Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mrwayne]

Hi Wayne.My understanding of where you are at right now. You have resolved the big problem that has been bugging you with the issue of the bolts/tie rods. So now you are back on track with your test programme, and when you are satisfied with the results, you will schedule another visit by Mark Dansie.
    Question. In view of the above, is your team still continuing with the desk top demonstration model?
    You seem to be in the mood to talk philosophy today.So here is a philosophical question for you. Many of your team members are hard sceptics, and originally came to disprove the technology. Then they saw something that changed their minds, and stayed to become part of the team.
     The big question is, what was it that they saw that changed their minds? The answer probably varies from one man to another. Perhaps you could give us one or two examples?


Respect, neptune.

Hello Neptune, yes we are back on track.

No, the Demo Challenge is "On" - it has nothing to do with our validation delay - that was an assumption - not from me.
Our engineers decided that a very simple model would be helpful for their demonstration to the validation team.

As I saw the usefulness of the model they wanted and I was gifted the prize money - same time - one plus one = the opportunity to fund the ZFC.

You guys and gals are in ZFC - (ZED First Class) - your work will help teach generations - do you see the value in that? It is well worth the effort and funding.

Little Philosophy I learned - A wise man plants a tree that he might never be able to climb, so that others might be able.

One gift of encouragment I have over everyone else - Good Men and Women from around the world are sharing their OM Gosh moments with me - those will be in book, or movie lol.

The common term I hear - is goose bumps suddenly ran up my arms..... when the gravity of the discovery hit...pun intended..

As far as why others follow - that is as big a questions as why people who are very educated and do not think Free energy is possible - spend time on an Overunity web site?

I will leave that to the Others for now.

Thanks, Wayne

[neptune]

I appreciate being included on the back Chanel conversations,, I would like to be included in ALL of them,, thank you.

TK,

What kind of coffee do you like?? I will send you some if you simply will take a moment before you post,, you like instant? Starbucks has there
Iced Via caramel that is fabulous.   Send M your info and I will send you some.

NOW,, children stop with all this garbage.

I have seen an anomaly,, I am playing with it and I am trying to tie it out.

None of this stuff that you are putting up here is helping me in getting there,, so if you are Not BUILDING, please ask questions that those of us that are MAY be able to answer.

TK, I have not been able to come up with a test that allows me to back the system up,, I have to over compress the risers with mass to start the reverse lift process,, HOW can *I* get rid of that problem.

MH,, yes what is needed is all the final data,, but if that can not be given then what may I be able to give you to get past this issue?? or at least move on to the anomaly that is in the room.

So, HELP ME HELP YOU, quit with all this stuff and give ME guidance.

Hi Webby1. In the quote above you are addressing TK, but as you posted this publicly, I feel it is appropriate to comment. What exactly do you mean by "back the system up", and "the reverse lift process".Exactly what problem are you trying to get rid of ? Do please clarify.

[mrwayne]

Hello Webby,
You are discovering the production difference between the up stroke and the down stroke.
The up stroke is captured by lifting a weight - and the process was Precharge first and then lift volume added.
The down stroke is pre charge out first (free flow) - and then pressure and flow out from the remaining weight.
The process is not a complete reverse.
Also
If the input load is still on - you have full head even after your lift - pushing the other ways like pushing a spring from both directions - only their is only so much give.
Very cool mind bender - output removed - still full power in the spring....................this is important.
If you wanted to lift the original input weight .....lift that weight directly and measure how much it weighs as the heads retract - that is measureable hint hint.
Lots to observe and learn here I promise -
Wayne

[neptune]

@Webby1. Thanks for that clarification. That`s a start as now I understand what the problem is. Sadly at this stage I do not know the answer, but the more readers who fully understand the question, the greater the likelyhood of an answer.
     One way to look at it is this. Use the "divide and conquer" technique. The problem has to be either in the Zed itself, or in your input pump. Is it possible to disconnect your input pump? Or build a copy of it? If it is replace the Zed with a balloon and use the pump to pump water into the balloon,. Put the balloon under one end of a small lever[half a see-saw], and put a weight on top of the lever. So the balloon and lever now takes the place of the Zed. Do you still have the same problem, or not ?
    OK, its a crazy theory, but it is something else to try.
     Maybe Wayne has a theory?
Sorry, Mrwayne beat me to it.

[fletcher]

As far as why others follow - that is as big a question as why people who are very educated and do not think Free energy is possible - spend time on an Overunity web site?

Thanks, Wayne

Skeptics who don't believe in 'something for nothing' in energy terms [like harnessing conservative gravity] can still believe in potential for free-energy technology & engines derived from this.

For a layman any free-energy technology's modus operandi might be generically thought of as OU, hense the legitimacy of spending time on an Overunity web site.

The subtle difference between OU & free-energy is sometimes missed - an engine that uses a differential or gradient derived & harnessed from nature to cause asymmetric torque would be free-energy but since the environment is providing the energy 'top up' it would not be OU.

The world is not a dearth of such devices, in fact they are very common - solar, wind, water & tide power, barometric pressure & temperature/thermal devices etc - each has a natural cycle where the energy is provided by the environment for the basis of a free-energy engine, but they are not 'closed system' OU as you would describe it, using conservative forces - they are 'open systems' that do not invalidate the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Hence there is a much greater statistical probability of finding free-energy thru harnessing an environmentally occurring force cobbled to a mechanical device to exploit it than finding OU from conservative forces in a closed mechanical system.

That's why skeptics of OU spend time at a free-energy web site.