Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
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.

User Menu

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

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

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 514344
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED  (Read 431054 times)

Offline mondrasek

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #465 on: March 05, 2014, 01:34:03 AM »
What air is being used that is 'incompressible?? ???

Mags

Mags, we are working through an "Ideal case" Analysis.  So we are neglecting the normal losses dues to friction, compressibility, and surface tension, etc., for now. 

If the Analysis fails to show any possible gains under "Ideal" conditions, there is no way it can ever show gains once those losses are included.

If the Analysis DOES show possible gains under "Ideal" conditions, then we can move on to see if Engineering can minimize the "real world" (less than Ideal) losses to the extent that the gains are not completely lost.

M.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #465 on: March 05, 2014, 01:34:03 AM »

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #466 on: March 05, 2014, 01:34:06 AM »
No movement no energy.
That's a relief.  So what energy were you referring to when you claimed that I did not account for energy of the restraints?
Quote

Do you contend that energy causes movement?
When did I say anything like that?
Quote

Where are your buoyant lift forces in your spreadsheet, where is the buoyant lift from the pod in your spreadsheet?
The water masses are all in the spreadsheet.
Quote

Do you contend that a partially sunk float will not move up?
Mondrasek stipulated as such.  See State 1.
Quote

It is looking to me that what you did in your analysis is a uniform spread of the water volume countered by the weight of the water columns.
Water countered itself???
Quote

Archimedes is dead in the water I think.
Then you aren't thinking very clearly.  Archimedes' Principle dictates the behavior of the always less efficient than a common brick ZED.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #467 on: March 05, 2014, 01:35:30 AM »
It was not, that was in response to you saying there is no energy to be had from the risers and pod lifting, but there can be if you apply the restraint at a 99.9% value required.  That is just common sense MarkE,, why just waste what you have when you do not need to.
A restraint prevents motion.  It does not create energy.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #467 on: March 05, 2014, 01:35:30 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #468 on: March 05, 2014, 01:39:50 AM »
The incompressible air has an ASSUMED Specific Gravity = 0.

In fact, using a compressible fluid such as real air causes more losses due to the relationships described in the Ideal Gas Law, PV=nRT.  The change in V due to P does change the T, by creating heat when compressed.  It is a loss mechanism only and cannot be completely recovered.  So using two incompressible liquids leads to a better performance. 
That's right, and that's part of the reason that your ZED is an "ideal ZED".  Using air as in a real ZED is less efficient.
Quote
And the bigger the difference between those two fluid's Specific Gravity values, the better.
Nope, the efficiency improves as the SG's converge.  When the SG's are the same, IE the "air" is replaced with water, the losses improve a lot.
Quote

I agree that the outside air pressure/volume does not need to be considered.  Except that the system is open to the outside air and so air can enter and exit the system freely as Pressure and Volume changes inside the system require to satisfy the Volume constraint of each internal fluid to remain constant.
Yes, the "air" is just a fluid that moves back and forth to fill out the volume changes.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #469 on: March 05, 2014, 01:49:47 AM »
Of course.  There is no head difference between the ID and OD surface on any riser.  The pod has no water in contact with it at all.  So all risers and the pod are being acted on by zero buoyant Forces.  Also, the sum of the buoyant Forces on all the risers and the pod is exactly zero.  There are zero Forces acting on the system and therefore zero motion would occur.

BTW, this is not a "stipulation."  This is a physical fact derived from the geometry and the assumption of incompressible fluids.
I withdraw my objection.  Yes, State 1 is in equilibrium naturally.  I will have to rework the problem on that basis.  It will not however materially change the outcome:  Preparing State 1 is lossy.  State 1 to State 2 is ideally conservative, and State 2 to State 3 is always lossy. 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #469 on: March 05, 2014, 01:49:47 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #470 on: March 05, 2014, 02:54:37 AM »
The incompressible air has an ASSUMED Specific Gravity = 0.

