Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[wildew]

@TK

Well, my thoughts are going like this right now:  No matter how you add the water, it is going to be equivalent to stroking a small piston a great distance.

I think I'm done debating or possibly even responding to most, if not all, of these comments. - Let the flames (or whatever they are called here begin) - The statement quoted is ridiculous and you know it.
"small piston a great distance" or large one small distance - same thing - same work - get over it.

I will continue to experiment and post results - might even correct some with thoughts counter to the objective of what this discussion should be about.

And some wonder why there is so much positive communication that doesn't show up here .....

Back to the lab
Dale

[TinselKoala]

I said,

Well, my thoughts are going like this right now:  No matter how you add the water, it is going to be equivalent to stroking a small piston a great distance.

And then wildew replied,

@TK
I think I'm done debating or possibly even responding to most, if not all, of these comments. - Let the flames (or whatever they are called here begin) - The statement quoted is ridiculous and you know it.

If I had explicitly said, USING MONDRASEK's SYSTEM AND INPUT TUBE, would  it have seemed less ridiculous to you? I thought that would be taken for granted, but apparently not.
Would you care to take my illustration of pouring one cc in at a time and tell me why it's wrong?

"small piston a great distance" or large one small distance - same thing - same work - get over it.

I'm glad we agree on this point. What does that do to the "overunity" claim though? It would seem to turn the Zeds, and all of the models like yours and Mondrasek's, into ordinary compound hydraulic cylinders.

I will continue to experiment and post results - might even correct some with thoughts counter to the objective of what this discussion should be about.

And some wonder why there is so much positive communication that doesn't show up here .....

Back to the lab
Dale

Well, good for you. But wouldn't it be better if you simply refuted my thought experiment with a logical argument, carefully reasoned, instead of reacting so emotionally and with your veiled insults? Maybe less satisfying, but certainly more filling.

Isn't this discussion supposed to be about where the extra work comes from in a Zed system? I'll tell you this much with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY... it is not coming from the Zero Point energy.

[TinselKoala]

I am going to add one small thing for consideration.

In this system,, the LAST in is the FIRST out.

Most will not be able to get what that changes,, some will.

Think about it.

So if Mondrasek, with his BLUE water inside the Zed, poured RED water into the input tube to make the lift, he'd get that same RED water out on the sink. That makes sense, since there is only the one inlet/outlet into the one chamber, and nobody is blowing skirts or overflowing, so that chamber's water doesn't mix with the other water in the Zed.

But how does that produce any overunity or input work savings?

[LarryC]

Got to praise webby1 in that he has a far superior understanding into how the Travis system works than the closed minded know it all skeptics.


Regards, Larry

[AmoLago]

That is the same as what I have come to understand and have argued previously as well.  So unless someone has other ideas the results from my test run are:

Input of 74 grams raised 10mm.
Output of 1217 grams raised 10mm.

Dennis, we've discussed that the entire way I vent water and reintroduce it is actually an energy neutral cycle.  This could be more clearly shown if I was using a reservoir with 74 grams of water instead of the funnel and raising and lowering that reservoir 10 mm.

Pre lift:  241 mm
Post 10 mm lift: 281 mm

Hi mondrasek,

I have a quick query on the above three posts I've hand picked out of the last couple of days (you can't leave the thread for a moment without 5 more pages appearing )

It seems to my untrained eye that you don't need to only lift your input water over 10mm, but over the head of the water and thus, in the current setup at least, that would require lifting it from the underside of Zed where the water is obtained from, to a minimum of 241mm.

This would seem to me that the input work done was 74g x 241mm = 1783.4g-cm and output from the lift being 1217g-cm, which obviously seems to be nowhere near as good!?

So it seems that there's a need to find a way of finding out what we can take out from the down stroke too. I believe this is where Wayne has pointed to the 'extra' from his ZEDs in previous posts.

Either that or I've not understood something in the work calculation correctly?

Amo