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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Big try at gravity wheel  (Read 716011 times)

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #570 on: January 26, 2014, 12:22:01 AM »
Now that explanation is what is predicted (expected) in accordance with the rules that science has developed from previous observations.  Not that those are wrong...

You tested an extraordinary claim and dismiss it without comparing it to a control experiment.  Or at least you never showed the control experiments and corresponding measurements.  Instead, you explain the higher head pressure away (understandably) using currently understood science.  Instead of testing.

Just how do you know the higher pressure manifested "for a shorter time?"

Please don't think I'm trying to goad you into performing more tests.  It is only that I am used to you proving your points by presenting excellent experiments and data.  Even when they are redundant to the point of being moribund.  I am just curious how you draw your conclusion.

M.
I thought that TK's conventional Heron fountain without the inverted ZED style plunger was TK's control experiment. 

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #571 on: January 26, 2014, 12:41:03 AM »
People do not like the truth because they want to believe in miracles. Debunking is not popular because it destroys illusions. Facts are boring because they prove a reality one wants to escape from.

Nice and clear measurements which demonstrate grave errors in wondrous machines are quickly forgotten. Facts which could easily be verified by everybody are constantly overlooked. Apparent false claims are believed instead of the overwhelming arguments against them.

But people just love to be bamboozled. They love sweet talk specially when god is brought into the equation. How nice it is if someone lies to support a long awaited miracle. How we all love tall tales and hints at things to come tomorrow, just not today, just a little more effort, and we get salvation from all worries.

Why are we lingering in this forum? Do we want to hear the big thing? Are we expecting the final OU proof?

I am just a little better than the deluded ones, just one step away from believing in the impossible. You may accuse me of false hope. I hope that one day the impossible will be done. I am just not far gone enough to believe in clumsy prophets with a badly designed machine and who contradict themselfs every fifth sentence.

But if the master deceiver appears I might as well fall for his spiel.

Greetings, Conrad

Conrad:

You are correct.  Some people like to be fooled and, to make sure that they really believe in being fooled, send money to the folks that have scams.  It is to reinforce their beliefs.  I detest those that take advantage of these poor folks.  I am not sure we can stop it other than by busting those bogus claims as we do here on this forum.  But, sometimes, you just can't help some people.

Bill

mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1301
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #572 on: January 26, 2014, 12:46:42 AM »
I thought that TK's conventional Heron fountain without the inverted ZED style plunger was TK's control experiment.

That could be.  But if so, it was unclear to me how the time factor is supposed to be measured.

Are both of those experimental setups identical so as to be an "apples to apples" comparison where we can compare flow vs. pressure over time?  Ie. no volumes changed?

Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #573 on: January 26, 2014, 12:48:04 AM »
Did anyone ever get anything else but the run around from Travis (except Webby of course)?

The "Travis Effect" is a Red Herring. But the best Red Herrings are real fish, after all.

Ol' Wayne never liked me much, even though I was the only one (in public at least) who rose to his challenge to make a table-top selfrunning water pump incorporating the ZED effect.  Personally, I find this demonstration fairly dramatic, and I'm puzzled as to why it didn't cause more of a stir at the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlLYD4CSJLU

Hey, isn't that the JonnyDolittle design that he clams that you stole from him even though you posted your idea a month before he came up his idea?  It is hard to tell because you actually built yours and he just has some design parameters that he has written down somewhere. He will actually build it someday...just wait and see.

It did cause a bit of a stir with ol' Jonny.

Bill

Marsing

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #574 on: January 26, 2014, 04:36:08 AM »
Conrad .. FWIW - these types of forums serve a purpose - they are a place where people can congregate & share ideas & opinions - we don't always agree & that diversity makes it interesting at times - some are quick to believe claims without iron-clad proof whilst others will remain skeptics until the bitter end - that is, unless a working model is produced & independently verified by qualified & trustworthy individuals, they will not look for a possibility in the known physics & math that could provide a pathway to OU & PM in the vernacular - both positions are polarizing & neither of particular merit - an open mind to possibilities is more an advantage to exploring new potential paradigms than to become a science bigot constantly falling back on what we have learned.

