Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mrwayne]

So,you admit that extra energy is being added at each stoke. How large is this input and what proportion of the net output is it? In this calculation do not include any energy that might be be recovered by exhausting the precharge energy.

Even if this device is overunity, and I am fairly certain it is not, it doesn't sound like the energy density of the output is large.

Seamus -
I tire of your immaturity, I have waited patiently - and you persist.

I am here sharing our world changing discovery - and you are busy eating "sour grapes" - what is up with you?

I would rather you chew your grapes here - and leave other inventors alone - I can take it.

One of the primary reasons I was able to find a system that produces Over Unity - was that I never tried to take a system and reduce all of the losses - instead I designed a system with Net energy - from the beginning.

I saw the Net energy possibilities in our Travis Effect - which I would not have seen if I was looking at reducing losses.

Your comments show "that methodology" as being lost in your dogma, I am sorry for you. I am merely humbled to be called the inventor - that's all - and I have the persistence and ability to see it through - I thank God for that.

We have never concerned ourselves with Over/Unity - My goal has been to provide Energy Independence -
And why you are such a turd about our long and hard efforts - must be pride.

We are very, and I mean very Over unity - and energy density - Our 50kw continuous model takes up the space of a full parking spot - and will power the average consumption of thirty homes (USA).

It operates with no Fuel, No emissions, Can run near Silently, and provides freedom.

p.s If it takes up too much room for you, have yours put in the basement - it does not need wind, the sun, nor any fossil fuel.

You might consider staying off all comments sites if you can't man up to your errors. I make them, make corrections and apologies, and then try not to repeat them.

On that same note: My engineers felt the same passion to protect the entropy idea of an  "operating system"  as well, yet they were professional about their original objections - and we are a good team now - you close doors, and very unprofessionally.

Wayne

[mrwayne]

My web Guru added a guest book to my web site:
http://hydroenergyrevolution.com/
If you would like to leave your mark - as witness to this work I would love for you to sign the book.
Also, I write weekly updates on the Current objectives page if you would like to keep track.
Wayne Travis

[mrwayne]

Hi Seamus. Of course energy is added at every stroke. It comes from the output. This is called LOOPING.


Energy density increases as you scale up, in a non-linear fashion. How ever low the energy density is, it is still a WHITE CROW. The energy density of the present machine is higher than all the Hot Fusion devices ever built at a cost of Billions of dollars. It is indeed possible that white crows are the only type we will see, soon, as all the black ones will have been eaten by academics.

Hello Netptune
Our system can be scaled and linked to replace the power of Nuclear - much cheaper and with a smaller foot print, so no worries here.
Just clean - safe energy.
We are currently Blue printing our Beta Models -
Our due diligence means we allow the inspectors to come, so I also spend time with the Demo model.
Yet, our understanding of the design capabilities are very advanced, very clear, and very scalable.

Currently - thru direct contact, and those Mark has made - we are offering the funding of the Beta systems in exchange for exclusive rights of sales, manufacturing, distribution, and maintains.

I heard comments about open sourcing - open sourcing has yet to provide the funds to see the project through - our goal is to make sure energy Independence becomes a reality - first.
We have had preemptive offers, which I respect - they are in the process of vetting.
Unfortunately - some people see the opportunity and try to become middle men - we need to deal with the people who can make it happen.
Somebody out here is in the right position, the right mindset, with the right contacts or capabilities - and have just been waiting for this discovery - I welcome them.
That is how all of our hard work has moved ahead - it has been a blessing.
If we have any trouble, or people wait too long to get involved - we will use the demo model to claim a few Prizes - ;-) 
Wayne

[neptune]

@mrwayne. In a sense this project is already open source, in the sense that you are hiding nothing. Ok, there may be further stuff that you are not telling , until you are granted further patents. No problem with that . Before my health forced retirement, I was a business man, in the sense that I worked for myself, and made a good living. But I get the impression that you probably run a large and diverse business which is a whole different thing. However that puts you in a strong position to do research and development, and marketing. How many inventions have been lost because the inventor was not in a position to develop and market the idea.
        In its present form your machine is more suited to groups of homes rather than individual houses. That means that to benefit from this, there will need to be cooperation between groups of people. That in itself is no bad thing.
        You seem to have a step by step plan in place to bring this to the world. Although the need is urgent, it can be a case of more haste less speed. To build a Nuclear power plant takes 10 years. And here in the UK we are just starting to build 10 new ones . My hope is that by the time the buildings are complete, Nukes will be redundant. Here`s to the Future.

[see3d]

This is a bit OT, but I love the sentiment expressed.  It is the same as I have expressed before about this device and others.  This particular one is an excerpt from:  A Student’s Guide to Cold Fusion -- Edmund Storms.  It is his closing statement on page 40 that I think is great:

"Science has been successful because certain rules of evidence were adopted centuries ago, the so-called Scientific Method. These rules require that many people using different devices duplicate all novel observations. Such replications reduce the human tendency to deceive and to be deceived. In addition, the behavior observed in these various studies must show similar patterns, i.e. important variables must have the same effect in all studies, regardless of the equipment used. Having an explanation for a strange behavior is NOT initially necessary, although eventual discovery of an explanation is important. This is a good method and has served mankind well when it is faithfully applied. Science fails when these rules are ignored. They can be ignored several different ways, the most obvious being premature acceptance. Some scientists think premature acceptance is so damaging that they base their careers on protecting Science from such a violation. A less obvious problem occurs when evidence is ignored because a scientist does not WANT to believe results that conflict with a favorite theory. Initially, cold fusion was rejected for the former reason. Now rejection is based on the latter. The first rejection was valid and consistent with the Scientific Method. The present rejection is not."

"Skepticism, when carried to extreme, is as damaging as naive acceptance. At the present time, many people respect the skeptic for guarding the high ideals of science. Unfortunately, skeptics frequently cause much more harm by stopping progress, stifling originality, and turning creative people away from science altogether. Although many examples of this injury can be cited from many fields of science, the continued rejection of LENR is particularly egregious because of its vehement nature and the importance of the discovery..."

"Remember that new and strange claims do not have to be blindly accepted or blindly rejected, but only explored with an open mind. Important new ideas always conflict with conventional understanding. Such conflict should not be used as a basis for outright rejection before the possibilities have been carefully examined."