Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

MarkE, please look at the ZED in State 3.  There is still a positive water head on the pod and each riser!  Therefore there is still much buoyant Force to be resolved.  Ego, the ZED could NOT come to rest in this condition.  It must stroke further if unrestrained.  This proves that the ASSUMPTION that Energy in is equal to Energy out was wrong.  Unless you have some other way to resolve the remaining buoyant Force without more stroke?

Mondrasek, would you like to bet?  The system as presented is physically and mathematically correct.  Why?  Because of the venting necessary to create State 1, the pod and the risers are stable as you stipulated as a requirement for the State 1 condition.  You will recall that I went to pains to discuss with you how the system would be brought to State 1. 

In State 2 3108 cir mm²*mm was added to the system.  Unrestrained that volume lifts the entire cross-section by a distance equal to the volume divided by the cross-section as shown.  A rising tide does indeed lift all boats.

If you object to State 3, then you must object to your own stipulations for State 1.  At the end of State 1 the massless materials:  The "air", the pod, and the risers are all in effect simply floating on the surface of one pool of water.  State 2 holds those masses restrained while water is pumped in.  State 3 releases those masses so that the water can equalize.  They rise, gaining no work because they are massless and the previously lifted water falls, losing a great deal of the energy added during State 2.

[MarkE]

I realize you did not mean this seriously;

But you are right regarding the Set up pressures - the first time you introduce the differential density fluids - and set them up to the sunk and stroked position - that requires external input.

That input never leaves the system - and is continually recycled.

SO check in never check out - exactly

Wayne

Your piece of junk machine is a sink for energy.  The special features of:  A serpentine hydraulic piston corrupted by pockets of air, and with an outer venting column all take a useful machine:  a hydraulic piston and turn it into a lossy piece of junk.  This is of course contrary to your often stated lies that those very features enable you to cheat gravity.

[mrwayne]

Ah another wall of BS text from the shameless huckster Wayne Travis.  One might wonder why oh why is Wayne so anxious to try and deflect the analysis that shows that even under idealized conditions, the ZED is less useful than a brick.

Maybe the lying huckster wasn't completely honest with us about his investment situation.

Maybe the lying huckster has some fish he is trying to reel in and he doesn't want them to see the empty bag he is trying to trade them for their cash.

Note that in his entire wall of text, Wayne Travis cannot refute anything in the analysis.  Note that in the entire wall of text Wayne Travis fails to bring in any actual new information that supports his false claims of getting free energy by cyclically lifting and dropping weights.

MarkE,

I am still patient with you.

As far as your insinuations and slander, my motives have been clear and consistent from my first post.

......

I know, our ZED system is tough to wrap your head around for some, you are very close - don't give up.

If all you see is lifting and dropping weights - you missed the production which is removed before dropping, and the re use of each half cycles charge.

That is not dropping a rock twice.

Wayne

[mondrasek]

Mondrasek, would you like to bet?  The system as presented is physically and mathematically correct.  Why?  Because of the venting necessary to create State 1, the pod and the risers are stable as you stipulated as a requirement for the State 1 condition.  You will recall that I went to pains to discuss with you how the system would be brought to State 1. 

In State 2 3108 cir mm²*mm was added to the system.  Unrestrained that volume lifts the entire cross-section by a distance equal to the volume divided by the cross-section as shown.  A rising tide does indeed lift all boats.

If you object to State 3, then you must object to your own stipulations for State 1.  At the end of State 1 the massless materials:  The "air", the pod, and the risers are all in effect simply floating on the surface of one pool of water.  State 2 holds those masses restrained while water is pumped in.  State 3 releases those masses so that the water can equalize.  They rise, gaining no work because they are massless and the previously lifted water falls, losing a great deal of the energy added during State 2.

In the condition you show in your State 3 drawing the pod is still submersed in 28.537mm of water.  It is displacing 89.652 cc of that water.  Are you saying that does not create a buoyant Force equal to ~89 grams?  What is keeping it from rising further?  Where is the equal and opposite force that is cancelling this buoyant Force that remains?

The three risers are likewise still positively buoyant due to the head difference of the water on their OD and ID, right?

[mrwayne]

Your piece of junk machine is a sink for energy.  The special features of:  A serpentine hydraulic piston corrupted by pockets of air, and with an outer venting column all take a useful machine:  a hydraulic piston and turn it into a lossy piece of junk.  This is of course contrary to your often stated lies that those very features enable you to cheat gravity.

MarkE

Lots of losses - and bigger gains...

The ratio to losses is too high with a single layer ZED, We have agreed with you.

The ratio to losses does not increase at the same rate of output increase as you add layers.

Monderask and Larry detailed that.

But go to three layers - smile

Reuse the differential pressures, with a dual system and WOW.

DOn't give up!

Wayne