Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mrwayne]

So from this description you are not making a cycle, back to the starting volumes and positions yet, are you? It seems that you have pumped out 30 cubic inches of fluid from the Zed but pumped in 15 cubic inches of fluid. Thus... there are 15 cubic inches LESS fluid in the Zed and 15 cu in MORE fluid in the accumulator than you started with. Right? If this is a full cycle... so this means you could now start at THIS POINT, and do it again, right?  Aren't you going to run out of fluid in the Zed after a certain number of these "cycles"? Or do you have to put in some more energy -- fluid under pressure -- somehow to reset the system back to the point where you started from?
If the first... you would seem to have a hydraulic fluid manufacturing plant, starting from nothing, making 15 cu in per squirt, filling up your accumulator. If the second... then you have not yet accounted for all the input work, have you?

(Conservation of Energy might be problematic... but surely everybody here believes in Conservation of Hydraulic Fluid... the stuff just does not come from nowhere and vanish back into nowhere, as much as we might like it to.)

"the input comes from within the loop"... sorry, this doesn't make sense to me.  INPUT is something coming in from the outside. If your device has NO INPUT, yet makes an extra 15 cu in of hydraulic fluid per cycle... well I think Mark Dansie could confirm that pretty easily; the accumulator will be overflowing pretty soon. Or if it's just moving 15 cu inch from one Zed to the other and back again, with no input, and producing useful power output, that too can be measured in terms of energy. (In what form? electrical? How about just torque on that hydraulic motor., something that can be measured unequivocally with a simple Prony brake or fancy electronic torque shaft sensors for example.)

You sure are making it hard for me to stay out of the "stink pitcher's bullpen" here, Mr Wayne. It looks like determining work in and work out in your system is not going to be a casual affair and it's pretty clear that continued questions about it are just frustrating you. I'm sorry for that.

What???
Output does not mean we take it out of the system.... are you playing with me lol
I will try one more time.
OUR PRODUCTION - is 28-30
Our INTERNAL CONSUMPTION is 15-18
With A NET of 12-15

Specifically concerning our "little model" - A single Zed needs 6-7 inches and it is a half stroke - a double Zed s requires 15-18
and one Zed produces 14-15, and the double produces 28-30
A cycle is One zed at the bottom of the stroke - the other at the top starting - and then returning to the same spot.
all of the presures inside The Zed return to the starting posistion.

@All
I meet with my engineers and I played "Semous tennis" with them from 4:30 -10:40
They gave me the current optimized model and its spreadsheets - and I threw my hands up and dramatically said:

"This is all bunk - how can you tell me with physics - that you have 800percent efficiency when physics says it cannot be done!!!! "You can not prove with physics that which can not be done in physics!!!"

Then I ignored the answer as they moved to the input and output and said "Impossible!!! Can't be done and I stomped my foot!!!"

And they turned and pointed at the Zed ten feet away and started to say just look......I said "trickery - you have hidden some secret compartment that with electro magnets .....helium.. something...some-thin pumps inside the plumbing....."

I continued "What about the FIRST LAW!!!!" they started to explain that we were not thermal - and that we have excess - black box - I interrupted ..... "WHERE DOES THE ENERGY COME FROM? ??"

They started back at the Physics - and I shouted "ALREADY DISCOUNTED!"

They turned to explain the rational mind needed to realize we had achieved what is impossible.. I shouted "WHERE DOES THE ENERGY COME FROM!!!!!!!!"

"You Are playing Games, Stonewalling, avoiding the fact - DO YOU CREATE ENERGY? ??"

One engineer said.... Yes... I Said Calmly - "no we don't......" he turned to the black box - Zed, the models, the physics, ...but these say we do...

I said "We don't - you have not yet fully explained where the energy comes from - the question we have to answer is NOT does it work - no one really cares about that  - they really want you to explain how you appear to create energy from nothing."

He said - we put nothing in and get power out - that is energy creation - I said "What are you not counting - that is inside the box even if you don't put it in..."

Another engineer said "Gravity - the system does not work without it, increasing the gravity would make it work better,"I interrupted "But gravity is a conservative field.... "

He said, "Our system turns up the effect of gravity" - another engineer said "you can't turn gravity off and on" he responded - "we don't we increase the effect of gravity with the reuse of the same displacement thru each layer - and then we relax... it is a ten to three exchange."

I said - "then account for it - show it, We have to educate the people - they do not want to know it works - they won't believe it, they won't listen until you can explain where the energy comes from" - one engineer chimed in - isn't that what Mark and Jim's team are going to do?

I said "Yes - but you need to have a working plausible - verifiable theory before they get here....The machine is good, the physics are good, the energy is real - now is the time to educate the world on what is missing in our texts."

Then I drew the system separated - and I gave a value to each separate mass (displacement) and then I combined them - and said - the only  thing that changed - is the mass was reduced by the number of layers - and we predict in the single layer based off that mass - you should be able to explain how recounting the same mass - at the same time - is pulling from the same field multiple times - our output increases directly proportional to the "presumed" mass repeatedly - even though it is only one mass for all layers.

I have excellent engineers:
Please remember - I never told them how it works or how to model, or how to optimize - that is their job - I gave them the working model and asked them to make it optimized and reliable  - on that same note.......
They had all the same skepticism as the rest of you - and the same excitement and joy once they understood..
They are excellent at their Job.

A point on our current model - it is barely overunity - I call it the little model - not due to its size our its output - but from its optimization - it barely works - We overcome 9 real losses to operate.
I built it - the minimum size I knew how. It cost a lot of money - I was under the idea that seeing was believing - that does not work - for the "Educated" they must know how.

It is too important to stand on a box and insist that people believe... they have to see the relationship.

Yes it does work - it is Overunity - unless you account for the gravity - and then you understand that it is not energy creation - even though we get energy from the Black Box.

At some point the "minds" will understand that we have a 10-3 system - our layering turns up the effect of gravity and then we relax to normal gravity - that is where our differential .....which does work.... and supplies our energy - comes from.

TK, we are not trying to teach you that bicycles can fly - but we are trying to teach you to "see" energy - that you can not "see"............I understand how difficult that is...Your term "virtual" was very clever.

The virtual water - in your wet hands - is compounded in the same space over and over as we add layers - our four layer system has virtually four cups of water in nearly the same space as your one cup demonstration...

I am glad you looked... I hope you begin to see.. I would love for you to know - your own search and hope was not in vain.

This is not about Wayne Travis - but about the future and our generations - it is very important you do not throw the baby away with the bath water because the virtual is hard to "See".

Thank you.

Wayne Travis

[mrwayne]

Take some time to look at these:
The Patent has been available since May - and links have been posted here.
I hope this helps with the confusion.

[mrwayne]

And

[mrwayne]

Also

[mrwayne]

Internal of Zed left blank for focus on l hydraulic loop.
p.s. this was the original location of the Lever arm - we turned it horizontal because of air trapping in the cyclinder.
But the function is the same.