Big try at gravity wheel

[conradelektro]

The big gravity machine works like this:

Each of the two machines works half way, then two of them will work full way. And it helps that they are on two different continents because their operation will be independent.

And one does not need experimental proof because everybody knows that 0.5 + 0.5 = 1 specially if the two 0.5 values were established independently.

Independence of the two 0.5 values is essential because I would of course take a 0.5 value if I knew that you have already established your 0.5 value and I want the result to be 1. But such cheating does not work if the two 0.5 values are found independently.

I hope that intelligent people can see the reason behind this proof. But as always, big oil will buy some debunkers and they will deny the truth.

Naturally, there are only few people as intelligent as me, therefore I could as well have said nothing.

There is a slim chance that Grimer comes close to my outstanding intelligence. He is currently developing a theory that one machine works quarter ways and the other three quarter ways, which leads to the question whether two unequal parts can constitute "full way" in a gravity machine. I flatly deny such nonsense. Gravity machines have to do their business in equal parts, because gravity always needs two heavenly bodies to attract each other, and if you do not want your gravity machine pairs to fly off into space they need both to be "half way".

So, "half way" is the thing to achieve in a gravity machine. And you need two of them. I wonder why the Wayne crowed has not stumbled upon this obvious fact. Well, they will know now.

Greetings, Conrad

[MarkE]

MarkE,

You seem to be deliberately not following the setup I am trying to walk through.

At the start, the the idea was to fill the GAP with air, then add air as the cylinder lifts.

I pointed out that you were not adding in enough energy, you disagreed.

Is it not a strange stance for YOU to take since we are walking through  what I MYSELF am explaining, and YOU are showing the math for?

So use the correct scenario, air filled to the bottom of the cylinder and air added while the lift is made.

Webby I am amenable to anything that you want to try.  You just have to describe it.  I started with your  sketches. 

By gap do you mean the 15mm between the stop and the top of the piston, or the annular ring between the cylinder and the piston?

I added only the energy needed to lift the payload weight.  I offered to add more "air" which requires more energy.  Just specify the condition and I will set it up.

[Marsing]

webby i get only little fraction of this all, so what to do with displaced water after lifting, i am thinking to make close loop now,

[MarkE]

MarkE,

Show the misrepresentation, would you?

I do not see any such thing in any of the videos.

The videos point out *and demonstrate* that it takes a smaller volume of air to do the same thing.  They do not show an OU thing nor do they say that it is, not what is shown in the videos.

It is a step, just like putting petrol in your tank,,

Webby the video demonstrates the 2000 year old Archimedes' Principal that it takes an identical displaced water volume to produce the same amount of buoyant force in each case.  Air does not supply the force in either case.  Displaced water supplies the force.  The set-up on the left displaces with a combination of a cement insert and surrounding air.  The set-up on the right relies entirely on air to displace water.  In both cases, the air transmits the force of the displaced water to the underside of the cups.  The focus that Tom Miller places on the air is entirely misdirection.

[minnie]

    Sunset,
               dunno about the production line, sounds as if he's moving in to a Portacabin
                                     John.