Author Topic: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device. (Read 211143 times)

d3x0r · « **Reply #270 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:15:28 AM »

Quote from: MarkE on May 01, 2015, 03:11:41 AM

Get a tub of water. Fill it 3/4s full. Let it set for at least an hour so that the water reaches ambient temperature. Get a: empty inner tube, air pump of any kind, and good pressure gauge. Fill the inner tube to a normal pressure reasonably quickly, say less than 1 minute. Record the pressure. Place the inner tube in the tub of water and let it set for 15 minutes. Read the pressure again.

Irrealvent, the pressure required only exists for ... well less than a second in reality but for 1 second. So... ya even if the temp is lost and therefore pressure goes down, the amount that is transferred from air to water in 1 second is nil.

MarkE · « **Reply #271 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:16:10 AM »

Quote from: sm0ky2 on May 01, 2015, 02:40:02 AM

the balloon thing wasn't an example, it was a comment...

as for the CO2 cartridge, there is plenty of info available on this. The force required to fill them (+ a little extra to seal it) is give or take 1.6 newtons, Which is exactly what you get back out. its compressed gas, in actuality you gain a little extra because the gas is cooled before it is filled, so you have extra pressure from the ambient heat.

Newtons are units of force, not work.

Quote

In either case, it doesn't come anywhere close to the energy gained by the sustained buoyant force over time required to lift the diver 100 feet through ocean water.

Do your math

Please do. Please show an energy gain by comparing energy values. We'll see if there is a business making free energy compressing CO2 and plumbing it into submersibles.

MarkE · « **Reply #272 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:18:52 AM »

Quote from: ramset on May 01, 2015, 03:03:32 AM

Mark E
You should get another act , trying to peddle your way around a context for your comment as it applies to NASA and their research into propulsion drives ...your garbage in garbage out comment to the engineers at NASA ,makes you sound like some pompous ignoramus
that sweeps all claims with the same broad brush of ignorance and assumption.

But that's what you love to do ... throw insults in the wind from behind the Curtain of alleged anonymity at those who actually do the hard work and research .

as if it really mattered ..to anyone but yourself.
your a legend in your own Mind Mr......

Chet you are a hoot. You are either too lazy to dig up the quote that you refer to, or you know that it doesn't say what you represent.

MarkE · « **Reply #273 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:22:25 AM »

Quote from: tinman on May 01, 2015, 03:05:08 AM

Mark
I really think that YOU should go and do some reserch your self on a 767's speed capabilities at sea level-start with boeings spec sheets first. Take note of the built in speed limits to avoid things like bird strikes taking out the plane at low altitudes. Also see the calculations on maximum thrust v air density v mass of the plane.. Also try and sepperate cruising altitude speed from sea level speed.

Hey,who knows,maybe the guys that couldnt even fly a cessna that managed to pilot a 757 and 767 beyond there capabilities also worked out how to hack into the planes main frame,and disable all the built in safty limits of the aircraft.

A little graph from boeing on the 767-200-->you should go read up a bit Mark,and get YOUR head out of ya ass. Im not seeing the mach .86 at sea level Mark-->who is on the cool aid?.

LOL, your limit line is at 0.55 Mach. When did 0.55 Mach at sea level fall significantly below the 220 mph that you claim would tear the plane apart? 0.55 mach is on a typical day at sea level about 420mph.

PIH123 · « **Reply #274 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:24:30 AM »

Quote from: MarkE on April 30, 2015, 08:58:37 PM

There is definitely a light source up there. The picture isn't clear enough for me to see if that is a camera head or not.

So given that we take evidence as presented, we cannot conclude if it is emergency lighting or light emitted from an infrared camera.
So a plausible explanation as TK said.

Now even without seeing an image taken from that location, I hope you will agree, we have to let that piece of the puzzle go.

Pete

MarkE · « **Reply #275 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:27:08 AM »

Quote from: d3x0r on May 01, 2015, 03:15:28 AM

Irrealvent, the pressure required only exists for ... well less than a second in reality but for 1 second. So... ya even if the temp is lost and therefore pressure goes down, the amount that is transferred from air to water in 1 second is nil.

The two salient points are: Compression does heat the gas (air). Given the opportunity that heat conducts out of the gas, losing energy to the surroundings. That is the same change in energy that can later be absorbed back from the surroundings to displace additional fluid as the elastic bubble rises. Soda water can be a refreshing treat. It is not a source of free energy.

MarkE · « **Reply #276 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:30:43 AM »

Quote from: PIH123 on May 01, 2015, 03:24:30 AM

So given that we take evidence as presented, we cannot conclude if it is emergency lighting or light emitted from an infrared camera.
So a plausible explanation as TK said.

Now even without seeing an image taken from that location, I hope you will agree, we have to let that piece of the puzzle go.

Pete

As I posted a day or two ago on PESN: Even if the building power went down, there was always an out that they could claim of the controller interrupting power from the AuKW to its loads. Building power still looks like it failed because other lighting and the TV remained on for several seconds after the AuKW display lights and controller shut down.

ramset · « **Reply #277 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:30:54 AM »

I'll look when I get the time, and you know exactly the context .
your credibility has come into question in Debates and discussions and has lead many here to realize you will
stretch the boundaries of personal integrity and the rules of fair play [ being honest at all costs]
as well as distort and change intent on your positions if it does not fit your agenda/position.

translation ...you try to cheat...
but fool nobody but yourself.

