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.
 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: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED  (Read 704216 times)

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2220 on: April 16, 2014, 12:44:24 AM »
care to elaborate a little
The value immediately preceding is the change in riser GPE going from ST2 to ST3.
Quote

This is why I am asking.

If the risers are at a higher energy state, then will they not return to a lower state if allowed?
They are at a higher GPE in ST3.  They do fall back to the lower GPE returning to ST1.  It is an internal energy loss.  It does affect the amount of energy that comes out during the ST3 => ST1 transition.  Hint:  The force acting on the water in the pod chamber is not just the weight of that water column.
Quote

ST1=>ST2 takes the same input but ST2=>ST3 is over a shorter distance,, make the riser walls thinner and that force goes down,, make them 0 and it goes away.
By "that force" I believe you mean the weight that Mondrasek intentionally added to counter the buoyant up force in ST1 of the submerged portion of the risers.  Yes, if the riser walls had no volume they would not displace water and there would be no buoyant up force to compensate.  The flip side is that the volumes and forces would change as well.

#### minnie

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1244
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2221 on: April 16, 2014, 01:10:10 AM »

Yes Mark,
I think a bucket of slippery water would perform nearer the 100%
than the stupid Ideal ZED.
Is there anyone out there who could foresee any possible use for a
ZED, other than an amusing conversation piece.
minnie is my wife's name by way, I didn't realise how the thing worked
when I joined up many years ago, never bothered to change it. Don't
see why an ideal user name should be gender specific anyway.
John

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2222 on: April 16, 2014, 02:00:01 AM »

Yes Mark,
I think a bucket of slippery water would perform nearer the 100%
than the stupid Ideal ZED.
Is there anyone out there who could foresee any possible use for a
ZED, other than an amusing conversation piece.
minnie is my wife's name by way, I didn't realise how the thing worked
when I joined up many years ago, never bothered to change it. Don't
see why an ideal user name should be gender specific anyway.
John
Ha!  I wasn't thinking of you when I said:  a woman named John?  It is a line from an old movie.

Like you, I do not see the least bit of utility in Wayne's contraptions.  Their efficiency gets better and better the less that they do.  Ultimately they are surpassed in utility by a brick.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2223 on: April 16, 2014, 02:49:19 AM »
I was running under the impression that it is the total reflected weight in the pod chamber.

That then would include the riser weight.
That is correct and it affects the energy dumped out the pod chamber drain.
Quote

That is what I used to "test" if my calculations were working to provide a net zero condition,, I made the thickness 0 and the final two calculations were still the same value as each other.
Zeroing the riser wall widths tells you if the up lift calculations on the undersides of the walls are reasonable.  In terms of inergy in and out, one still has to put the same amount of energy in to go from ST1 to ST2 as before.  What changes is the additional energy that comes out going from ST3 to ST1.  You sort of had the right idea that you needed to account for the energy that goes into the R3 GPE.  But where you subtracted it in two places to cancel out, you should have added in two other places instead.
Quote

So I was thinking then that if the energy is balanced and accounted for, then I can look at the forces, which are not energy and do not need to be conserved.
For God's sake why look at forces which are not conserved when trying to see if a machine conserves energy or not?  What is force alone going to tell you that is of any use at all?
Quote

I was also thinking that I could just take the difference between the spillway output and the ideal output and keep track of that so that the totals are still a net zero,, just trying to account for all the energy so that none is missed or doubled up.
If you want to try zeroing out then set the spillway movement time to some huge number like 1E30 seconds.  You will run Excel out of significant digits forcing the ST2 => ST3 efficiency to 100% to Excel's precision limit.

#### mondrasek

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1301
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2224 on: April 16, 2014, 03:06:09 AM »
Well, maybe you have a different idea of what it is that you would like to try and obtain from this analysis exercise than I think you do.  Please state clearly and succinctly what you are trying to determine from this exercise.

What I am trying to determine from this exercise is if an Ideal ZED acts analogous to a simple (or compound) hydraulic cylinder as has been contended as the basis for previous "proofs" of the impossibility of the actual functionality of the "dual ZED" devices demonstrated by Wayne Travis to Mark Dansie.

