Knitel's InfinityPump

[wizkycho]

Hi All !

Since Hans was somwhere arround all the time doing silly things,
disassembling everything in order to find out how things work, as any young apprentice would,
I propose to call this Push-Pull setup Knitel-Lieven InfinityPump.
It is consisted of two Knitel's InfinityPumps (that may but not prooven expirience pressure paradox)

Wiz

[Koen1]

Come on guys, keep your cool!

@Wizkycho: I am sorry but I can't really disagree with Hans and the others...
That paper Hans presented seems to be a very good one, and from your posts
I do get the impression that you don't fully grasp fluid mechanics and hydrodynamics,
just like Hans basically said...

But if you are so convinced that your setup will work, then why don't you build one
and show all of us that you're right? It doesn't look like a very difficult setup to build.
You should be able to get a couple of valves, a weight, and the right size containers?
Who knows, you might just prove us all wrong eh?

regards,
Koen

[wizkycho]

@koen1 and all

I'm a newbie here (hidrostatics, hidrodynamics) and nobody said that you have to pay something here to learn something
and I manged to learan about interesting hidrostatic paradox.

Now I introduced 2 KIPs mechanically conected in first KIP's floater(LTW - lighter then water) and pump on input pipe of other KIP
they are in counter phase one KIP's floater is in LTW and other KIP's floater is in HTA (heavier then air) state.

So KIP1(HTA) expirience pressure that makes him unable to pump, and cause of it is initial pressure 500g/cm2 (5m height input pipe and surface cm2).
To lower down that pressure I'm trying to use bouancy of KIP2's(LTW) state. Is that bouancy sufficient ? is question that I would like to be logically
explained (and Hans is unable to stick to the exact topic and problem). Both floaters are made to be 5kg in air and is overall lighter then water by 10kg (-10Kg).

My thinking is that that bouaynt force from KIP2 will be able to pump all the water to KIP1 (of course helped with KIP1's water goes out of cylinder making underpressure on floater and 5kg floater) 
The functioning of This push-pull is totaly identicall to one KIP except added pump on input pipe and connection of bouyant force from another to that pump.

I think it now works.


(I put all of my concentration on exact setup not on person - this is the only right way to approach these designs.
Hans has another approach)

I don't know nothing about any person, do You (only think that You do)?

Wiz

[Koen1]

@koen1 and all

I'm a newbie here (hidrostatics, hidrodynamics) and nobody said that you have to pay something here to learn something
and I manged to learan about interesting hidrostatic paradox.

Now I introduced 2 KIPs mechanically conected in first KIP's floater(LTW - lighter then water) and pump on input pipe of other KIP
they are in counter phase one KIP's floater is in LTW and other KIP's floater is in HTA (heavier then air) state.

So KIP1(HTA) expirience pressure that makes him unable to pump, and cause of it is initial pressure 500g/cm2 (5m height input pipe and surface cm2).
To lower down that pressure I'm trying to use bouancy of KIP2's(LTW) state. Is that bouancy sufficient ? is question that I would like to be logically
explained (and Hans is unable to stick to the exact topic and problem). Both floaters are made to be 5kg in air and is overall lighter then water by 10kg (-10Kg).

My thinking is that that bouaynt force from KIP2 will be able to pump all the water to KIP1 (of course helped with KIP1's water goes out of cylinder making underpressure on floater and 5kg floater) 
The functioning of This push-pull is totaly identicall to one KIP except added pump on input pipe and connection of bouyant force from another to that pump.

I think it now works.

Hmm okay I must think about this variation of yours a bit

(I put all of my concentration on exact setup not on person - this is the only right way to approach these designs.
Hans has another approach)

Well, ad hominem is not really a nice way to disagree with people, I agree with you there.

I don't know nothing about any person, do You (only think that You do)?

Excuse me?
Are you now accusing me of making baseless accusations?
I hope not.
But to answer your question, although I am fairly certain that this is not what you
meant, yes, I do know quite a few things about quite a few people other than myself.
And I see where Hans was coming from, his hydrodynamic analysis does seem to be
correct, and so it was a matter of you maintaining that your idea will, is going to, and must
work, while everything in classical hydrodynamics says it shouldn't.
I don't want to get into the little fight you two were having, and in fact I do not want
to dismiss your idea completely based solely on what the texbooks say,
but the only way to prove that your idea works and the books are wrong is
to build it and show them.

If you like you can look at it like this: back in 1900, all aerodynamics textbooks
said heavier than air flight was impossible. All professors on universities taught this,
and even proved it with experiments.
Then two stubborn bicycle repair men decided to build a flimsy airplane...
... and managed to do what everyone had been taught in school was impossible,
they flew a heavier-than-air vehicle on its own power.
They didn't get stuck in the phase of bickering and arguing with others who did
not believe it was possible. Instead, they agreed they were going to show them
it was possible and hey started working on their design and building test versions.
And after a while they actually managed to make it work.
After that, the nay-sayers could whine and argue all they wanted, but it is very
hard to maintain that something is scientifically impossible if it flies overhead.

See what I'm saying? You can get stuck in the arguing phase, or you can
show people you're right by building a working prototype.
I for one can't wait to see your prototype working.

regards,
Koen

[wizkycho]

Come on guys, keep your cool!

@Wizkycho: I am sorry but I can't really disagree with Hans and the others...
That paper Hans presented seems to be a very good one, and from your posts
I do get the impression that you don't fully grasp fluid mechanics and hydrodynamics,
just like Hans basically said...

But if you are so convinced that your setup will work, then why don't you build one
and show all of us that you're right? It doesn't look like a very difficult setup to build.
You should be able to get a couple of valves, a weight, and the right size containers?
Who knows, you might just prove us all wrong eh?

regards,
Koen

@Koen1

Hans written very well postulates and some of his drawings has similarities and that is it, just simmilarities. So you approve
actually his harsh crticism based on simmilarities...it is obvious your judgement is wrong and you want to suck up to Hans who thinks that
he is Keely himself.

but such approach I just did (above) and that You two make here all the time is irrelevant. This is not celebrityes we are talking about
we here on the other hand have possible or not working device. And if none of You can point finger and say wrong is this and this and this...
then just go and read Victoryas Secret.

Wiz