PIH123 · « **Reply #278 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:33:07 AM »

Quote from: sterlinga on April 30, 2015, 08:02:04 PM

At 17:36 GMT, Roberto wrote: "Sterling, hi, this is the Second Webcam, we can access locally only to show a video of the generator & compressor. This Cam also has IR LEDs."

That makes sense. The livestream camera was on infrared, so any light would be amplified, so a little light from this second camera, poised above the AuKW would be exaggerated. Consistent with LED as described.

Sterling, you seem to have turned a corner.

You are now questioning issues raised and appear more balanced.

I hope this bodes well for your business since that is what is needed for you to take care of your family in the manner which they deserve.

Having followed what has gone on with you for the last 5 months, I still do not agree with your "lust addiction" and actions thereof,
or the alphabetics, 9/11 and the chemtrails stuff.
But if you keep all of this out of the free energy business, you may be able to win it back yet.

Pete

tinman · « **Reply #279 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:35:44 AM »

Quote from: MarkE on April 30, 2015, 07:22:30 PM

Quote

I just showed you a steel reinforced freeway intersection that failed due to heat from a petrol fire. Show me how many 1000' or higher buildings have survived a 767 full of fuel crashing into them at 500mph.

You just posted a pic of a concrete overpass that has steel reinforcing. If you do not know the difference between the two structures,then it is you who needs to go and do some reserch. Apples and oranges is what you just posted. The pic below is a better indication,and a lot closer than your orange from the apple tree. See the huge chunk missing from the building that would be more than that created by any plane. It burnt for two day's,and yet it still stand's. Once again,show me a highrise building that collapsed from fire like the WTC did.

And no-the planes wernt,cant and never did hit the buildings at the speeds claimed-->just not possable.

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #280 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:37:09 AM »

Quote from: PIH123 on May 01, 2015, 03:33:07 AM

Sterling, you seem to have turned a corner.

You are now questioning issues raised and appear more balanced.

I hope this bodes well for your business since that is what is needed for you to take care of your family in the manner which they deserve.

Having followed what has gone on with you for the last 5 months, I still do not agree with your "lust addiction" and actions thereof,
or the alphabetics, 9/11 and the chemtrails stuff.
But if you keep all of this out of the free energy business, you may be able to win it back yet.

Pete

Maybe...when he gets out of jail. Boy, will he learn a few lessons in there.

My advice to Sterling: Don't drop the soap.

Bill

PS I have no knowledge of Sterling's alleged transgressions other than those admitted to by Sterling himself. He is the one that said he may do jail time, not me.

PIH123 · « **Reply #281 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:37:37 AM »

Quote from: MarkE on May 01, 2015, 03:30:43 AM

As I posted a day or two ago on PESN: Even if the building power went down, there was always an out that they could claim of the controller interrupting power from the AuKW to its loads. Building power still looks like it failed because other lighting and the TV remained on for several seconds after the AuKW display lights and controller shut down.

I agree.

I was merely pointing out that they had provided a reasonable explanation for ONE concern.
It was not meant to be an "out" for them. Just an acceptance of this issue.

MarkE · « **Reply #282 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:42:02 AM »

Quote from: PIH123 on May 01, 2015, 03:37:37 AM

I agree.

I was merely pointing out that they had provided a reasonable explanation for ONE concern.
It was not meant to be an "out" for them. Just an acceptance of this issue.

Even the famous violinist Lindsey Stirling would have to agree with you on that.

PIH123 · « **Reply #283 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:43:17 AM »

Quote from: MarkE on May 01, 2015, 03:42:02 AM

Even the famous violinist Lindsay Stirling would have to agree with you on that.

You mean me and John Doe

MarkE · « **Reply #284 on:** May 01, 2015, 03:50:35 AM »

Quote from: ramset on May 01, 2015, 03:30:54 AM

I'll look when I get the time, and you know exactly the context .
your credibility has come into question in Debates and discussions and has lead many here to realize you will
stretch the boundaries of personal integrity and the rules of fair play [ being honest at all costs]
as well as distort and change intent on your positions if it does not fit your agenda/position.

translation ...you try to cheat...
but fool nobody but yourself.

Evidence Chet, you should look into it. You put forth an argument it is up to you to support your argument with verifiable evidence or suffer yourself as a fool. It's quite amusing that you speak of personal integrity and fair play. You might want to review your posting habits if that is a genuine concern to you. So: By all means go dig up any of my posts and shove them in my face. See if you can find anything embarrassing that sticks.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device. (Read 211143 times)

d3x0r

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

MarkE

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

MarkE

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

MarkE

Re: Is the motor and generator atop the Rosch's KPP actually a QMoGen?

PIH123

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

MarkE

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

MarkE

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

ramset

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

PIH123

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

tinman

Re: Is the motor and generator atop the Rosch's KPP actually a QMoGen?

Pirate88179

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

PIH123

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

MarkE

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

PIH123

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

MarkE

Re: Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.