I maintain that if you are trying to determine what level of efficiency is "ideally" possible, then the mechanisms do need to be specified, or else the exercise is rather pointless.  It is pretty simple to state that as the throughput power approaches zero the energy efficiency approaches, but never reaches 100%.  If you are content with that conclusion, then we are back to the device being more or less a complicated way to emulate a spring, actually two springs, where one more or less falls out in the ST3 to ST1 transition.

I appreciate our mutual understanding of the "Ideal" Analysis.  And I also agree that by the definition of an Ideal Analysis, any real world device must display efficiencies below that of the ideal device.

If you have not been picking up the hints, the change in R3 GPE is negative in the ST3 => ST1 transition as is the internal energy change in the water columns.  In your spreadsheet you did not account for the R3 GPE.  If you did then your 88.3% number under the assumptions you state would come up to close to but less than 100%.  The device remains fundamentally lossy.  The whole question of whether something like this could be OU was answered by Powercat or Minnie back at like page 3 of the thread:  Using accepted First Principles, a properly constructed math model cannot show over unity as First Principles do not allow for it.

And this is my favorite part so far!  And I thank you for teaching again.

I did pick up on the hints (I believe) and understood them to mean that the Energy that could be extracted from the difference in the Energy between State 3 and State 1 would be 1/2 that total (and not the 100% I used to calculate the 88.3% efficiency).  But I had not considered that this could make the efficiency greater.  I also do not fully understand how?

BTW, my water heater has blown and I am now stuck at home for tomorrow.  I hope to be able to mentally digest all the logic changes due to the interesting negative GPE revelations.  But for now I may be preoccupied with if I can comfortably wash my face in the morning.  So please grant me a short hiatus.

Once again, I do greatly appreciate when you teach.

M.

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2225 on: April 16, 2014, 03:26:25 AM »
I get a chuckle every now and then looking at the sparring with Wayne.  He tries so hard to pretend that he says things that make sense.  He tries so hard to pretend that he has actually explained something.  He tries so hard to pretend that his "team" are the ones that are in the know and his challengers are lost souls that don't understand anything.  He is dismissive of all comments that point out how ridiculous his statements are.  It's so over the top sometimes that it's hard to believe.  It's surreal, like some 1920s surrealist black and white German expressionist movie.

#### mrwayne

• Hero Member
• Posts: 975
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2226 on: April 16, 2014, 03:42:51 AM »
Ok, so lets not introduce any nonsensical statements like 'Super  Conservative' or 'Energy reference mapping'

With out reference to such ill defined concepts, show me just where in your machine that

"Water spontaneously flows up hill",  or
"Expanding air recovers more energy then is required to compress it" or perhaps even,
"A buoyant object gains more energy when it rises compared to the energy required to sink it".

Have I missed any potential 'simple processes' that might be occurring in your machine?
Yeah, Non sense for now...
One thing a real expert explained to me long ago - don't try to explain - because they will only pick at the words used and not the meaning behind them.
--- Even when the meaning behind them is what is important---
I only have two days left - and none of the questions have anything to do with a ZED
Since you are quoting - I am even more confused...
"Water spontaneously flows up hill",  or
"Expanding air recovers more energy then is required to compress it" or perhaps even,
"A buoyant object gains more energy when it rises compared to the energy required to sink it".

I have said none of these statements, I do not know who you are quoting?
It is as if you are trying to move our system back to the Magical free energy system???
Only two days left.

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2227 on: April 16, 2014, 03:52:15 AM »
Don't burst any high-pressure hoses or groaning bellows on your way out!

#### mrwayne

• Hero Member
• Posts: 975
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2228 on: April 16, 2014, 03:54:24 AM »
For God's sake why look at forces which are not conserved when trying to see if a machine conserves energy or not?  What is force alone going to tell you that is of any use at all?
Looking at a system to see if it conserves energy..................
......................
The Zed is not a conserves energy process...... it is a force amplification - with reduced input - which results in NET available energy.
If you are looking for a single process to gain.... you have not understood that our system is not an OU device -
Thanks

#### orbut 3000

• Full Member
• Posts: 247
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2229 on: April 16, 2014, 04:02:37 AM »

Quote
The mystery man got nervous
And he fidget around a bit
He reached in the pocket of his mystery robe
And he whipped out a shaving kit
Now I thought it was a razor
And a can of foaming goo
But he told me right then when the top popped open
There was nothin' his box won't do
With the oil of Aphrodite,
and the dust of the Grand Wazoo
He said "You might not believe this, little fella
But it'll cure your asthma too"
...

