Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

Trying to help you out Powercatt - Add another dollar to the pot... but this was too funny.

...............

Mark - you just cheered me up again.......... Let me drop a Brick for you........

....

I had assumed that you are a not just a  , but totally missing the ZED process - I admit it is getting harder to believe you have missed it.... but your intentional diversions and attacking members is something else.
.....................

Of course - this diversion;

"Any professional engineer who thinks that free energy is to be had lifting and dropping weights needs to have his certification revoked.  They need to go back to school for extremely remedial training."

Those Excellent Engineers - did not try to turn our system into a "false lifting weights diversion", Spring or Brick....

Our Excellent Scientist and Engineers knew to hold their conclusions until they finished the analysis of the whole system.

And then joined our team, when you make a statement toward the credibility of others....  who do understand ....well,  Enough said... Smile.

If you are a  - I understand all the twisted diversion - you have a job to do... remember - avoid the true ZED process - or you will fail.

...................

Good Day.

Gee Wayne your latest final farewell to OverUnity.com only lasted a week. 

I see you are back to thumping on your completely false claims again.   I am delighted that you keep building your already solid record of scienter.  You are in so deep now that there is no reason to expect that you will suddenly confess to your running fraud.  Whomever may be on your payroll, any support they offer to your inane and false claims will not be career enhancing.  I hope Mr. Riley has his E&O insurance paid up.

mrwayne

Re: Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED
« Reply #926 on: March 10, 2014, 11:24:14 AM »

    Quote



Well men, It took a good woman to make me see the light......

This is my Final Farewell to O/U.com

...

[MarkE]

I brought up the CVT for a few reasons.

A CVT by itself has more loses when compared to a normal automatic transmission by itself.  When you take 2 cars that are otherwise identical the one with the CVT will accelerate better and return a higher fuel efficiency.  That is something with more loses making a more efficient system.  This is not the normal condition, normally more loses makes for more loses.

The CVT can match the input to output requirements between the engine, wheels and driver much better, that is, it can take the input from the engine at a constant RPM and deliver it to the wheels at a variable RPM.

This completely apples and oranges comparison is instructive:  A CVT does not make an automobile over unity.  Neither do the losses of the Nested Russian Dolls of Ignorance improve the efficiency of anything other than Wayne and company's ability to suck money out of the wallets of gullible investors.

[camelherder49]

Webby-

It gets back to your point much earlier about Nascar
and their drafting techniques. After a stack of cars
get together at the correct intervals, all cars in
the process attain more speed and better fuel efficiency.

What the heck?

[MarkE]

Webby-

It gets back to your point much earlier about Nascar
and their drafting techniques. After a stack of cars
get together at the correct intervals, all cars in
the process attain more speed and better fuel efficiency.

What the heck?

And yet none of them attain over unity.  Nor do the Nested Russian Dolls of Ignorance improve over the simple compression spring they replace at a cost of far greater:  cost, complexity, and volume.

[camelherder49]

This was speaking to the point that was made earlier
about adding additional under unity processes always
causes greater losses to the overall operation.

Twist that any way you care too!