In fact, using a compressible fluid such as real air causes more losses due to the relationships described in the Ideal Gas Law, PV=nRT.  The change in V due to P does change the T, by creating heat when compressed.  It is a loss mechanism only and cannot be completely recovered.  So using two incompressible liquids leads to a better performance.  And the bigger the difference between those two fluid's Specific Gravity values, the better.
Well, exactly. So why is Travis using air instead of kerosene or peanut oil? I know why.
Quote

I agree that the outside air pressure/volume does not need to be considered.  Except that the system is open to the outside air and so air can enter and exit the system freely as Pressure and Volume changes inside the system require to satisfy the Volume constraint of each internal fluid to remain constant.
In every drawing I have seen, the outside air does NOT enter the system. The "system boundary" is along the top edge of the outer air column. This boundary moves but is never penetrated unless you blow skirts or overflow the top. The only thing the outside air does is press down on the outer layer of water and it does this with the same force regardless of the column's height (within reason of course. Make a column a mile high and then pressures will change.) The outer air pressure works against your injection of fluid, I think. If it were vacuum out there you would be able to inject the same amount of fluid but with less resistance (less working against the pressure of the outside air.) I think.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #471 on: March 05, 2014, 03:09:33 AM »
Well, exactly. So why is Travis using air instead of kerosene or peanut oil? I know why.In every drawing I have seen, the outside air does NOT enter the system. The "system boundary" is along the top edge of the outer air column. This boundary moves but is never penetrated unless you blow skirts or overflow the top. The only thing the outside air does is press down on the outer layer of water and it does this with the same force regardless of the column's height (within reason of course. Make a column a mile high and then pressures will change.) The outer air pressure works against your injection of fluid, I think. If it were vacuum out there you would be able to inject the same amount of fluid but with less resistance (less working against the pressure of the outside air.) I think.
I look at things a little bit differently.  We are presented with a claim that by combining certain elements there is not only major advantage over well known and much simpler machines, there is actually a way to get free energy.  Those claims are both false.

For example take the ZED technique of polluting a hydraulic piston system with air bubbles.  Even in the ideal case where the air bubbles are made from an ideal material, the result is that work is constantly lost each cycle.  For anyone who doubts this, get or construct a "U".  A pair of plastic cups, some tubing and water proof glue will do.  Place the "U" on a level stand.  Pour in some water.  Note that the levels are even on both sides.  Now force fluid from one side to the other.  That required work.  Now, let go.  The water levels equalize.  The applied work is lost.  And so it is with this serpentine mechanism where the water levels go up and down.  50" of head in one column has twice the stored potential energy of 25" in two equalized columns.  What do you get when you remove all the "air"?  You get an ordinary hydraulic system.  Ordinary hydraulic systems are known to be under unity.  So, since we have established that the ZED with its "air" bubbles even in the idealized case is less efficient than known under unity systems, we must conclude that the ZED too is under unity.  QED.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #471 on: March 05, 2014, 03:09:33 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #472 on: March 05, 2014, 03:28:05 AM »
Hey!  Remember John Rohner claiming that he would show his extraordinary plasma motor at that _real_ Power-Gen trade show?  We mocked him well before the show and said that never in a million years would he show a running motor.  John claimed that he would.  I still smile thinking about the Team Rohner bumpkins standing around at that trade show while real power industry professionals walked by their booth.  Of course there was no motor in sight, and there has _never_ been a plasma motor in sight.  Yet there is still a web page out there fishing.  The same thing will happen with the prancing fluids free energy pumpitude machine.  You will never see it in your lifetime.  The only question is how the end game will play out.

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8369
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #473 on: March 05, 2014, 03:29:11 AM »
"Wayne has asked folks for money for a device that does not work, can't work, will not work, he can't prove it works...etc."

You have built it? And you have shown it does not work??? Has Mark? Has MH?  Bah, he never builds anything yet knows it all in 10 sec of looking at it, right? Well, I dont follow the 10 sec diagnosis bullony.  Just the mention of OU and the 'no it isnt' comes without the 'work' to prove it. Thats so easy. I wish I had that job. Boring but probably pays ok. ;)

You guys can talk all you want. But you never prove that it doesnt work, just state whats in the books, all in a tight little box.