#### mrwayne

• Hero Member
• Posts: 975
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2230 on: April 16, 2014, 04:25:02 AM »
To all:
We have worked hard to develop our technology and then some more.
We have had incredible selfless help - guidance - and support.
We are so blessed, the source code to free energy has been unlocked -
I waded thru crap here to share... the rest of you are awesome!
Tomorrow is the last day.
I will check back tomorrow.
Good night

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2231 on: April 16, 2014, 05:04:47 AM »
What I am trying to determine from this exercise is if an Ideal ZED acts analogous to a simple (or compound) hydraulic cylinder as has been contended as the basis for previous "proofs" of the impossibility of the actual functionality of the "dual ZED" devices demonstrated by Wayne Travis to Mark Dansie.
It does act like a crippled hydraulic cylinder.  That should be self-evident by now.
Quote

I appreciate our mutual understanding of the "Ideal" Analysis.  And I also agree that by the definition of an Ideal Analysis, any real world device must display efficiencies below that of the ideal device.

And this is my favorite part so far!  And I thank you for teaching again.

I did pick up on the hints (I believe) and understood them to mean that the Energy that could be extracted from the difference in the Energy between State 3 and State 1 would be 1/2 that total (and not the 100% I used to calculate the 88.3% efficiency).  But I had not considered that this could make the efficiency greater.  I also do not fully understand how?

BTW, my water heater has blown and I am now stuck at home for tomorrow.  I hope to be able to mentally digest all the logic changes due to the interesting negative GPE revelations.  But for now I may be preoccupied with if I can comfortably wash my face in the morning.  So please grant me a short hiatus.

Once again, I do greatly appreciate when you teach.

M.
Good luck with the water heater.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2232 on: April 16, 2014, 05:08:05 AM »
Looking at a system to see if it conserves energy..................
......................
The Zed is not a conserves energy process...... it is a force amplification - with reduced input - which results in NET available energy.
If you are looking for a single process to gain.... you have not understood that our system is not an OU device -
Thanks
The ZED is absolutely subject to the Laws of Energy.  Force is not conserved.  But you simply reject these lessons each time they are presented because they contradict your lies.

Your machine is not an OU device that is certain.  Neither is it any other name you or anyone else would put on something that does as you falsely claim:  produce energy for free.

#### LibreEnergia

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 332
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2233 on: April 16, 2014, 05:10:36 AM »
Looking at a system to see if it conserves energy..................
......................
The Zed is not a conserves energy process...... it is a force amplification - with reduced input - which results in NET available energy.
If you are looking for a single process to gain.... you have not understood that our system is not an OU device -
Thanks

Wayne, your descriptions are  meaningless crap and you know it.

The description "force amplification - with reduced input " IS identically equal to saying that it is an over-unity device.

Would you like to invent some more spin to try and convince the weak minded?

Your machine would appear to raise and lower masses correct? This does not give rise to net energy output.
You machine compresses/expands air somewhat..? again not an net energy producing effect.
A buoyant object moves up and down..? again, not an net energy producing process.

What else does it do? magic? if so describe that...

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #2234 on: April 16, 2014, 05:12:29 AM »
To all:
We have worked hard to develop our technology and then some more.
It is such a shame that you do not now have nor have you ever had a technology such as you falsely claim.
Quote

We have had incredible selfless help - guidance - and support.
It's amazing the amount of help a shameless huckster can elicit.
Quote

We are so blessed, the source code to free energy has been unlocked -
Too bad that there isn't any free energy to be had from your contraptions.  But don't let that stop you from thumping your Bible.
Quote

I waded thru crap here to share... the rest of you are awesome!
Tomorrow is the last day.
I will check back tomorrow.
Good night

Hmm, you must be working with a different calendar than me.  Who knows, maybe you will get that knock on your door Thursday after all.  It's just something that I don't know.  Do you keep plenty of hot coffee and donuts around for visitors?

Viva!  Las Vegas!