Room for Free Energy and its Physics

[mrwayne]

[quote author=Tarsier_


You need to use "my" system in your debunking claim - not yours. Thanks.

I provided accurate drawings since yours are misleading, contain function errors, mistaken order and
omitted the key concepts used in the process.


Pay closer attention to Markus Video in the Video -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTbIJnEOw8Y&lc=UgzZVZ2Yld1XqiS7BbB4AaABAg.9dnMD1elZwd9dnSPWu-6sX


As a reminder - I deal in field tested results.


See attached - After Pod Travel is reached, and locked, air is allowed to equalize, and Both Sides have Full
buoyant force - but only one can move - can you guess what happens... details on the drawing.. Thanks

[mrwayne]

For a start: Work is force x distance. Your claim is that you get out more "work" than you put in: Hence OU.

Here you are mistaken or misleading in two ways - in the Video we share the difference between OU claims
and our system, I claim free energy, not OU, I have been clear about that till Ad Nausium.....sic


Second - your definition of work and OU is lacking context and that is the error that leads to so many failures
in building Free energy Devices -


On that note, I have built 5 Different styles of Free energy Devices using the correct measure of work and
they all generate Free Energy - but none were over unity... Once you understand the proper formula for
free energy - its easy peasy.


Work is a force moving a mass over a distance (and that mass has a value related to the value of gravity
(which is why Markus, and engineer, used the moon versus earth example in the video).


The Work is "UNITY" when the WORK corresponds with the value the mass in relation to Gravity (where it is).


So every single time you say OVER UNITY - you are making the claim that the Mass has more weight than
its relationship to Gravity, and thus the work performed is greater than the relationship to gravity.


I have not claimed "OU" since I discovered and analyzed the Travis Effect - and realized my error - which
you are still making.


Buoyancy is a perfect example of Unity - when the lift force is directly proportional to the volume displaced
(without interference - like the Travis Effect) - and gravity causes the corresponding pressure related to the density.


FACTS:


The Travis Effect "REDUCES" the Air Required to do UNITY...


The Travis Effect does work BELOW unity...


The Travis Effect created the ability to design a (many), Work Differential systems.


When you pay less than Unity for Work, then sell it at UNITY - you have Free Energy ... FACT.


Unless you can debunk basic math Such as 10 Unity-5 cost=5 Free energy - you can not debunk this system.


And in the future - If you are going to quote me - please provide the exact quote and date please .


Thanks


Mr Wayne

[Tarsier_79]

The fact is:

You have and will be able to convince people that your system works, even though it does not, and can not.

I have not claimed "OU" since I discovered and analyzed the Travis Effect - and realized my error - which you are still making.

Finally we agree on something. Your device is not OU.

Buoyancy is a perfect example of Unity..

Again, I agree with you specifically here.

The Travis Effect "REDUCES" the Air Required to do UNITY...
The Travis Effect does work BELOW unity...

Agreed, agreed.

Unless you can debunk basic math Such as 10 Unity-5 cost=5 Free energy - you can not debunk this system.

... your designs are so easy to debunk. The output - cost = 0 free energy. Perhaps you could introduce a new spreadsheet again. Longstroke V1.3?

Anyway, if anyone else would like an examination on any specific mechanism, I will be happy to oblige.
Wayne, I look forward to people seeing your mechanism for what it truly is.

[mrwayne]

The fact is:

You have and will be able to convince people that your system works, even though it does not, and can not.
Finally we agree on something. Your device is not OU.
Again, I agree with you specifically here.
Agreed, agreed.
... your designs are so easy to debunk. The output - cost = 0 free energy. Perhaps you could introduce a new spreadsheet again. Longstroke V1.3?

Kaine,


Please, please Mr Kaine, debunk that my system does not result in free energy.


If you Can prove that this simple equation is wrong" 10-5=5 " Than I will concede and state that you are the greatest!


Prove my system is 10-0=0 That would be very valuable to everyone.


Otherwise you are a troll, distractor, jealous, maybe just lonely - whatever your intent is - its disingenuous at the best.


I have had to redirect you to my designs repeatedly, you have described my system incorrectly repeatedly,
you have made up quotes,  - I have had to correct you on multiple voids in your knowledge of buoyancy
and work, and I have provided ample evidence to prove my system does in fact have a remainder after each cycle.


I don't care if you agree or not - I don't put feelings into my proof - I put science.


You have 20 years at not building Free energy systems, I have 12 successful years - first P.E. tested "success"
at generating free energy was in 2010.



You are the guest student here. I am teaching, so as long as you stomp your foot and ignore real science and facts
- feel free to close the door on your way out.


I made lots of errors until I understood Unity properly - you might just try learning  - it is the key to most of your
bad assumptions - and as practice - you might leave the assumptions in the rear where they belong.


To repeat - please, please debunk my system - with science and facts - Thanks!


Sincerely


MrWayne

[mrwayne]

I added the equalization stages to the process visual.


Thanks For you Input!


Mr Wayne