That said, this forum & others teach you more about human nature than science & the scientific method - if you can keep it in perspective & recognize these undercurrents of human nature, ego's & emotionally charged arguments you will find it an altogether more enjoyable experience [as I'm sure you do].

The benefit from this experience is that exposure to sometimes volatile & emotionally charged individuals & their arguments desensitizes you & then you begin to see the same patterns of communication everywhere around you in daily life & work environments - it is the human condition & it pays to understand it - soon you realize that entire markets are driven by the same precepts & even philosophy & economics etc are not immune to its covert influence.

An old adage I often keep in mind when reading this forum "trouble can't be where trouble can't go" - for me this simply means that if I understand the drivers for different personalities then I am less likely to respond out of character.

ETA: I also hope one day to be greatly surprised by something not easily explained, & that keeps me interested.

all  Readers, please read  fletcher post above ten times, it's universal

   you will find who you are, what role you are playing,
   don't be shy, they have noticed you.

attention : please don't drive to other topic with irrelevant comments.

orbut 3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #575 on: January 26, 2014, 05:38:17 AM »
all  Readers, please read  fletcher post above ten times, it's universal

   you will find who you are, what role you are playing,
   don't be shy, they have noticed you.

attention : please don't drive to other topic with irrelevant comments.
aberbut waswhat tutdoes dasthat bedeutenmean?

Marsing

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 300
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #576 on: January 26, 2014, 06:07:57 AM »
aberbut waswhat tutdoes dasthat bedeutenmean?

lol
BtTrThNktwC    Or Nothing

Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #577 on: January 26, 2014, 05:23:45 PM »
Selected excerpts from Fletchers post #575
Position 1 & 2
1.. Some are quick to believe claims without iron-clad proof
2.. Others will remain skeptics until the bitter end –  They will not look for a possibility in the known physics & math that could provide a pathway to OU & PM in the vernacular.

Both positions 1 & 2 are polarizing & neither of particular merit
Position 3
3..  An open mind to possibilities is more an advantage to exploring new potential paradigms than to become a science bigot constantly falling back on what we have learned.   

Hi Fletcher,
A good post, well put, I enjoyed it,  If I may elaborate on your statements a little,

What does it mean, to keep an open mind?  >>  It would be neither position 1 neither position 2.
 *  An open mind is not polarized; it has no left or right position or overruling opinion.
 *  It can have temporary positions.
 *  It explores all the possibilities presented

This means that “an open mind” process is the initial step towards forming an opinion of fitness.
To form an opinion requires a process
The quality & thoroughness of this process will determine the outcome substance.
We do not like always to expose our process followed to avoid being shot to smithereens on the forum high street.  Especially (position 2) skeptics with demanding agenda’s without input.

At the same time, a quick believe is not necessary a head strong believe, rather an aim to focus in a possible feature with promise. When put on the spot, things tend to run quite rapidly out of hand and escalate in a process to defend a turf position (let it be only a temporary position).

I find the biggest shortcoming of the forum, the ability to present a point of view, conviction, opinion, even fact without any gain of supporting evidence. Some is better than none to document a viewpoint.

I do realize at the same time, that presenting evidence with appropriate graphical documentation takes a lot of work & time,  of which we have only a limited quantity.
This becomes definitely an obstruction in a discussion when both parties are not on the same level,  this would require a inordinate amount of effort on the part of the idea proposer to educate the opposer to a compatible level.

I sometimes get the impression that many members want to see an immediate clear cut OU solution , packaged A-Z including warranty. An impossible task or expectation at any time.

The symptoms of battle fatigue can also be seen,  the impatience because the zest to explore has been lost, previous time spent has become wasted time.

Just a few cents of observational anecdotes
Red_Sunset

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #578 on: January 26, 2014, 05:55:34 PM »
Hi Webby,
            tried a few experiments and a float behaves just as expected, it experiences
gravity just like anything else.
    Try this, put open top container on scales, put water in and dip a finger in, watch
the weight increase!
                 John .

