Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[powercat]

I am sorry to say that this is getting beyond rediculous now.  Mark (and TK) have bent over backwards attempting to describe real physics using well accepted math principles.   Still, there seems to be a clinging on to something that Wayne has that might actually be overunity.

Well, his website (Now) does not claim overunity so, what is the conversation about then?  I really don't know what else Mark can type to make it more clear than he already has.

I admire Mark for doing what he has done here but, I think the time has come to let the man apply his efforts to something that actually might have some promise.

I thank you Mark for all you have done here, free of charge, to help to educate the rest of us.

Bill

The con man's followers will just keep repeating the same old arguments without ever showing any new evidence, despite his denials it is obvious that webby is a stooge for the Travesty propaganda machine, I think it's important that people like Mark, TK, mile high, John, and others continue to challenge this fraudulent claim, and keep demanding genuine evidence.  But as we all know they will never go away and come up with something new that actually works, because all they have in reality is repetitive posting

[mondrasek]

As you described the device the energy absolutely is lost.  Look at your own drawings.  You later added a clever yet absurd mechanism to reclaim almost all of that lost energy.  The mechanism is for all intent and purpose an unfolded mirror of the original device.  I evaluated your proposed device as you presented it.  You might recall that I asked you many times to present your complete analysis and you refused each time, stating that you felt you had provided enough information and would not be bothered.

Just as we never drew the device that would introduce the water needed to charge the system from State 1(x) to State 2, I also did not originally draw a device that represented the Work that the ZED can do while lifting from State 2 to State 3.  The physical device is not important for either of that input or output in an Ideal Analysis.  However, the calculation of the Energy that crosses the boarder of the Ideal ZED while transitioning from any first State to a second State needs to be calculated correctly.

The Energy added to the system by the introduction of the Water during the transitions from State 1(x) to State 2 has been calculated.

The Energy leaving the system as Work when the riser "lifts" has not been calculated as the integral of F*ds.

[mrwayne]

Do you get it yet?  Gravity is conservative.  Wayne is a liar.  You are acting as though you do not have even a very basic grasp on physics.  Wayne Travis claims you are an expert.  What does that say about Wayne's supposed experts?

More    I did not claim that Gravity is non conservative... You twisted our claim.

What is claimed - and missed or just  - is that we have designed a "mechanical" device that circumvents the conservative field of gravity.

Big difference - Which has enabled us the ability to utilize Gravity as an energy source.

[mrwayne]

The con man's followers will just keep repeating the same old arguments without ever showing any new evidence, despite his denials it is obvious that webby is a stooge for the Travesty propaganda machine, I think it's important that people like Mark, TK, mile high, John, and others continue to challenge this fraudulent claim, and keep demanding genuine evidence.  But as we all know they will never go away and come up with something new that actually works, because all they have in reality is repetitive posting

How logical is it to copy (puppet) insults made toward those that built and tested a Zed type system...

Here is what you miss - Independent replication VS 


We each make our own decisions - the self verified truth or 

[minnie]

   mrwayne,
                  non of the evidence from any of your representatives on this forum holds up
   because not one of them appears to have a grasp of even basic physics.
        You've got to show something for the years that you've been at it, then we'll
    start believing you.
        Try a wiki on mechanical amplification and see where that gets you!
                      Regards John.