Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[mondrasek]

I would really appreciate you coming forward with your continued input into the debate between Webby & MarkE as neither seems to be connecting with the other - one is wrong or both are wrong ! - I feel you are likely best placed to highlight the differences in the arguments & their validity, or not, which ever is the case - your objective input would be appreciated by me as I am having trouble following Webby's arguments & logic at times, to be honest.

Hi Fletcher.  Good to hear that you are back.  I hope everything went well with your last adventure.

To be honest, I have not been following the discussions (debates?) between Webby and MarkE in detail.  And I really can't see a reason to get in the middle of it since I believe the debate is moot at this point.  And that is because the Ideal ZED model that has been Analyzed cannot perform the CYCLE that was intended.  MarkE pointed out my error in under calculating the Buoyant Lift Forces some time ago.  He correctly pointed out that State 1 (see diagrams on page 73) could not exist unless the ZED was restrained from lifting.  He showed the correct State 1X that would occur if the system was unrestrained.  But State 1X includes the condition of a vacuum in the pod chamber, which is undesirable for the Analysis that I was hoping to perform for two reasons:

First, if the ZED was charged from State 1X to some State 2X, the introduced Volume of water would begin to flow under a negative Pressure (due to the vacuum in the pod chamber).  That fact makes it a bit counter intuitive and opens arguments about the proper Energy integral F*ds.

Second, the CYCLE was intended to be State 1 -> State 2 -> State 3 -> State 1.  If we modify this to include the corrected State 1X the CYCLE should be something like State 1X -> State 2X -> State 3X -> State 1X.  The final step from State 3X -> State 1X was intended to be achieved by simply venting the charge by "pulling the plug" in the pod chamber.  But with State 1X having a negative Pressure in the pod chamber, that cannot be achieved.

And so the discussions about this Ideal ZED Analysis that are currently ongoing are not of great interest to me.  Because they are not Analyzing a correct model, AFAICS.  I would prefer to discuss a model that can perform the intended cycle.  But that idea has not been accepted by the others at this point.

M.

[mrwayne]

Never mind.

[minnie]

    Mondrasek,
                     what's the point of moaning about nobody wanting to look at your idea
    of how it should work?
          First you've got to describe what it is you want.
    mrwayne's never shown anything, neither have the others.
        The thing we've been looking at so far is dead, just a passive device. You can't
      get any movement out of a balanced system so you have to give something away
      to make it go.
                          John.

[powercat]

p.s. It is the purpose of this web site to search and discover..... why do you want to stop that?
Take care

The first bit of your post has been answered, you must have missed it go back and look at marks posts again.

I want to stop you, and if webby1 just built the device he would see it doesn't work, I know you have to keeping character, but you know perfectly well why you are the only one of being singled out, your fraudulent claims endure repeated broken promises over the years, I think it's about time I dust off the list of and give it a fresh look, fraudsters like you need constant reminding of your treachery and lies.

[minnie]

    Webby,
             you must realise the air in the ideal ZED is incompressible. This needs a bit
     of thought, but it does have consequences.
          If your thing works make a bench top never ending fountain,say, and tell us
      about it. Even if you don't do videos, I'm sure people will believe you if you say
      it works.
          Remember the Tinselzed, it went well but it soon stopped!
                              John.