johnny874.
You are paranoid. None of your accusations of  people PMing each other to conspire against you are true. None of us are working for some evil cabal to suppress free energy either, that allegation is also a plain and simple lie, based on a delusion and promulgated by some people who have no idea what they are talking about.

No amount of proof will convince you either, not even Stefan's testimony about who pms whom with what... because you believe that our good and tolerant host is in on the conspiracy.

Yes... and he runs this website as a personal joke on people like you, Jim, doesn't he.

So... if I may be permitted to get back on topic for a moment....

The Zeds go through a cycle, right, a complete cycle, gaining something for each cycle in terms of work/energy. Right? So... there is no law, is there, that the cycle has to start at the bottom, I think... it just has to wind up exactly where it started from, but that starting position could just as well be the top of the lift as the bottom of it. Right? As long as a complete cycle is performed, winding back up at the top.

And also, or maybe the same thing,  we could consider the "output" ... the great weight lifted a small distance... to be the "input" when running backwards. So you start at the top, use the great weight to push down the small distance which then causes the small weight to rise a great distance until you are back at the normal, bottom "start"position, then you continue through the second half of the cycle until the small weight (or piston) is down and the great weight is up again, an inverse cycle.

That destroys energy, or makes input work vanish... or something. 


Ahhh... I think I need another cup of instant coffee.

Hmmm.

Okay, I'm in.  You propose a very interesting thought experiment to which I have no immediate answer.

Good on you and thanks.  I'll try to sleep on it and get back to you.

M.

@TK,  Right.  It does not matter where a cycle starts as long as it ends in the same place.  I like your running in reverse analogy destroying energy.  I have my head around the simulation again and cleared up my conceptual error.  Making quick progress towards another PDF release soon...

Quote from: TinselKoala on August 23, 2012, 08:46:27 PM
So... if I may be permitted to get back on topic for a moment....

The Zeds go through a cycle, right, a complete cycle, gaining something for each cycle in terms of work/energy. Right? So... there is no law, is there, that the cycle has to start at the bottom, I think... it just has to wind up exactly where it started from, but that starting position could just as well be the top of the lift as the bottom of it. Right? As long as a complete cycle is performed, winding back up at the top.

And also, or maybe the same thing,  we could consider the "output" ... the great weight lifted a small distance... to be the "input" when running backwards. So you start at the top, use the great weight to push down the small distance which then causes the small weight to rise a great distance until you are back at the normal, bottom "start"position, then you continue through the second half of the cycle until the small weight (or piston) is down and the great weight is up again, an inverse cycle.

That destroys energy, or makes input work vanish... or something. 


Ahhh... I think I need another cup of instant coffee.

In our double ZED system if we let go - they equalize - this does not mean that both ZEDS are in the middle - but the heads inside the ZEDs are equal - one can be on the way up and on the way down.

The "Bottom" is never seen - the set up process is designed to have the lowest point - above the bottom - or else the pressure from the weight will drop.

And Yes - on the way up the Hydraulic load is the output from the changing the head - and on the way down - the weight causes the output of water pressure - transfer of the head.

It is a dual inverse process - both sides are producing in both directions.

The non linear function is due to the distribution of head in varying diameters (layers) of the ZED, the head distribution on the down stroke favors the smaller diameter - making the weight production (down stroke) more productive than the cost of the weight on the upstroke.

Wayne