Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[fletcher]

See3d .. LOL - soon you will be 100% percent confident of your sim, logic & the formula's, & that was your target IINM.

I've attempted to constructively cross reference your logic without seeing the actual volumes, masses & formula's you are using [I guess I could work them out from your data compilation but that would take valuable time].

The prize Mr Wayne & his team are so confident of having achieved is a paradigm changing one - one can never be to careful in checking for errors in formula's or logic, though this may seem redundant to some - a lot of credibility rides on it.

You are correct & the OU capability predicted is way above unity [large margin of error insurance] so a few minor aberrations or omissions isn't going to affect the results to much [the 80:20 rule] - if things were predicted to be much more close & marginal every detail would have to be accounted for accurately - this is why TK was questioning Webby's results when considering margin for error & scientific bias etc, because the results appeared to be possibly marginally significant at best & not demonstrably OU as was perhaps expected.

BTW - when your sim is complete to your standards I expect others to replicate your sim in other 'off the shelf purpose built' programs to compare results.

The new build challenges should also answer a lot of questions independent of Mr Wayne's own team building a desk top demonstration of a self sustaining pump well able to identify & measure input & output.

[mrwayne]

Hi Mr Wayne,

Okay,  love game time. I am not a member of Mr Webby's team, but have a question as I am a friend of  Mr. Webby, will your team have access to your new improvements or will this be based on the current demo model specifications that we both understand? Just want to make sure we are on the same playing field.

Thanks, Larry

Hello Larry,
Our team is restricted to what is currently released - you have gleemed much already - I will offer suggestions and lessons learned if asked.
Teaming with Webby is between you two. You both have demonstrated talent, and self motivation.
If it is to be  seperate teams - I will give a certificates of ownership to the runner up if it happens that way.
Thanks!
Wayne

[AmoLago]

BTW - when your sim is complete to your standards I expect others to replicate your sim in other 'off the shelf purpose built' programs to compare results.

This is what I've been hoping to do and I've been Google'ing like mad to find something that doesn't cost the earth. I'm only just getting in to this so this is probably old news.

But anyway, from what I've found, there are clearly heaps of games and sims out there for educating yourself on specific setups/systems/forces etc. I thought Google's SketchUp might do it, with SketchyPhysics (Newton SDK) plugin, but I struggled with it last night.

However, I've now come across Algodoo (previously Phun), at http://www.algodoo.com/wiki/Home. At 3 Euros I thought I'd give it a try and let others know of it for anyone who doesn't have a sim or hadn't heard of this one.

Looks like it should be a fun night.

[TinselKoala]

Algodoo/Phun is fun. I've got a couple perpetual motion machines that work in Phun. One is a gravity wheel and the other is powered by an overcentering spring. No tricks like hidden motors... they just work.


Meanwhile, back in the DeepBunker....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUlBqLM6Naw

[neptune]

@Mrwayne. On your website you say that there is to be a change of emphasis, and that you are now working on a simple basic table top model. I get the impression that you are still having problems with the data collection model, in that although it consistently demonstrates OU, it fails to meet some other criterion that you have set yourself, and for that reason you have not yet called in Mark Dansie. You may [or not ] wish to tell us more about that.
       I did say months ago that IMO a simple basic model would be more convincing to a casual observer, so this change of policy definately has a positive side. The new challenge is exciting, and I am sure there will be people who will rise to that challenge.
       One thing I found strange is this. Re the challenge model, I don`t think you gave any specification on the size of this model. And yet you say that gaps of a quarter or half an inch between ringwalls and risers will work OK. This is a bigger gap than in your Data collection model, yet I was envisaging a much smaller model would be built for the challenge. Could you please help to clarify this. I love the idea of a self acting water pump model, simpler than trying to generate electricity, and yet has a visible measurable output.
@See3d. I am intrigued by your idea of a one layer model. Please give more detail. Are we talking about  a pod and one riser?