Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

MarkE,


Added the Integral F*ds for the Archimedes and they also agree with the original spreadsheet results. So we still have a 33.55% efficiency increase for the Zed over the Archimedes that needs to be explained.[size=78%] [/size]


The majority of people coming to learn about the Zed would not understand your math approach and would think that we were trying to fool them. But they do easily understand concepts like buoyancy, pressure, force, volume, water levels, etc., which can be used in simple easy to understand math formula. A few that come, will like you, insist on Integrating F*ds and now I understand that we need to have that available. So, thank you for the heads up.


Larry

Who cares how much less horrific one scheme is than another?  The HER/Zydro claim is for a gain in energy.  No such gain occurs.  Do you drive your car around with the emergency brake on?  Do you get excited about a huge boost in gas mileage when you release the emergency brake?

Nature doesn't care what any individual may or may not understand.  It's hilarious that you would claim that your convoluted spreadsheet that used dozens of cell formulas in place of a few lines of algebra was constructed to create an easy to follow illustration of your claims.

[LarryC]

Wayne Travis you do not speak for me.  Larry's spreadsheet remains broken.  The analysis above shows that there is no gain to be had with the serpentine piston.  As soon as we release the device, we lose energy that we paid.  There is no sign of over unity.  There are only losses.

MarkE,


Where is it broken now? You've proved that our Engineering calculations that you been saying were wrong, are correct, as they match your Integral F*ds calculations.

[mondrasek]

It all depends on what one wishes to determine. 

1) Since we agree that there is no energy gain going between State1 and State2, we have established that the "ideal Zed" you have set-up can only do something that you find interesting by buoying the risers and pod. 

2) The risers and the pod have zero mass, so no energy is gained by their increase in height.

3) Buoyancy force is just acceleration due to gravity operating on fluids.

4) Gravity acts conservatively on any mass independent of state:  solid, liquid, gas, plasma.

5) Now that you are using the integral of F*ds, you know that as soon as we release the risers, that the stored energy will go down. 


Do you agree with all of that or not?

MarkE, I agree with all of it except for your statement #5.  And that is because I have done the math and did not find those expected results for this unique construction (ZED).  I would fully have expected your statement to hold true due to my training and experience (and knowledge of history).  But I could not find the classical expected result to present itself.  And so I did, and still do, ask for a double check of the analysis of this 3-layer ZED model.

[mrwayne]

I think that Wayne drops in once in a while to try to do some damage control.  He desperately wants this this thread to create the illusion that the Zed is real and his company is real for the true hard-core rabid believers.  Hence he himself, Red_Sunset and LarryC always try to imply that everything is real with their cynical manipulative use of the English language.  Where else could Wayne possibly get money?  It's only from the hard-core rabid believers with deep pockets.  Think of the people that built replications of the Mylow "motor."  There was one wealthy person that was paying a machine shop to build his replication.

There is gold in them thar hills and Wayne wants that gold.

I will repeat again, I am so creeped out by his fake quasi North Korean "Leader" persona mixed in with the all of the religious jargon and fake preaching.  Big Wayne is going to give you sausages and soothe your soul.  Eeeeek!!!

Lets score:

People who independently built ZED's and then analyzed to understand the system - are trying to share with the ones that would rather not.

And you have what to offer?




..........................................OK

Got it.

Wayne 

[mondrasek]

So you must be building away in secret then, so that you will be the FIRST actually to show on a real system, more output work than input work, and a real self-runner. Certainly nobody on Travis's payroll can do that much.

TK, I see no reason why you keep making things like this up, and stating them in the form of a fact that you will repeat as true unless some "proof" is given that they are false.

And let's not even mention the little incident involving calculations that brought you and me together in the first place, shall we?

TK, you can bring up the "mondrasek wheel" (please Google it if you want to see it everybody) anytime you please.  But it appears you are trying to "shame" me for a mistake from my past, rather than discuss the Mathematical Analysis.  And you have tried that before.  And the last time you did so I think I was open and transparent about what happened during that occasion as well.  So why the thinly veiled threat again?  I openly admit I made a mistake then and that you were instrumental in helping me realize that fact.  I have thanked you multiple times for helping me to find the error in what first brought me to OU.com and "Energy research" in the first place.  So, what of it?