Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[mrwayne]

Dear puppet master - I am still waiting on your MarkE creation to answer to his lies about the lack of anomalies.....
Or how he supposedly proved our ZED system does not work....
Or how he did not make any mistakes and everyone else did...
Or how he solved the boot strap error...
Or how Larry was wrong all this time....
Or how adding layers did not improve the efficiency..
Or to ever discuss the reuse of the pressure from one ZED to another...
We will not forget.....and we will be patient.
Even when you change names again.
Four days waiting for the answer.

[MarkE]

No Mark, you are still wrong.

You have not introduced, or shown, a device, or mechanism, that not only supports Riser 3 while the vacuum is present but also lifts Riser 3 while it is using that vacuum to lift Riser 2.

What is present in the system that can do that is Riser 2.  Riser 2 supports the full negative force of Riser 3, and it lifts Riser 3 thus Riser 2 see's the full negative force from Riser 3 and as such, in your spreadsheet, that OD force on Riser 2 must be negative, not the positive value you have assigned.

Another test that any one can run is to take a cup and half fill it with water, invert the cup in a sink full of water,, according to you the cup should rise up and out of the water lifting the water inside the cup with it, it does not.  In order to lift the cup up and raise the water level inside the cup above the water in the sink it must be pulled up.  This condition is still the same even if you put a cork, or a ping-pong ball inside the cup.

As I have correctly stated you have bootstrapped Riser 3.

You are hopelessly lost.  The movement from State 2 to State 3: All 2.59 mm of it occurs for the same reason that the water bottle moves from the fully equalized pressure in the third picture to the fourth picture where it has drawn in and lifted water from the outer soda bottle resulting in negative gauge pressure in the water bottle.  You are willfully ignorant.  You are simply going to keep repeating your version of "No it isn't" ad infinitum no matter how many times I demonstrate how utterly and completely wrong you are.  See once again the pictures below. 

I have fully described the soda bottle / water bottle experiment.  Go conduct it.  Learn something.

[MarkE]

Or, maybe you are one of a few people who still believe that it does not.

there is a special quote from one of Wayne's disciples of duplicity.  No one with any science knowledge or any common sense for that matter should ever be fooled into believing that lifting and lowering weights cyclically generates net energy as Wayne Travis and his cadre falsely claim they do.

[MarkE]

PowerCat,

The device I built showed that the system can work.

If you are placing bets on anything then I would suggest that you at least try the simple experiment I outlined in my response to Mark.  Try that little test and tell the group if indeed the cup magically lifts up and raises the water within the cup above the water level in the sink, if it does not then Mark is in error, if it does then I am in error,, simple.

Your dubious claim for your contraption was a generous 75% efficiency.  Even if one were to take that claim, your device was well under unity: refuting Wayne Travis' claims.  Try the soda bottle test.  It proves what I have been telling you.

[MarkE]

Not what I said, minnie.  I said they are not analyzing a correct model.  Just as my Analysis was shown to have errors, so has the model that I presented in the first place.  You do recall the reason they were presented?  The reason was to see if others could confirm they were correct or not.

It is funny how early on Wayne Travis approved and lauded your "ideal ZED".  Now that it has been proven fundamentally lossy you find it is no longer relevant.  All of Wayne's contraptions are fundamentally lossy.  None of them generate surplus energy.