So what if Wayne has an investor. As long as its not you or your Mom, what do you care? People get investments all the time.  Sure some people get ripped off. But man you better be able to back up your statements of lies, thievery, ponzi, criminality. Wayne is not making the argument, you are. He is giving only what he said he would give, and the 2 people that are interested are being persecuted for doing what they want to do, and you have a problem with that??? So put up your numbers and show your non working device, then I will listen.  Meanwhile, why cant these 3 guys hang out and discuss what they want in peace??? No?? They must pay for their deeds!!! ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Mags

OK, so let me get this straight.  If I see a woman, whom I do not know, getting robbed on the street, I should just let that happen?  After all, I don't know her, she is not my Mom or a family member....right?  Is this the attitude you are suggesting that I take?  I really hope not.

As you mentioned, I am usually impartial on things but, I was NOT impartial during the Mylow saga.  Sometimes, a man just has to take a stand.  Now, Mylow was not selling anything to anyone but, many folks were spending a lot of money trying to replicate his "working" device.  This was still wrong.  I live in a world of right and wrong.

One last thing.  I am not against the research for free, or efficient energy sources.  Not at all.  If someone had an idea for something that looked promising, and wanted to do a kickstarter type program to raise money to "look into it", that would be fine.  But, if they claim they have a working device, and a single zed is overunity by itself, and that is not true, then that is fraud.  Do you understand what I am saying here?

Now Wayne has said, he does not claim overunity but, he did.  I wonder what those investors were told?  Do you know?

That is all I have to say.

Bill

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #473 on: March 05, 2014, 03:29:11 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #474 on: March 05, 2014, 04:45:30 AM »
Hey!  Remember John Rohner claiming that he would show his extraordinary plasma motor at that _real_ Power-Gen trade show?  We mocked him well before the show and said that never in a million years would he show a running motor.  John claimed that he would.  I still smile thinking about the Team Rohner bumpkins standing around at that trade show while real power industry professionals walked by their booth.  Of course there was no motor in sight, and there has _never_ been a plasma motor in sight.  Yet there is still a web page out there fishing.  The same thing will happen with the prancing fluids free energy pumpitude machine.  You will never see it in your lifetime.  The only question is how the end game will play out.
I remember the giant empty plastic display case.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #475 on: March 05, 2014, 04:46:57 AM »
OK, so let me get this straight.  If I see a woman, whom I do not know, getting robbed on the street, I should just let that happen?  After all, I don't know her, she is not my Mom or a family member....right?  Is this the attitude you are suggesting that I take?  I really hope not.

As you mentioned, I am usually impartial on things but, I was NOT impartial during the Mylow saga.  Sometimes, a man just has to take a stand.  Now, Mylow was not selling anything to anyone but, many folks were spending a lot of money trying to replicate his "working" device.  This was still wrong.  I live in a world of right and wrong.

One last thing.  I am not against the research for free, or efficient energy sources.  Not at all.  If someone had an idea for something that looked promising, and wanted to do a kickstarter type program to raise money to "look into it", that would be fine.  But, if they claim they have a working device, and a single zed is overunity by itself, and that is not true, then that is fraud.  Do you understand what I am saying here?

Now Wayne has said, he does not claim overunity but, he did.  I wonder what those investors were told?  Do you know?

That is all I have to say.

Bill
Wayne Travis claims over unity.  Check out the mission statement on his web site.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #475 on: March 05, 2014, 04:46:57 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline mrwayne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 909
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #476 on: March 05, 2014, 04:47:52 AM »
never mind

Offline mrwayne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 909
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #477 on: March 05, 2014, 04:50:24 AM »
Wayne Travis claims over unity.  Check out the mission statement on his web site.

Mark - you missed it again,

Net Energy - do you know the difference?

I did not know the difference two years ago.

If you do - stop spreading lies about me.

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5772
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #478 on: March 05, 2014, 05:10:27 AM »
OK, so let me get this straight.  If I see a woman, whom I do not know, getting robbed on the street, I should just let that happen?  After all, I don't know her, she is not my Mom or a family member....right?  Is this the attitude you are suggesting that I take?  I really hope not.

As you mentioned, I am usually impartial on things but, I was NOT impartial during the Mylow saga.  Sometimes, a man just has to take a stand.  Now, Mylow was not selling anything to anyone but, many folks were spending a lot of money trying to replicate his "working" device.  This was still wrong.  I live in a world of right and wrong.

