Hydro Differential pressure exchange over unity system.

[mondrasek]

Well it is about time for us in the US EST to pay more attention to our families than the forums.

However, AU should be just well into their morning. 

Good Morning Gents (and Lasses?)!

I know you guys are more than up to the task of dissecting this one.

Cheers,

M.

[mondrasek]

I just PM'd Fletcher.

I believe he's a Kiwi now.  (Hopefully that will spur some quick response from the opposing AU team.)

Not sure if Fletcher has any Internet access on the beautiful rock he is living on, but I would love to hear his take on things.

M.

[TinselKoala]

This system will never work. There is no way to extract energy from buoyancy in the way described.  Buoyancy is a function of gravity, and gravity (at least at newtowian scales)  is a conservative field. If you displace a mass in this field then the energy required to return that mass to the starting location is the same (or more if considering mechanical effieciency losses).  That this system uses bouyancy is irrelevant, as the conservative field principle still applies.

Sure, that's what I say too. But there seems to be a working prototype that runs itself.... and a patent.

I think MrWayne has come out and said clearly that the prototype runs itself without external power supplied, and produces useful electrical power over and above that required to run its own electronics and air compressor and so on. (I could be wrong about this; I'm just going by what I think he meant when he's been answering questions.)  And there will be a team of observers, some of whose names we know, that will be looking it over and reporting, soon.

So it's a  mystery for those of us who believe in conservative fields, in the acumen of scientists at the various national Naval Research Laboratories in the East and the West, in the USA and Russia, in China and Germany..., and in physics in general. How can its working be reconciled with what we _think_ we know?

[mrwayne]

MrWayne is at best mistaken in his beliefs, and possibly now acting fraudulently given that I believe he has an inkling that his system does not actually work as dscribed.

I'd place a bet of any amount you care to mention that any 'overunity' he claims to have measured  ( barring ourright fraud) is simply the amount of energy taken to precharge the system with air, or in the case of the fish-tank 'Travis Effect' videos the amount of energy associated with sinking the cup  *and* block of cement to the bottom of the tank.

Yes.. to actually generate/consume energy a force needs to be applied over a distance, something that is lacking in any video seen so far.

You make me smile,
We have been working on this for four years - we have been running well over O/U (closed looped) since November 2011 - eye witnesses have reported it here.
In total $500 grand in Research and development - well spent.
I just left a meeting with my engineers, we were reminesing back to when they were hired to prove my system did not work - back then - they told me the same thing you just said - it is a funny
Nice to meet you,

Wayne Travis

Except the fraud part - they know me better.

[mrwayne]

So describe to me just where you think this source of energy comes from as i completely unconvinced by any demonstration available to me so far. Your video demonstration on you tube of the Travis effect is entirely unconvincing and is easy to refute that it could be a source of energy.

Simply making the appuratus more complex and attempting misdirection won't wash.

Very simple - well forgive me - we have studied it for a long time -
The total buoyancy of our design is equal to the mass discplaced - times the number of layers.
The number of layers reduce the input requirement to activate the buoyancy.

We convert that Buoyancy to hydraulic pressure and volume - it takes one third of that energy to repeat the process - another third is lost in the energy exchanges, and we net the last third.

Where does the energy come from - a super effecient method of making an object buoyant - then stroking and capturing that energy(If you could not see that in the video, well what can I say).

And to top it off - we reuse the exhaust pressure - to supplament the system
So in recap - 100% available - 33% internal operating cost, 33% lost in conversions, Net 33%
Now, I did not misdirect - but you insulted - we do not need unprofessionalism.

This group has been invited to learn of our discovery.

Wayne Travis