Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

Hello Mondrasek,

A "builder" just stopped by shook my hand and gave me a running Sterno motor!

He drove 80 miles!!!

I love it.

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

I will be surprised if Mark ever goes any further with you - he is smart and can surely see the obvious conclusion.

The obvious conclusion is that the system is lossy as has been shown.  It is Mondrasek who has failed to show that he obtains an OU result by any valid analysis.

The dodging and diversions and demands, intentional omissions, premature assumptions, degrading comparatives, making self supporting claims, assumed ruler of the universe, and     are much like TK - but I am not yet convinced.

Yes, it is sad how Mondrasek has asked people to help him figure out his work for three weeks, while he steadfastly dips and dodges every request to see the work that he says he wants checked.  The obvious conclusion is that Mondrasek has been blowing smoke the entire time.

Quick question:

How many of these user names are "TK

John
AL
alokin alset
Orbo 3000
minnie
TK
alset alokin
Bill

?

If it is not an anagram of Nikola Tesla then it is probably not TinselKoala.

For John's name and address. Private message me.

Sorry if I missed some -  do not read the other threads.

If you have his actual name and address then you can also determine his science qualifications.

[mrwayne]

The obvious conclusion is that the system is lossy as has been shown.  It is Mondrasek who has failed to show that he obtains an OU result by any valid analysis.Yes, it is sad how Mondrasek has asked people to help him figure out his work for three weeks, while he steadfastly dips and dodges every request to see the work that he says he wants checked.  The obvious conclusion is that Mondrasek has been blowing smoke the entire time.If it is not an anagram of Nikola Tesla then it is probably not TinselKoala.If you have his actual name and address then you can also determine his science qualifications.

I know that Mondrasek is an excellent engineer, and  has went to great length to analyze the system (independently) and has his conclusions.

Its up to you - I suggest you let him lead his thread - I know you 'think' you know the answer - he does.

I do understand your steadfast faith.

On TK

You are right, he checked out with plenty of qualifications. What he is using them for now - at least on this thread -  I do not know.

I am glad he is helpful to some - but being a total urd isser - does not help anyone.

[MarkE]

I know that Mondrasek is an excellent engineer, and  has went to great length to analyze the system (independently) and has his conclusions.

Whatever his conclusions may or may not be he has failed to show how he reaches them, despite opening this thread with a request that others review them.  It is very queer that three weeks in he avoids showing the work he said he wants checked.

Its up to you - I suggest you let him lead his thread - I know you 'think' you know the answer - he does.

Not only do I know it, I have posted it:  The scheme is fundamentally lossy.  Adding more risers just makes it worse.

I do understand you steadfast faith.

It's called physics.

On TK

You are right, he checked out with plenty of qualifications. What he is using them for now - at least on this thread -  I do not know.

He seems to have performed a number of neat demonstrations that refute your claims.

I am glad he is helpful to some - but being a total urd isser - does not help anyone.

Then you stop doing that and do something useful.  Selling false claims is not an honorable endeavor.

[mrwayne]

MarkE

You have shown your version - diversion , not the one Mike was showing.

I do not waste my time with your letter to the readers - they are on to you.

Prove your "not" by letting Mike lead you to the OU

Wayne

[MarkE]

MarkE

You have shown your version - diversion , not the one Mike was showing.

Mondrasek has had three weeks to show his analysis.  We all still wait.  Perhaps we will never see it just as we will never see a working free energy generator that you claim to have from you.

I do not waste my time with your letter to the readers - they are on to you.

Oh perish the thought:  People actually know that I follow the physics and not silly misdirection like the "Travis effect".

Prove your "not" by letting Mike lead you to the OU

You'll have to ask Mondrasek to come up with some evidence.  Sadly, it is not something that either you or he offer.

Wayne

Are events in motion?  Maybe yes, and maybe no.