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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.  (Read 181879 times)

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #90 on: April 29, 2015, 05:18:11 AM »
Quote : A conservative force is a force with the property that the work done in moving a particle between two points is independent of the taken path.[1] Equivalently, if a particle travels in a closed loop, the net work done (the sum of the force acting along the path multiplied by the distance travelled) by a conservative force is zero.

Like i said-crap. As the gravitational field is NOT constant,then net work can be done-->there for meaning that the gravitational field is not conservative. This is one great example of the crap that is peddled through the teaching of physics. So i say once again-->if the gravitational force is not constant,and work can be done from this non consistant force,then how can it be a conservative force?.

It is not i that is doing one's self no favors Mark,as my post is not nonsense. I CAN !without doubt! show you energy being produced using !your! conservative force(both gravitational and bouyant).You say that the gravitational force cant do work-->rubbish. You say that a bouyancy device cant do work-->more rubbish. Neither of these forces(when combined) is conservative,as they are not constant forces.
You are: confused, wrong, and rude.  I am really tired of it.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #91 on: April 29, 2015, 06:05:38 AM »
You are: confused, wrong, and rude.  I am really tired of it.
I am not wrong,confused or rude. The rude part is your insistance that you are always correct,and as i have shown you before,you are not. You come into threads with the attitude that you are better than anyone else,and yet time and time again you have been proven to be incorrect-as in this example. You say gravity can do no useful work-a gravity device will not work-nor will a bouyant device,and yet it dose day in day out,and i have given a simple example of this that you cannot refute. The only two forces at play are gravity and bouyancy,and the two can indeed generate power-do useful work. So,there you have it,a working gravity/bouyancy device. So now,please tell us all once again that a gravity/bouyancy device can never work due to the fact that garvity and bouyancy forces are conservative.

Quote reply 27: Buoyancy drives don't work.
Quote reply 51; Buoyancy is not an energy source.  Buoyancy drives don't work.
Quote reply 58: Sigh:  Gravity is a conservative field.  Take something through an arbitrary path from one point and back to that point and there is no gain or loss in gravitational potential energy:  Zero, nada.

All completly wrong when the two forces work together.
Gravity is the force which raises the tide's 14 meters.
Bouyancy is the force that raises the ship that has a displacement of 50 000 tons.
6860000000 joules of energy has just been placed on that ship.
Did gravity have to do extra work to raise that ship?-no,it did not,as the 50 000 ton's the ship added was the very same as the 50 000 tons of water that was displaced that gravity no longer has to raise.

I too grow tired of your negativity Mark,and your partner in crime-LE.
Im not sure where you two live,but for us here on earth,we see the two forces doing work twice a day in most cases. You have tunnel vision,and that tunnel lead's to a dead end. There are devices that clearly dont work,but you put a blanket NO on all such devices that use the same principle. You say that neither bouyant or gravity powered devices will work,and yet we see it daily here on earth. Maybe in 4 to 5 billion years when the moon is to far away from the earth to raise tide's,then you may come back and make your claim. But for now,we have the worlds largest bouyant/gravity driven generator working 24/7.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #92 on: April 29, 2015, 06:08:48 AM »
I am not wrong,confused or rude. The rude part is your insistance that you are always correct,and as i have shown you before,you are not. You come into threads with the attitude that you are better than anyone else,and yet time and time again you have been proven to be incorrect-as in this example. You say gravity can do no useful work-a gravity device will not work-nor will a bouyant device,and yet it dose day in day out,and i have given a simple example of this that you cannot refute. The only two forces at play are gravity and bouyancy,and the two can indeed generate power-do useful work. So,there you have it,a working gravity/bouyancy device. So now,please tell us all once again that a gravity/bouyancy device can never work due to the fact that garvity and bouyancy forces are conservative.

Quote reply 27: Buoyancy drives don't work.
Quote reply 51; Buoyancy is not an energy source.  Buoyancy drives don't work.
Quote reply 58: Sigh:  Gravity is a conservative field.  Take something through an arbitrary path from one point and back to that point and there is no gain or loss in gravitational potential energy:  Zero, nada.

All completly wrong when the two forces work together.
Gravity is the force which raises the tide's 14 meters.
Bouyancy is the force that raises the ship that has a displacement of 50 000 tons.
6860000000 joules of energy has just been placed on that ship.
Did gravity have to do extra work to raise that ship?-no,it did not,as the 50 000 ton's the ship added was the very same as the 50 000 tons of water that was displaced that gravity no longer has to raise.

