot of other things.

Did you know that there is a ton of pure gold bullion bars buried directly under your house, Red? It's only 30 meters down. I know this because I have invented the TK GoldFinding pendulum, and I've dowsed the map with it, and it told me where you live and that the gold is there. It has never been known to fail! (This is the first time I've used it, but my theory is infallible, so I know it's working.)

Now... tell me.... will you start digging? Not finding something doesn't mean it doesn't exist, remember. And I've given you exactly the same degree of proof for your gold, as Travis has given us, as Grimer, as .....

Get the point, or not? There's no point in searching for something that you know is impossible. Yet, we both can imagine perfecly plausible and physically possible scenarios where there could indeed be all that gold under your home. Pirates, Russians, the NSA, smugglers, have dug a cavern and hidden it there.

Still, I predict you will not begin digging for it.

[/size][/font]
Yes, Frank, please explain how someone telling you that a device is NOT OU IN ANY WAY, that it is perfectly ordinary and everything it does is in accord with normal physics, someone who actually REFUSED your cynical offer of money for the device .... is a "fraud", or how it compares to Mylow, who told everyone he had a working Free Energy Magnet Motor and took money and materials from people under those false pretenses. Let's see you reproduce some of the conversations you held, where YOU were arguing that it was OU when the builder kept telling you it wasn't. Those were a real hoot to read at the time.


Frank Grimer, like one or two others, was utterly fooled by a simple child's toy, in spite of everything he was told by the builder, in spite of physics, and now he's bitter about it. He _saw something_ and chose to interpret it through his rose-tinted glasses, and would not accept other interpretations as possible or real.  He also has funny ideas about internet identities.

[/size][/font]



Look how Setalokin won't answer the question about whether on not he is TK.
He says of me, "He also has funny ideas about internet identities."
What has he got to be ashamed about. Why does he continue to deceive people.


As for the WhipMag, it wasn't a simple child's toy. It was an experiment originally
suggested by "overconfident" on which you were co-operating (he will be turning
 in his grave at your betrayal of his idea).


The result you got was quite unexpected by you. I was there, remember.
Not physically but on the internet as you made the various timing measurements
as it slowed down. You're lying, Setalokin and you know it. I


If it was a toy explain to us how it worked. If it is a toy why don't you go to the
remaining video site and explain it was a toy made to fool your audience.
Frankly the idea it was a toy is ludicrous to anyone who know anything about
magnetic experiments.


That was an attempt to build a magnetic motor and to your and the viewers
at the time's amazement it succeeded. You put out the video on the web
then tried to get them back - probably on the instruction of your employer
who took over the motor. Unfortunately, one of the videos escaped and is
still out there on the web.


You did exactly the same thing to me on the
Not the [Word removed at the request of Steorn] Forum
(At that forum he is in his Al Setalokin persona. )


You put up a picture of a gyroscope experiment you were working on.
Knowing your anal retentiveness I immediately pressed Print Screen. :-)
Sure enough a couple of posts later it had disappeared.


Was he mad when I told him what I'd done!
 I think the expression is "He's got issues."


I fear in many ways I feel rather sorry for him. When I compare his
lonely life with mine, I feel, what a difference. When on one session
he complained about his miserable existence I said I'd pray for him
 (we are both Catholics except I'm practising and he's lapsed) he got
mad at that too and said he didn't want to be prayed for (I think that
was his Hyde persona speaking - I'd better start fasting too :-) ).[/size]


It's because I think he has great qualities that I want him to stop lying
about who he is and about the true story of the WhipMag -
even if his employer doesn't like it.


I should explain that Al's employer seems to be some dilettante who
pays Al to monitor the OU world. Isn't that right, Al.


Why would an employer do that?[/size]
I'll let you draw your own conclusions.






 

Red_Sunset the various aquarium and cup demonstrations were entirely acts of misdirection.  The claims that they asserted in those videos were false.  They claimed that they were showing something new and unique:  a "Travis Effect".  They did not show anything new or unique. 
..................................................................
.......................................................... 

MarkE,
You might be correct that the Travis Effect" was pinned to the wrong model demonstration.  I agree that all the cups demonstrations showed normal physics, the only point they tried to convey that pressure creates lift, not volume (volume is secondary), a basic fact.  Small water volume and pressure utilization were important in realizing the principle that underpins the Zed.  To that purpose they were not misleading.
The Travis Effect referred to a distribution of pressures in the multi-layer pressure assembly. It made possible the asymmetry between the up & down stroke, and in turn the ability to harvest a positive energy balance.
Revisiting the topic pages and a bit of study would clarify this in greater detail.  The current model has evolved and is unrecognizable from the system shown in those pages with dramatic improved efficiency.
Although a principle remains a principle.

Regards, Red_Sunset