Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[mrwayne]

It's incredible watching Wayne ply his craft.  It's very similar to debating with John Rohner.  In both cases they post incomprehensible goop and pretend that they are actually saying something valid.

I really hope this one ends where the good guys win.  It's soooo creepy to see this stuff happening in real time.  There must be a lot of passive observers reading this thread that can distinguish right from wrong.  It's incredible how so many of them remain mute in the presence of such wrong.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

- Edmund Burke (1729-97)

Is that your version of a "triumph"

Sad.

[MarkE]

Regarding State one:

Monderask is discussing an Mathematical Analysis of an ideal ZED.

His stated his purpose is to discuss Pv difference between a single and three layer system.

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

MarkE You jump to the conclusion that you have analyzed a ZED in Operation.

These are two separate subjects - as I clearly and complete shared a complete ZED operation.

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

It is a mistake to assume that state 1 as Monderask described in his Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED is the same as the state 1 I described - which is sunk ZED - with enough differential pressure to maintain neutral buoyancy of added weight or risers.

While ZED B is a Fully stroke ZED at the end of a determined and limited stroke - with a load balancing differential intact.

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

MarkE slow down, we are not attacking you, if you make these mistakes on purpose - that is wrong.

Wayne

Wayne Travis, do you now speak for Mondrasek?  If you don't and you aren't a mind reader then you had better let him speak for himself.  As for you, you approved of his stipulations and applauded his work.  Now that your minion Webby has noticed Archimedes' Principle acting on 21.5mm riser height that Mondrasek's stipulation ignored, what have you to say about that stipulation that you approved?

There is no mistaking that whether one starts with Mondrasek's stipulation or any real arrangement that the most efficient ZED that anyone can design is outperformed by a brick.

[mrwayne]

Webby you cannot have it both ways.  Either you accept Mondrasek's: Wayne Travis approved State 1 or you don't.  If you accept it then State 3 falls out as shown.  If you don't accept it then you change the problem.  So pick your poison:  State 1 as stipulated by Mondrasek and approved by Wayne Travis with State 3 as the result, or State 1 as your experience tells you which yields a different and still lossy result.

Repost:

Regarding State one:

Monderask is discussing an Mathematical Analysis of an ideal ZED.

Has stated his purpose is to discuss Pv difference between a single and three layer system.

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

MarkE You jump to the conclusion that you have analyzed a ZED in Operation.

These are two separate subjects - as I clearly and complete shared a complete ZED operation.

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

It is a mistake to assume that state 1 as Monderask described in his Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED is the same as the state 1 I described - which is sunk ZED - with enough differential pressure to maintain neutral buoyancy of added weight or risers.

While ZED B is a Fully stroke ZED at the end of a determined and limited stroke - with a load balancing differential intact.

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

I hope you can see the difference

Wayne

[MarkE]

See how incredibly creepy he is?  He is playing the MIB card and he is playing it to a specific type of audience.

I really and truly hope that you make the national media Wayne for all the right reasons.

Wayne has crawled over a bear trap with his fly undone.  Of course Wayne tells us that he is not seeking new investment.  Of course that would mean that he has no concerns that any prospective investors could be watching as he approved Mondrasek's non-physical stipulation, or as the inevitable result with or without that stipulation is a machine that is just a lossy piece of junk.  Of course he wouldn't be worried that it would dawn on a new prospective investor that all the HER / Zydro charade amounts to is a game of three card monty.  We know that because the self-declared the God fearing, Jesus loving Wayne Travis told us he isn't seeking any new investors.

[mrwayne]

Wayne Travis, do you now speak for Mondrasek?  If you don't and you aren't a mind reader then you had better let him speak for himself.  As for you, you approved of his stipulations and applauded his work.  Now that your minion Webby has noticed Archimedes' Principle acting on 21.5mm riser height that Mondrasek's stipulation ignored, what have you to say about that stipulation that you approved?

There is no mistaking that whether one starts with Mondrasek's stipulation or any real arrangement that the most efficient ZED that anyone can design is outperformed by a brick.

MarkE

I applaud due diligence, I ignore your comments and assumptions and bogus conclusions.

If you do you math right - I know the conclusion - will you have the honor to admit it - I know you have not finished - because the Math does not lie.

It could turn out that you are smarter than the 40 plus engineers that have traveled this road - that would be fantastic - but then we would have to solve why it works in the physical???

We will see if you do.

I know it will be hard for you - you have dished out so much fodder - it is going to be hard to swallow.

I tried very very hard to warn you. I find no pleasure in your errors.

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

Monderask can speak for himself - and has.

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

I presented the "operational states" so that you could make a true conclusion - nothing to do with Monderasks State 1 or any other.

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

Take care.

Wayne