I too grow tired of your negativity Mark,and your partner in crime-LE.
Im not sure where you two live,but for us here on earth,we see the two forces doing work twice a day in most cases. You have tunnel vision,and that tunnel lead's to a dead end. There are devices that clearly dont work,but you put a blanket NO on all such devices that use the same principle. You say that neither bouyant or gravity powered devices will work,and yet we see it daily here on earth. Maybe in 4 to 5 billion years when the moon is to far away from the earth to raise tide's,then you may come back and make your claim. But for now,we have the worlds largest bouyant/gravity driven generator working 24/7.
But you are as anyone with a basic working knowledge of physics and reading comprehension can see.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #93 on: April 29, 2015, 07:31:12 AM »
The term 'conservative field' has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the fact that the tide caused the ship to gain gravitational potential energy.

Conservative means the amount of energy dissipated by the tide to raise the ship is 6860 MJ and the amount recoverable by moving the ship back to the original position will be exactly the same, independent of how fast or over what path the ship takes during those movements.

Exactly
Gravitational and bouyant forces have now given rise to a potential energy source-->a gravity/bouyant generator. Why you and your partner in crime continue to say things just wont work,when they work day in day out is nothing more than a joke.

Quote
I'd suggest you just give up trying to understand physics...

this is the biggest joke of all-->give up trying to understand physics.
Even the best that think they understand physics really dont know all they think they know. The same answer is always given--how could hundreds of years of understanding be wrong. These are the same people that cannot to this day even explain what the magnetic force actually is,or what the hell gravity even is-->how dose it work,what is the gravitational force?. they have no answer to these question's,and yet here you are claiming that a PM,gravity or bouyancy device can never do useful work-->and yet neither of you(or anyone else) even knows what these forces actually are lol. What creates gravity-->answer-mass lol. No,mass is the quantity of that force,it is not the creator.
What is the magnetic force-->answer-we dont know,but the current modle work's,so we'll stick with that,A PM motor will never work.

What you are saying is-this fuel will not run your motor,even though we dont know what the fuel is.

Quote sm0ky2 :The only restrictions that exists are in our ability to create and remove the conditions of buoyancy, which boils down to human ingenuity.

This statement is spot on,and very correct. Only our non understanding of these forces and what they actually are is stopping us from achieving our goal-and nothing more.
So when you guys actually know what the magnetic or gravitational force is,then you may have a case to argue. Until then,you have nothing but theory,and a ! so far so good! attitude.

Here is a good example of energies that await us when we gain this understanding.
Matter and antimatter. Quite same when they are not together,but when the two opposites are bought together,well,all hell breaks loose,and the energy created from this union is extreem. It took some time for scientist to learn of this!antimatter!,and it will be some time before they come up with some form of antimagnetic field,or antigravity field. But when the time come's,im afraid you two will be out of a job-and it's only a matter of time.

#### LibreEnergia

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 332
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #94 on: April 29, 2015, 07:37:03 AM »
I am not wrong,confused or rude. The rude part is your insistance that you are always correct,and as i have shown you before,you are not. You come into threads with the attitude that you are better than anyone else,and yet time and time again you have been proven to be incorrect-as in this example. You say gravity can do no useful work-a gravity device will not work-nor will a bouyant device,and yet it dose day in day out,and i have given a simple example of this that you cannot refute. The only two forces at play are gravity and bouyancy,and the two can indeed generate power-do useful work. So,there you have it,a working gravity/bouyancy device. So now,please tell us all once again that a gravity/bouyancy device can never work due to the fact that garvity and bouyancy forces are conservative.

Quote reply 27: Buoyancy drives don't work.
Quote reply 51; Buoyancy is not an energy source.  Buoyancy drives don't work.
Quote reply 58: Sigh:  Gravity is a conservative field.  Take something through an arbitrary path from one point and back to that point and there is no gain or loss in gravitational potential energy:  Zero, nada.

All completly wrong when the two forces work together.
Gravity is the force which raises the tide's 14 meters.
Bouyancy is the force that raises the ship that has a displacement of 50 000 tons.
6860000000 joules of energy has just been placed on that ship.
Did gravity have to do extra work to raise that ship?-no,it did not,as the 50 000 ton's the ship added was the very same as the 50 000 tons of water that was displaced that gravity no longer has to raise.

