Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mondrasek]

errr i neeed to rrrrespond i need to hit that reply button it makes me feel goood let's make some shit up about converting the Buoyancy into hydraulic production and add some more bull about our layering system and they will give me some more attention it makes me feel like a god and i'm not going to show anything har har har

Here is what I don't understand:  A guy comes to OVERUNITY.COM forums to tell us about his (supposed) OVERUNITY device.  There are videos of obviously very expensive machines.  There is a know de-bunker who has visited, witnessed, and not been able to rule out the possibility that there is something to his claim.

Why are you mocking him?

Anyone who claims to believe in OU is usually labeled as a nutter believing in pseudoscience, right?  But isn't this the website where we listen to them and try to help them find the error in their idea or help them move forward with their idea?

Please don't take me as some sort of zealot who believes that Mr. Wayne has found "the Holy Grail."

I believe we need to show him the respect he has repeatedly showed us.

I also agree with MileHigh that serious questions should be presented to him.  We can only learn more from his answers.

Thanks,

M.

[mondrasek]

Here is a simple study of the effect of adding a "Travis effect" type fixed displacement member inside of a buoyancy device.  The device is designed to have the water (not air) introduced from the bottom.  So we start with everything only in air at one atmosphere.  As the water is pumped in and rises it will cause the air trapped inside the "piston" chamber to compress slightly.  Assuming a simple isothermic case where P1*V1=P2*V2 the reduced air volume and resultant head pressure available for buoyancy is calculated.  In order to allow for both cases to still have 12 inches of possible stroke I found that I could only block 33.4" of the inside of the piston air chamber with the selected 22" diameter cylinder.

The results show that, due to the reduced amount of air and subsequent reduced volume reduction due to compression, a higher head pressure and resultant buoyancy force can be achieved in case #2.  But I was unable to find any other significant results.

Please note that this is just a simple ideal case study where all members are 100% ridged, massless, and have no material thickness.

Thanks,

M.

[johnny874]

  M.,
I think where he lost me was when he started thanking God for the great things he is going to do.
With me, I like working out in the open. I have no need to keep secrets.
Then again everyone knows I believe Bessler war succesful and was highly intelligent.
Could be where I am different, I don,t mind doing what,s already been accomplished.
I still find Bessler and what it takes to replicating his work worth while.

         Jim

[mondrasek]

Jim,

I too have chased after the Bessler wheel.  I've done dozens of simulations, all that I can get close to unity!  But unfortunately no success.

If you are a fan of Bessler you then know that he also gave all credit for his wheel to God.  He was holding out for the sum he required to "sell" his invention for the purpose of funding some religious academy I recall?  Others can correct the details.

I am fine with anyone not believing Mr. Wayne's claims for any reason.  I just want a mature and respectful exchange since, so far, I have seen no requests for funds, replication, or other resource wasting items.  So I cannot label this a scam that is hurting anyone.  Instead, it has inspired me to study and learn several new things.  For that I am indebted.

I appreciate everyone who helps to expose and drive off scammers.  As well as those who help to educate the misguided and misled.  I don't believe we have any hard evidence of any of those malign intentions so far.  All evidence for those conclusions is so far circumstantial, I believe.  So I say, ask questions.  And listen carefully to the responses.  Study, and learn.  At least until something more solid than "I've seen this pattern of behavior before and it never ends up satisfying me"! is evident.

I appreciate that everyone's threshold for calling something a scam is different.  But just because some individual's tolerance has already been breached, it should not be taken as the reason to be disrespectful to an individual that may still have valuable input to the rest of the community. 

Thanks,

M.

[MileHigh]

Wayne:

I am going to share a few thoughts with you.

For starters, for your demo I would disconnect your entire monitoring apparatus for the first run.  In your outdoor clip you can see what looks like an oilfield Christmas tree of high pressure hydraulic and/or pneumatic hoses.  Your monitoring system could easily be powering your device and nobody would know any better.  Plus, seeing 25 or so digital strip-chart recordings of your sensor information is just going to make people glaze over.

Repeat, strip off your entire sensor array and just do a bare-bones demonstration of your system for your first demo.  Run it for a month continuously and show it outputting power in an absolutely unambiguous way.   Seeing a set of lights mounted on a panel with a digital watt meter is NOT a way to demonstrate the alleged output power of your device.

What about what you plan to demo?  In my opinion you can sketch out what you plan to do without revealing anything.   So what do you have?  It looks like your buoyancy system will be used to run a hydraulic pump.  Will the pressurized hydraulic oil power some kind of oil turbine (not sure of the correct nomenclature) that then runs a generator?   I am sure that we are all curious to know how you take the power supplied by the buoyancy system and turn it into something useful.  What will the form of the output power be in?  How much power?  How will you measure it?  What will the load be?  Are you using a COTS electrical generator?  If yes, who is the manufacturer and what is the model number?

In your groaning clip, we see what appears to be an electric motor that is driving a hydraulic pump.  Is this true?  Where does the electrical power to drive the motor come from?  What is the pressurized hydraulic oil being used for?

What is going on in both the groaning clip and the outdoor clip in terms of what you are doing with your alleged free power from your buoyancy system?  It appears that there are hydraulics and pneumatics running and you already stated that there is a battery running some stuff.  Both the pneumatics and the hydraulics require a power source, and your slow oscillating alleged free energy buoyancy systems seen in both clips makes you wonder how you convert that into pneumatic and hydraulic power.

I could go on for a long time with questions.  I don't feel any of these questions are invasive and infringe on your alleged core IP built around the buoyancy system.  All that I see in those clips appears to be two contraptions that are powered by compressed air or hydraulic oil or a battery setup.  I don't get any sense that those two setups have a core power source that is driving the system.  To me it looks like both setups are being driven from some sort of power source.  That is my honest opinion.

You say that you have to pressurize the system when you start it up.  Well, you are putting energy into the system in the form of compressed air when you start it up.  How much compressed air energy do you put into the setup at the start?   How large is the compressed air volume and what is the PSI or kilopascals?

If you say that none of the compressed air provided to the system at startup ever loses pressure, then how come you have to repressurize it every time you start it up?

So Wayne, I doubt that you will answer my questions.  Right now your proposition has very little meat on the bone.  It's up to you to decide to answer or not before your demo for your investors.

If you have learned anything from this posting perhaps it is that your clips just generate a long list of questions for some people, they don't prove anything.

MileHigh