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #579 on: January 26, 2014, 06:10:52 PM »
I guess if you call being given information in an open thread "the run around",, then there were many right along with me who got it.

An interesting thing about a "float" is that it does not care how far it moves in gravity,, it is like it does not see gravity.  Well that is unless I am gong to be told that a fixed dimension float has more "float" the deeper it is under water or something.

You "Got it"? Others "got it" too? Great! Let's see your self-running ZED system then, since Wayne explained it to you so well, and you "got" his explanations.

Any other members of the "inner circle", the private discussion group that started after Wayne begged for his thread to be closed.... did they "get it" too? Why then is Wayne in such trouble? Where is any demonstration of OU from anyone involved with Wayne Travis? Nowhere, that's where.

Except of course in your own redefinition of what "overunity" means.

You got the runaround too, Webby, but since he gave you all that money, your own cognitive dissonance is preventing you from realizing it.

(Apparently I'm not the only one that doesn't "get" Travis's "explanations"... since he's got at least one lawsuit to deal with, and some investors are gathering pitchforks and lighting torches....)

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #580 on: January 26, 2014, 06:17:22 PM »
Indeed Tk,, but then your test setup is so far away from the run setup information that we all were provided with that some might of just thought you were trying to ridicule the whole thing.

I think that it is indeed nifty, and IIRC I commented on that, that even setup up wrong it still assisted your pump in the beginning.

How is it "different"? How is it set up "wrong"?  It incorporates a floating sealed pod, inner and outer ringwalls which make chambers of different internal pressures, and so forth. It needs to be "precharged" just right to work properly. Just because it's a single-layer ZED and only "cycles" once.... so what? It still incorporates the _exact principle_ that some people have called the "Travis Effect" and it shows the lever-action "benefit". Force is increased. Unfortunately work is not. Just as in Travis's own models.

And of course I'm ridiculing the whole thing. It is called "reductio ad absurdum". If you believe that Travis's items are OU, then you must also believe that my PerPump v. 2.0 is also OU, since it demonstrates the same fundamental principles in the same manner.... except it works as I have described it, whereas Wayne's systems don't work as he describes them.... if at all.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #581 on: January 26, 2014, 06:27:19 PM »
Hi Webby,
            tried a few experiments and a float behaves just as expected, it experiences
gravity just like anything else.
    Try this, put open top container on scales, put water in and dip a finger in, watch
the weight increase!
                 John .

That's right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iijUjtkV-E

Remember this PowerPoint presentation (linked below)? This was presented to a group of prospective investors several years ago. Note that in this PPT, Travis has a "three month plan" to install a 50 kW generating unit, with no input and no exhaust, at his Church. The investors were there in person to bask in Wayne's personality, they saw everything he had to show..... and yet not a single one "bit" and made an investment. There is no power plant at any church, today. Why not, if Travis is telling the truth?

https://www.sugarsync.com/pf/D8689161_65379893_837552

Note especially Slide 26 in the ppt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3doy-eyZew

Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #582 on: January 26, 2014, 06:59:10 PM »
Hi Webby,
            tried a few experiments and a float behaves just as expected, it experiences
gravity just like anything else.
    Try this, put open top container on scales, put water in and dip a finger in, watch
the weight increase!
                 John . 

Hi John,
How much is the increase ?
Red_Sunset

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #583 on: January 26, 2014, 07:08:09 PM »
Hi Sunset,
            Archimedes gives us the answer!
                                         John.
   I could mark my finger and cut it off at the level and weigh it?

Red_Sunset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
Re: Big try at gravity wheel
« Reply #584 on: January 26, 2014, 07:13:48 PM »
........................................................ Why not, if Travis is telling the truth?
........................................... 

TinselKoala,
There are several possibilities I can guess at,

1..   Optimization development to come within range of commercial viability (add-on components).
2..   Project /setup delays
3..   Business venture support
4..   We can never rule out a potential flaw  (Theory can not always neatly account for losses in the system)

I need to agree that a "proof of concept" mini system would go a long way to make a statement (even it it did light only a Christmas tree last Dec).

Red_Sunset