I too grow tired of your negativity Mark,and your partner in crime-LE.
Im not sure where you two live,but for us here on earth,we see the two forces doing work twice a day in most cases. You have tunnel vision,and that tunnel lead's to a dead end. There are devices that clearly dont work,but you put a blanket NO on all such devices that use the same principle. You say that neither bouyant or gravity powered devices will work,and yet we see it daily here on earth. Maybe in 4 to 5 billion years when the moon is to far away from the earth to raise tide's,then you may come back and make your claim. But for now,we have the worlds largest bouyant/gravity driven generator working 24/7.

I'm convinced you are completely clueless about basic physics concepts.  The earth - moon system can of course provide energy in the form of tides to move ships or whatever up and down. This does NOT mean gravity is "non- conservative".  The tides is powered by the earth - moon rotation slowing and the two bodies slowly moving apart.

Gravity would be "non conservative" ONLY if we could magically restore the earth and moon to their original positions without expending the same amount of energy as is dissipated as they move apart.  Given the tides dissipate gravitational potential at the rate of about 5 terawatts, that's a whole lot of energy going the be required to move them back into their original positions.

Maybe Wayne Travis can help us with that...

#### MileHigh

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7600
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #95 on: April 29, 2015, 07:39:33 AM »
Well, if you want to improve your understanding, the tidal ship in the Bay of Fundy does not use gravity as an energy source.  It uses the Earth's rotational energy as the energy source.  You slow down the rotational speed of the Earth when you do that.

Does the number 6.67 x 10^-11 mean anything to you?  If not, you have to look it up.  That will explain the gravity field.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #96 on: April 29, 2015, 08:20:29 AM »
I'm convinced you are completely clueless about basic physics concepts.  The earth - moon system can of course provide energy in the form of tides to move ships or whatever up and down. This does NOT mean gravity is "non- conservative".  The tides is powered by the earth - moon rotation slowing and the two bodies slowly moving apart.

Gravity would be "non conservative" ONLY if we could magically restore the earth and moon to their original positions without expending the same amount of energy as is dissipated as they move apart.  Given the tides dissipate gravitational potential at the rate of about 5 terawatts, that's a whole lot of energy going the be required to move them back into their original positions.

Maybe Wayne Travis can help us with that...
Poor "honest" Wayne Travis had a disappointing 2014 and 2015 isn't shaping up to be any better.  When he "wasn't looking for investors" he was hoping to land a big whale to the tune of \$1 billion dollars.  Guess what?  It never happened.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #97 on: April 29, 2015, 08:25:34 AM »
But you are as anyone with a basic working knowledge of physics and reading comprehension can see.
You pride your self on thinking you know all there is to know Mark. You sit and type with the feeling that you are infallible,and yet,even I(along with my terrible comprehension),a truck driver,have proven you wrong before. You frequent this forum often,dismissing idea's that others have,simply because it dosnt comply with your book's. How is it you can state things like a PM only motor will never work,and yet not even you know what the magnetic force is. This is a !best guess! you are having when you make claims like this. Just last week on the !open systems! thread,we were doing some calculation's. All was good until i gave you some results which you calculated,and because these results didnt conform with the ideal's,you just quit the job-->no more input until i gave you the workings of the device. What a copout that was,but typical in this situation.

I called you on your statements here on this thread,and showed how (in the here and now)that gravity and bouyancy can give rise to potential energy for us to use as we will. But you guys always want to see a self contained system that sit's on the bench running away,while you overlook the vast amount of energy that can be had with a device that you say dosnt work.

You have two opposite forces working here.
The bouyant force acting on a bouyant vessel gives an upward force on that vessel.
The gravitational force pulls down on that same vessel. here you have a sine wave of energy waiting to be tapped into,and one day this will be achieved when man is smart enough to enclose the system.

Im sorry Mark,but your negativity and tunnel vision is getting boaring and quite annoying.
I gave you one example of an energy increase in a device,and you took off like a chicken that spotted a fox. That was an extreemly clear example of energy being taken from the enviroment,which could then be made to do useful work. And the thing is,that energy(after doing work)was put back into the enviroment from where it came-->energy conserved.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #98 on: April 29, 2015, 08:52:26 AM »
Well, if you want to improve your understanding, the tidal ship in the Bay of Fundy does not use gravity as an energy source.  It uses the Earth's rotational energy as the energy source.  You slow down the rotational speed of the Earth when you do that.

