Hello Seamus,
I am glad you are doing your due dilligencse - good form.

I was going to ask you to explain this premise a little better, I am trying to follow your logic in your hypothetical example, but I realized you think our O/U comes from the precharge - no - It does not.

"To be 'overunity' the ONLY energy available to enable  cycling between the two states is represented by the initial state shown with a body of water initally raised above a free surface. This equates to a 'pre-charge' of the Zed device. At the end of the cycle this precharge must be at least fully intact and for overunity, be raised by delta h."

You seem to be saying (assuming) that energy for overuntiy must be present in the precharged "state" in order to cycle....... your premise of our operation is wrong.

If this is true - I am begining to see why you offer opposition, well done.

Before I continue - let me say - I agree with your conclusion based on your premise.

Your premsie - A sum of what you know and the assumption you based on those physics are correct.

For a little clarity - the precharge of the system is merely to set the stage for the operation of the system - it is "not" the operational - or cycling energy of our system.

Since you base your premise on the assumption that our energy to operate comes from that source - you can not analyze our process.

Precharge is set up - it is a one time cost to put the water and air into the chambers - it is only counted as a cost to account for all the energy that goes into the system - it is akin to counting the energy used to bolt the tire onto a car, or putting water into the radiator.

Why the cost of precharge is  mentioned - When our sketics reviewed our "Non" Hypothetical system - I graciously accepted the
"Exceptional Burden of proof" which included all input - including filling the tanks with water/air - as input energy.

The Sketics noted on the Video - that the Precharge values did not get consumed and continued to return to the same set up - each stroke - and even the next day - without any additional input.

Missing these points made by others is where you and I get seperated - those were key points to hear.

The level of sketisism - that we openly subitted to - was far beyound what you have realized - and we passed.

I will add another post repeating and expalining our operational process - and "energy in" and where it comes from.

Wayne

Operational input:

With both Zeds precharged (filled with water and air)
then equalized - (common Column equalization)
We have a state of being - where the resistance to lift (the weight of the risers and any added weight is counter balanced by the other Zed. Teeter taughter - is a good example of the static state.

That is very important - in the static state - nothing is moving - all things are equal
If the system were to be caused to move - the resistances change immediately.

The up going Zed will have the resistance of the hydraulic cylinder used to capture the buoyancy beyond the buoyancy used to float the riser and weight.

The lowering Zed has benefit of the weight of the riser and any additional weight.
To be clear - our teeter taughter - "when moving" is no longer equal

To start the "moving" - energy must be added to overcome the new resistance - the hydraulic cylinder.
Now follow closely - in the up direction - the added resistance 'increases" the required head pressure in order to overcome the "new resistance"

The energy added - become the new head - and the resistance is overcome - the system strokes and produces and stores the Hydraulic production - the energy added - continues until the end of the desired stroke.

Now - that head is still fully intact at the end of stroke - not just the value to overcome the resistance - but also the value to stroke.

The next step is to stop adding any energy - and equalization occurs again - everthing moves to center - naturally.

Note: the energy required to overcome the resistance - was converted during stroke into a second energy - while the original energy used is still intact - you see "head"  and the resultant air pressure "is" our opposite and equal reaction.

Now we are half way through a cycle - and heading the other direction - one difference than the start - the first Zed is still all the way up - and the other zed is all the way down.

Equalization after the stroke - is not the same as precharge set up - where both are at equal distances.

We call this position post "Free flow" when the higher tank (risers are higher - with fully charged Head) is allowed to flow into the lower Zed.

Free flow can be easily calculated (for those following) as the average between the top of stroke head and the bottom of stroke head (In my examples offered on line 6.7 psi hydro)

From the post free flow position we have a balanced teeter taughter pressure wise - but not in travel.
When we now reverse the direction of the system - the same resistance to upward travel is realized -

The energy required to overcome that Resistance is now less than the initial stroke (due to the Free flow pressure - both the available and the amount required to overcome the resistance.

That energy is added - at the rate needed no extra is needed - the resistance balances the input.

At half way through the travel and production (if we were to stop) the system will now mirror the original configuration.
The energy required to evercome the resistance is stable, and once again stored in the for of hydraulic production and an equal volume of energy is stored in the head.

And the system repeats.

At this point - it should be clear - that the production of the system is supplamented by the latereal transfer of "Head" into the other Zed - More than 50% as I have stated in previous explanations.

{Most engineers have their own OM-Gosh moment about here when they realize that this adds up to - in total - one Zed operates evenly and the other is totally free - which is why we say is general - if you want 100kw net free energy - we build two tanks capable of producing 100kw each - and net 100kw}

back to the operation:
Just at this stage of the operation - we have reduced our total input cost by half.

For Seamus - your drawing show large tanks - the rise of water in your tanks during the process to overcome the resistance will hardly be recognized as a value - but it is well understood that when creating a displacement:

At least three things are occurring:
Head is generated (stored energy)
Air is compressed(stored energy)
Buoyancy is realized (stored energy)

In your system - you are adding and subtracting the value of one effect you will need to adjust when you add your next example.

We are utilizing all three, and few we have not yet discussed -

Wayne

Oh, I forgot to state where our input energy comes from? - from the production.
Just as our input cost is reduced by Over 50%, that results in our production being over 50% above our need - Like Mark Dansie noted in his November Video.
Wayne

Wayne, any more details on the "educational models"?

Will it be a physical desktop model like others are working on here?

Thanks for taking the time to post here.

Dennis is Hammering out the manufacturing details of the educational model.
At this point in Dennis's decision - it will be a simple input output system demonstrating the lifting of a larger weight the same time and Distance of a smaller weight.
A small version of what Mark Dansie witnessed back in May of last year.

Some of the members here are already involved with the project.

If you would like to get involved with it, just e-mail me and I will forward it to Dennis.

Let me be clear - Dennis is helping because he values open / honesty - our educational model is as something he looks forward to as well.
One of the mistakes inventors make is to claim to "endorsments by association" that is not my character.
I can quote Mark Dansie - because he has openly explained his position.
Dennis is Good and very intellegent man, whom I have chosen to trust, that is our relationship.
You are welcome for the posts, actually you all help me to put into words and view the operation of our system in clarity - I appreciate it.

Wayne