Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[Artist_Guy]

@TK

The University of Oklahoma' s College of Engineering's School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering in Norman is the mere "local college"?

Why would you take the word local to mean 'mere' as in lesser, or incompetent or something? I meant local to the project. Local is same state, since I'm several away.


I was agreeing with you that it was a good idea to have a college look at it. Yet even when agreeing, that is made into something contentious. Hmm.


   

[mrwayne]

Is that still true when you have a bubble of "preload" extra kick being shuffled about? And buoyancy helping the lift with weird displaced virtual mass going on (maybe?)? Probably. But nobody knows. Maybe that we still don't is on purpose. Don't know. Maybe it's all been for the local 'journey' that Mark mentioned. Don't know.


As I said, history is on the side of the skeptics. By the time your screen name is Seamus105, I am sure it all will have been settled. 

Hello Artist,

Many have been taught that gravity and Mass are intrinsically linked - just as Archimedes' volume and buoyancy is misinterpreted to confirm - the misinterpretation is to transpose that observation and assume it holds true in all possible scenarios.

Our System proves they are not linked - Gravity is not limited or controlled by Mass - or density - instead Mass and density are controlled by gravity. Our system shows that Gravity can also be utilized in the absence of mass.

As long as the wrong understanding persists - that Volume/density - is the limitation of taking advantage of the gravity - one Will not understand our system - nor the impact of the discovery.

It time - I do believe that from the measurable physics of our system - it will be understood that we utilize Gravity "internally" at greater than external "mass" values - an awakening of understanding of how and why our system works - will be realized.

It can be said many ways - such as we utilize the force of gravity with less mass, or that we or we have virtual mass and utilize its effects.

But if you are limited in observation to the capture of gravity - and limit it to a single mass - you will not understand our system, or understand why our efficiency rises in an additive fashion within those layers..

I have said it is simple to see - but not simple to understand - one has to compare the lift forces of (Internal Mass usage) buoyancy - as Larry and Dennis have shown, and compared that to the External total mass of the ZED to see that either mass was missing to account for the buoyancy - Or that our current understanding of gravity has some loop wholes - or both - maybe a few more ideas  not authorized for release (and with People making threats - it is clear and proper due diligence).

The key point - Gravity utilized in our system is not dependent on actual Mass 

Thanks for the clear comments.

Wayne

[neptune]

A quick note.  I just tried using my pod and only the outside riser, I have played with different setups but did not bother to measure and since I did that yesterday for 4 risers and pod,, that was what I was using, leaving out my first riser to help with air blowing under the skirt,,

ANYWAY, my max lift like that was only 463g, compared to 730g with 4 risers.. this is the whole weight of the outside riser and added mass.

Edit:

Something struck me as odd, so I went outside and re-did some stuff.

outside risers can hold 324g
outside riser weighs     90g
lift was                462g

I will go measure displacement of pod and its weight.

Pod is partially full of water but it has a lift of 42g.

So should that not be 324g - 90g + 42g = 258g
and                         463g - 90g = 373g
So                         373g - 258g = 115g from where??

Maybe my math is wrong.

Hi Webby1.I have made no secret that I am not brilliant at mathematics. This is not surprising as I am only a retired truck driver, but I am not completely dumb. I have been struggling to understand the above post, and I suspect so were several others but were afraid to ask.


So as I understand it you are just using the outer riser and the pod.You say "outer risers can hold 324g. " I guess you meant to say "outer riser [singular] can hold 324g. So I assume that the outer riser if placed in a tank of water will require a weight of 324g to sink it. This riser itself weighs 90g



The pod can lift 42g


Then you say "So should that not be 324-90+42=258". My calculator gives 276
324 is the net upthrust of outer riser
90 is weight of outer riser
42 is the net upthrust of pod.


and 463-90=373
463 is the total lift [stated earlier as 462]
90 is the weight of the outer riser


so 373 - 276 =97


Therefore 97 grams unaccounted for.

[neptune]

Hi Webby. Yes I am quite sure that we are all interested in the why, rather than exactly how much. I just wanted to be quite sure on what you were saying , rather than criticising your calculations. As it looks like I will be waiting a while for surgery, I have started to make a model of my own, although it will be a slow process. All I have done so far is the pod.

[parisd]

MrWayne, Excuse me... Asking why the ZED stalled in 4 hours does not reflect what you are willing to discuss.

This is an essential information, from now no one should waste his time or money trying to replicate your device without you giving this information. You are entertaining dozen of fans in this thread with hope of OU, they deserve an answer.

You probably have arrived to the point where yourself after years and lot of $ spent have realized that there is no OU in your machine, just something that last hours a bit like the long pendulum of the London science museum.

I read that the additional layers increase the global efficiency from 104% to 300% from where come the additional 196% from the outside layers?? I dont understand all of the ZED as you have figure.

You have top scientists and engineers (read one hundred) that advise you. What means "top", they must have figure long ago what is the physics behind the ZED, a ZED is not rocket science; Archimede force, some simple fluid mechanics, a first year university student in physics or engineering should be able in a 2 weeks project to put on the table the physics involved and say yes or no if there is OU in a ZED. I cannot imagine that after years and $ you dont have this physics formula in your hands, if you dont show us, it is easy to figure why ...

It was so simple to tell us what was the problem to keep credibility something like "look guys, it stall because water leaks at one valve and water pressure drop fast" then we have an explanation (true or wrong) for your first failed demonstration that does not comprise the claimed OU.

Desapointed

To@,
I understand why these questions are important - but they do not reflect the topics that our advisory team is willing to discuss at this time.

Our immediate focus is to resolve the external issue we created during our last upgrade.

We will be providing clear and accurate information regarding the principle of our operation and design, and our ability to use
Gravity as a non conservative field - if this is the advice of our Validation team.

I am sorry, but the Questions that "assume entropy" of an energy source do not yet understand our system.

It is not in our best interest to engage in debates at this time.

Thank you for your interest.

Wayne Travis