Does the number 6.67 x 10^-11 mean anything to you?  If not, you have to look it up.  That will explain the gravity field.
You slow down nothing,because the mass of the earth as a whole has not increased. Regardless of wether that ship was there or not,the earths rotational rate would decrease by the same amount,as the same mass was moved in the rise of the tide. What you say MH is like saying a ton of grass is heavier than a ton of rock. So what will slow down the earths rotation more-->50 000 tons of water being raised 14 meters,or 50 000 tons of ship being raised 14 meters?. Mass is directly proportional to gravity,and as we have the same mass amount,then nothing has changed as far as gravitational pull go's,and thus the earths rotation would slow no more than it would if the ship wasnt there. The earth has a set amount of mass,and only things like meteorites can increase the mass of the earth. So as our mass remains constant,then so dose the decrease in rotational speed of the earth due to gravitational drag.

#### sterlinga

• Full Member
• Posts: 235
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #99 on: April 29, 2015, 09:02:41 AM »
Gaia AuKW failure Power went out at Rosch in Spich Germany

I saw this unfold. I happened to check the feed when it was dark (except for emergency light overhead). I informed Roberto.

I've posted my take on this at http://peswiki.com/index.php/Blog:GAIA%27s_AuKW_Demo#AuKW_goes_dark.3B_Livestream_goes_down

I don't see it as evidence of fraud. I see it as Murphy's law in action. The system went down. They fired it back up.

#### sterlinga

• Full Member
• Posts: 235
##### Is the motor and generator atop the Rosch's KPP actually a QMoGen?
« Reply #100 on: April 29, 2015, 09:04:43 AM »
Featured: Buoyancy > Rosch > GAIA > Demo >
Is the motor and generator atop the Rosch's KPP actually a QMoGen? Is the buoyancy system unnecessary? - Someone who attended the AuKW demo and is satisfied it is for real, is also convinced that buoyancy is not the heart of the system. Rather, the air compressor motor and the generator are working together like a QMoGen, with the buoyancy system acting like the belt between them. (PESN; April 29, 2015)
« Last Edit: April 29, 2015, 05:54:16 PM by sterlinga »

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1317
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #101 on: April 29, 2015, 09:08:15 AM »
@TK
Quote
Look. The whole contraption is based on one side being heavier than the other
side, right? So just get rid of the water altogether, it just creates drag you
don't need. Drop a series of heavy balls into the buckets on the descending side
and have them roll out on the bottom. Use an Archimedes Screw to elevate the
balls back up to the top so they can be dropped back into the descending
buckets. Power the Archimedes Screw with a simple pulley-belt linkage off the
top sprocket of the bucket-chain. Have the bottom sprocket drive your generator.
There will be so much mechanical advantage from the Screw-Pulley system that
you'll have to install a brake mechanism to keep it from speeding up to
self-destruction.
I believe you are making the same flawed argument as most here and we start with a fairly complex buoyancy machine and then you say why not metal balls as it's the same thing with weight on one side and if we use this same flawed logic we could take the next step. Why not just say it is the same as bouncing a ball and expecting it to bounce higher?. The problem here is that obviously they are not the same thing and to presume they are is absurd. I understand this is the same false premise most critics like to use however this old same/same argument game doesn't imply a great deal of intelligence in my opinion.

Obviously the most intelligent person would be the one smart enough to have figured out how to get the air into the bottom of the tank without all the losses normally involved. There is one question that matters here and that is how can we get the air across the pressurized boundary condition into the water without the normal losses however you wouldn't touch that one with a ten foot pole would you?. Because you have literally no idea do you and in fact you have no idea where to even start.
So how about we have an intelligent conversation for a change of pace?, tell me how would you get the air into the tank without all the losses normally involved?... any idea's?.