One last thing.  I am not against the research for free, or efficient energy sources.  Not at all.  If someone had an idea for something that looked promising, and wanted to do a kickstarter type program to raise money to "look into it", that would be fine.  But, if they claim they have a working device, and a single zed is overunity by itself, and that is not true, then that is fraud.  Do you understand what I am saying here?

Now Wayne has said, he does not claim overunity but, he did.  I wonder what those investors were told?  Do you know?

That is all I have to say.

Bill

"OK, so let me get this straight.  If I see a woman, whom I do not know, getting robbed on the street, I should just let that happen?  After all, I don't know her, she is not my Mom or a family member....right?  Is this the attitude you are suggesting that I take?  I really hope not."

Well, if I see Mark and you bitching and griping at Wayne on a street corner yelling "your a liar!", and I wanted to see what all the fuss was about, could you show me proof that Wayne is a liar? Well, show me some of YOUR proofs. Show me your replication of his complex device that is built as prescribed doesnt work and I would question him also possibly, if I 'felt the need'.  He doesnt need to show me any proof as I dont believe you paid him anything, have you? ;) He gave some info, and if YOU choose to build upon that, then what does he owe you??? Show me a definitive replication that does not work!  Do you have that replication? Or are you just following others? ???

We can play that many different ways. You dont know his investors. You dont know exactly what they bargained for. If I remember correctly, Wayne clearly said from the start that he was only disclosing some things, not all. And he has that right. He owes YOU NOTHING!! ;) Just like anyone else here. And you are pissed. ::) Well thats your problem. ;)

"As you mentioned, I am usually impartial on things but, I was NOT impartial during the Mylow saga.  Sometimes, a man just has to take a stand.  Now, Mylow was not selling anything to anyone but, many folks were spending a lot of money trying to replicate his "working" device.  This was still wrong.  I live in a world of right and wrong."

Mylow is a completely different monster. Mylow was a true con man, even if he didnt ask for money. Mylow gets busted again and again and keeps on going with some new trick to show the same goal. And it was all tricks. The master of the shell game.  No comparison with Wayne.


"One last thing.  I am not against the research for free, or efficient energy sources.  Not at all.  If someone had an idea for something that looked promising, and wanted to do a kickstarter type program to raise money to "look into it", that would be fine.  But, if they claim they have a working device, and a single zed is overunity by itself, and that is not true, then that is fraud.  Do you understand what I am saying here?"

Something that 'looked' like something promising, and you may have wanted to risk peoples kickstarter money to see if it works??????     ::)   Are you the one on the corner with the old woman??? ???

Well where is your single zed that does not work? Id love to see it. ;)

"Do you understand what I am saying here?"   You wont like my answer.



And finally....

"Now Wayne has said, he does not claim overunity but, he did.  I wonder what those investors were told?  Do you know?"

Do you????  Wayne has said from the beginning that he was only giving some of what he has. He has no obligation to 'give' any more than that. But your not satisfied with that? Then walk away, just like any other of the thousands of threads here. And he has charged not a single soul here 1 single penny, and never asked for any investments here. Yet the demands and slander continues every day this thread is alive. And with all the negativity, the real work is hindered by people that dont have the guts to build it and 'prove' their case. Tk is the only one I would imagine doing so, and I think he would do a great job at it.  ;) But he hasnt. Yet. ;D

Mags


Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #479 on: March 05, 2014, 05:17:44 AM »
Well I read Wayne's long posting before he deleted it.  It had the full cadence of the 'preacher.'  It's a regular occurrence.  His long 'explanation' posting was done in the preacher cadence.  The explanation posting was filled with 'technical' terms that only exist in Wayne's brain.  Seriously, when you use terms like 'exhaust' and all that mumbo-jumbo, it's all a farce.  I am sure that nobody knows what he is talking about.  Then you have him endorsing experimenters that barely have a clue.  There has never been a demonstration of a working system, surprise surprise.  Wayne refuses to even acknowledge direct straight-forward questions.  This has been going on for five years and nothing to show for it.  You can design and build a 2000 megawatt hydroelectric dam in five years.

Everything about Wayne adds up - on the dark side.

Don't be fooled.

 

OneLink