Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[mondrasek]

Do I understand you to be saying that you refuse to discuss basic physics as it directly applies to your example?  Your example in going from State 2 to State 3 moves the water columns towards equalization, does it not?  The same physics applies to each pair of annular rings divided by a riser wall as it does to my example, does it not?

MarkE, I am refusing anything but to discuss the MATH.  That is the only thing that matters, AFAIKS.

Principals of basic physics can be discussed later.  But first, please finish your math when you can.  Also, I am happy to help out since the volume changes in each annulus due to the changing height of the risers gave me a pause (once again).  Luckily I had encountered that issue a few years ago in the original discussion on this subject and was able to quickly recover again due to my previous "learning curve."  I'm happy to share that knowledge if it would expedite your own learning curve.  And, of course, I have no doubts that you can get by the tricky part that I found!  But the offer stands if it is useful.

[mrwayne]

There is not and never was net energy.   Only time will tell.

Mark,

Does it give you any pause to make conclusions before the homework is done........

I will wait. We have done ours.

Good luck.

Wayne

[mrwayne]

Let us presume for a while that the mathematical analysis as presented by LarryC is correct, in that it shows an energy increase or identically speaking a 'reduction in input' over a full cycle.

1. The first point would be to qualify that 'an energy increase' is in fact the same as a 'reduction in input', and simply a matter of semantics as to where you consider the lowest energy state of the cycle to be.  I'd be interested in Wayne or LarryC's comment to that.

If the above is agreed, then question then becomes, where did this energy increase during the cycle come from? It must be transferred from somewhere, unless you are going to challenge the first Law that states energy cannot be created or destroyed.

Nowhere have I seen a coherent explanation of this process.

We have claims of non-conservative gravity. This would imply lifting some mass was somehow easier when inside a ZED compared with outside of it. Certainly one can use levers to achieve lower force requirement but this is at the expense of displacement so we would expect in a conservative field such as gravity that the energy requirement remains constant.

If it works, then the ZED must break that symmetry. No where have I seen coherent explanation as to how this occurs within the ZED.

Does it somehow 'modify gravity' locally?  From all accounts the machine doesn't becoming  lighter while working, the workers are not floating away while working on it and I don't think Wayne is claiming that this is the working principle, so we can discount this.

So, from the agreed starting point given in point 1.  I'd like LarryC or Wayne to provide a coherent explanation of  how that happens.  The description must explicitly state how and where the energy increase occurs. It cannot contain reference to  time-based quantities such as power, as that is only valid when certain conditions are true that cause time to be eliminated from the math.

Perhaps, when this explanation is offered, we can then use mathematics to model JUST that process, as it is the only interesting part of the machine cycle.

I appreciate your turn and tone from trying to discredit our engineers - to asking a good question.

I think Monderask is taking a logical and clear method.

With the proper Math - of the whole system - opinions are not part of the equation.

Thanks Wayne

[mrwayne]

  Hi,
      thank you mrwayne for answering my question- by not answering!
   Now I feel I have enough information from Mondrasek and MarkE
   to be able to have a crack at the maths myself. It'll take me some
   time but between us we'll get to the bottom of it in the end.
                    John

Am I confused or what?

I thought you were just a simple farmer who had friends that did the math you could not understand? 

p.s. trying to create stories to support your other stories - is just.... TK (thats "Thumb Knitting" - or sock puppetry).

Gravity is Always on 

Wayne

[LibreEnergia]

I appreciate your turn and tone from trying to discredit our engineers - to asking a good question.

I think Monderask is taking a logical and clear method.

With the proper Math - of the whole system - opinions are not part of the equation.

Thanks Wayne

You need still need  to clarify point one. Unless you do that any further discussion with you is futile.

The only part of the system that is actually of interest from an energy point of view is when transitions from it's state of lowest energy to the highest.

In 4 stroke engine for instance, from an energy point of view it is only necessary to look at the power stroke. An engine will still "work" in the sense that it will pump air if it is driven from an outside source, But we see the power stroke alone is responsible for the energy output.  All other part of the cycle simply reset the conditions to allow that to occur.

From a thermodynamic view point we don't even need to consider that is has pistons or fuel or any other physical embodiment.  We just model is as a volume of ideal gas with starting pressure p1 and temperature t1, heat is introduced and the volume expands to a pressure p2 and ending temperature t2. From those values alone we can deduce energy efficiency.

So, for the ZED, you should then be able to

1. Identify the lowest energy state in the zed cycle.
2. Identify the highest energy state in the zed cycle
3. Describe how it transitions between the two states. To be valid for performing an energy balance,  such an explanation cannot make reference to time based quantities.