AC

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #102 on: April 29, 2015, 09:42:49 AM »
@TKI believe you are making the same flawed argument as most here and we start with a fairly complex buoyancy machine and then you say why not metal balls as it's the same thing with weight on one side and if we use this same flawed logic we could take the next step. Why not just say it is the same as bouncing a ball and expecting it to bounce higher?. The problem here is that obviously they are not the same thing and to presume they are is absurd. I understand this is the same false premise most critics like to use however this old same/same argument game doesn't imply a great deal of intelligence in my opinion.
You assert a distinction that you fail to establish.
Quote

Obviously the most intelligent person would be the one smart enough to have figured out how to get the air into the bottom of the tank without all the losses normally involved. There is one question that matters here and that is how can we get the air across the pressurized boundary condition into the water without the normal losses however you wouldn't touch that one with a ten foot pole would you?. Because you have literally no idea do you and in fact you have no idea where to even start.
So how about we have an intelligent conversation for a change of pace?, tell me how would you get the air into the tank without all the losses normally involved?... any idea's?.

AC
Unless you wish to rely on magical thinking, the minimum work to force the air into the buckets is identically the increase in mgh of the water that the air displaces.  That places the whole affair at zero sum gain in the best case.  This is all very black letter.  If you are going to make the ridiculous request that someone propose to you a means of imparting free energy to air, why not cut to the chase and just ask for a free source of electricity to run your appliances?

#### d3x0r

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1432
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #103 on: April 29, 2015, 11:01:59 AM »
You assert a distinction that you fail to establish.Unless you wish to rely on magical thinking, the minimum work to force the air into the buckets is identically the increase in mgh of the water that the air displaces.  That places the whole affair at zero sum gain in the best case.  This is all very black letter.  If you are going to make the ridiculous request that someone propose to you a means of imparting free energy to air, why not cut to the chase and just ask for a free source of electricity to run your appliances?
if  nRT ln(V2/V1 ) is the work to compress the gas to greater than the pressure at the bottom... what more work is required than that? Oh I see... once the gas does start flowing, then its pressure becomes less and you have to apply more force to maintain the pressure ( or have compressed a larger volume to a greater pressure )...

okay.  So if I compress 5 times the volume of air to twice the required additional pressure it's still less work than the total bouyance force.

and bouyancy is ( mass_displaced - mass_displacing ) * G.  (the air weighs something so should be subtracted from the mass displaced...)

... So, having an understanding of these basic physics principles where is the discontinuity?

How does one relate the force required to displace X with pressure?  Or.. why does it matter how much water is moved?  The pressure is enough to overcome the additional weight of the water.. and if it was under a solid plunger and moved the whole body of water, why does moving that water imply any more work than it took to presureize the gas?

input... (compress 5x the required air; twice the required exess pressure @ height of 14 buckets)
2.366602913    Work (ft-lb)

(edit: or even 4x the volume and 4x the pressure, so if I take 1 unit of volume out it's still 75% of the increased pressure... something; ya it's some differential
edit2: hmmm ya that needs to be looked at it's probably the missing work)

output...(14 buckets)
36.61705229    lift force (ft-lb/sec^2)

(fixed some annotions, grouping and colored related things)

#### LibreEnergia

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 332
##### Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.
« Reply #104 on: April 29, 2015, 11:04:41 AM »
You slow down nothing,because the mass of the earth as a whole has not increased. Regardless of wether that ship was there or not,the earths rotational rate would decrease by the same amount,as the same mass was moved in the rise of the tide. What you say MH is like saying a ton of grass is heavier than a ton of rock. So what will slow down the earths rotation more-->50 000 tons of water being raised 14 meters,or 50 000 tons of ship being raised 14 meters?. Mass is directly proportional to gravity,and as we have the same mass amount,then nothing has changed as far as gravitational pull go's,and thus the earths rotation would slow no more than it would if the ship wasnt there. The earth has a set amount of mass,and only things like meteorites can increase the mass of the earth. So as our mass remains constant,then so dose the decrease in rotational speed of the earth due to gravitational drag.

If you'd like to propose a free energy machine that is powered by the steaming pile of crap that equates to this analysis then I'd probably be willing to invest.

Sure, the masses do not change significantly but the distance between them does. The last time I looked the force due to gravity was equal to (G *m1 * m2)/r^2 . If you alter the distance between the two masses then the gravitational potential changes as the inverse square of the distance.

Also mass is NOT proportional to gravity. A 1 kg mass on earth is the same as a 1kg mass on  the moon or floating in space somewhere in the universe.

The quantity you are referring to is weight or mass multiplied by the acceleration due to gravity.