Big try at gravity wheel

[MarkE]

So Archimedes Paradox has had me bothered when contemplating the operation of a ZED for some time.  I think I am close to a breakthrough on my mental block.  If you will consider:

Two columns of water, both 30 meters tall.  One column is in a pipe with an inner diameter of 1 meter.  The other is in a pipe with an inner diameter of 2 meters.  So the pressure of the water at the bottom of both columns is the same.  But obviously there is a greater volume of water in the pipe with the larger inner diameter.

If the pipes are filled from the bottom, does it take more work/energy to fill the pipe with the smaller or larger inner diameter?  I think it is clear that it would take more work/energy to pump the larger volume of water into the larger diameter pipe.  But on the upside of things, the work that can be performed by the water if allowed to leave the bottom of the column under pressure (and spin an electric generator via a turbine for example) is likewise greater in the pipe with the larger diameter.  Similarly, while the smaller diameter pipe takes less work/energy to fill, it can return less work/energy when draining again.  In short, the water in the smaller diameter pipe will have less PE than the water in the larger diameter pipe when both are filled to 30 meters.

The difference in PE can be shown in another way by plumbing them to a simple hydraulic cylinder as they drain.  Both pipes will cause that cylinder to begin moving with the same force which will drop to zero as the water level drops to zero, but the smaller pipe will move the hydraulic cylinder less far due to the smaller volume of water that it contains.  The integral of the force x distance (stroke of the hydraulic cylinder) is less.  This is to say the work it performs is less.  Or (stretching a bit here) the higher pressure for a shorter stroke relationship.

To get more out than in (work/energy) from a ZED I think it would need to be shown that the nested riser arrangement can produce an output integral of force x distance that is greater than the input force x distance.  Or not, of course.  One way to do that may be to fix an input pressure and volume (to simply comparisons) and then see if different proportions and layers of ZED construction will result in exactly the same output pressure/2 x stroke.  This (I think) can be calculated relatively easily.

Does this approach appear correct to anyone else?  Or incorrect for that matter?

Thanks,

M.

TinselKoala's videos already demonstrate that there is no gain in energy to be had by leveraging hydrostatic forces.

[MarkE]

...

Don't say to quickly "psi*a",  it is not that simple for the ZED, because of the layering.  Wayne was very explicit about the non-linear behavior of the ZED lift power.   

Red_Sunset

Once again you conflate terms, here: force, and power, when talking about a machine where the principle claim is a gain in energy.

[Red_Sunset]

Red, you continue to crack me up. Please tell me just how "Technology" and "Nature" are different. What principles does "technology" contain that are not fully part and parcel of "nature" ?

Physics... real physics, not pretend Travis-RedSunset physics... is universal. It applies to "technology" and "nature" equally. It is the same physics. In fact, what we think of as "technology" could not even exist at all without our proper understanding of the Physics of Nature. Our understanding of _some aspects_ of Nature is imperfect. Our understanding of other aspects is _perfect enough_ for us to engineer, with confidence. As our understanding of Nature progresses we are able to engineer more and more "esoteric" technologies.... but not a single one of them violates the basics of Thermodynamics, the basics of Engineering Statics and Dynamics (lumped together as Engineering Mechanics) or especially the conservation of momentum and the conservation of energy. No amount of hand-waving that _does not include_ proper scientific experimentation and demonstration has ever, or can ever, trump the textbooks.   

Hi TK,
I am happy to at least was able to crack you up and give you a laugh.  When it comes to me seeing the other responses tonight,  all I can do is cry by seeing such short mindedness.  But then who am I to judge.... "different strokes for different folks" they say.

I agree, the choice of working was not as good as it could have been to describe the intended meanings.
The cracking difference of meaning between "Technology" and "Nature" defined.

Nature: The natural process process flow takes the system through its cycle. The natural expected flow path which is by standard ~symmetrical .

Technology:  The un-natural flow path. If you would leave the natural primary process to its own devices, it would never follow the desired path.  It requires a subsystem that interferes with he primary natural process in order to steer it in a predetermined path.

If you would have read the previous mails with comprehension, I would imagine that you would have gather the intended meaning, but nevertheless my apologies for the confusion caused

I will not add more comments in response to the additional comments made by yourself and other member in separate posts since I feel that additional information is not gonna solve the mental block that is shown.
Most of those issues questioned should resolve themselves in due time by themselves, if allowed to mature by sleeping over it.

Regards, Red_Sunset

[MarkE]

Which direction are you going in know?

You stated that there is no difference between multiple risers and a single large riser, I provided proof that there is a difference, so you are incorrect.

I am afraid that you are badly mistaken about your "proof" of any difference in principles of operation.

Support my idea that stressing the molecular boundaries can store and release energy,, I think that has been done in spades.  Support my idea that gravity is a force that acts upon all of the water molecules,, again done in spades.
Support my idea that a small external force can be used to control a larger force,, again done in spades.

The HER claims are with regard to energy.  Force is not the same as energy.

Back to the multiple vs. single riser.

Since I have given you proof, now it would be time for you to share your data from your tests that support your claim.

If you must have some of my data then it can be found in the original thread.

You said some number of posts back that you could not locate your data.  When you do locate it, kindly publish it.

[MileHigh]

since I feel that additional information is not gonna solve the mental block that is shown.

There is no "mental block" at all, it's just an ongoing attempt to manipulate people's thinking patterns.  It's just another attempt to brainwash susceptible people so you can get them to part with their money.

Don't fall for this cynical ploy, this nonsense.  Red_Sunset can try all he wants to feign that Wayne's system works but we have already seen when he is pressed for details he plays the "proprietary secret card" when it comes to Wayne's "technology."

He has nothing, nada, zero.  You can expect to never see a single working product from Wayne.  You can expect that you will never hear Wayne or Red_Sunset explain how the system allegedly works because they have nothing to explain and as a result they can't explain anything.

MileHigh