Big try at gravity wheel

[conradelektro]

You made an incorrect assumption - our "Dates" are not for public display.

Wayne

I have nothing more to say. How can we discuss what we can not see?

Greetings, Conrad

[mrwayne]

I have nothing more to say. How can we discuss what we can not see?

Greetings, Conrad

Understood - I showed the ZED - it only helped those that wanted to understand and riled those that would not.

Take care

[celsus]

Thanks for confirming that you have nothing, mrwayne.

[mrwayne]

Thanks for confirming that you have nothing, mrwayne.

LOL......

[MarkE]

If it seems like confusion... good point to stop and think..
Lets cut the system in half..... just to simplify.
Energy in to stroke
50% of the energy put in to each stroke comes from the previous production (the load lifted by the buoyancy),
Then an additional another 50% energy is put in from the other ZED.
Of course the lift efficiency is very important.... who want to pay $100 dollars for a Bike with one wheel.
p.s. our anomaly; The Zed Efficiency is improved over all other buoyancy devices - we can attain a lift value equal to the total input - easily (but lets just leave the lift value at 100%).
The lift value is "energy in versus energy out" - not force - just to be clear (poor assumptions have been made).
One side of the ZED lifts the load (production) and is equal to the energy put into it "equal" from both sources..Source one is part of the production, source two is the other ZED.
So the best we can have in a perfect world is 100% of the energy we put in-- right??? Of course.
Yes - the potential still in the Buoyancy is still worth 100% of the work we did...
Now - what we have is both the Load (production) and still have all the buoyancy in the system - what should we do with all that stored potential?
If we popped it up as MarkE suggested - that would be an awful loss.. that would be old school buoyancy - let the head pressure out to sink.....
Why not use it to offset the input cost of the other ZED.....gee that could reduce its cost by say 50% and then how much would it cost to stroke that side???
That's right 50%. That would suck if your buoyancy efficiency was 50%
Archimede's accounts for the displaced fluid, did you know that the air under pressure (stored energy) is equal to the cost of water that was "lifted" (stored energy) during the displacement, and the head and both of those are equal to the value of the buoyancy
Properly understood -  buoyancy has three equal values... the buoyancy, the air pressure, and the head pressure (raised water).
It does not matter how you shape the air in buoyancy - it is the same energy, it does not matter how you shape the buoyancy - it is the same energy - but as Red Sunset caught on so quickly...
The Water is a different story...... its value as head pressure is not locked into volume........
Energy can be observed by the "time distance and mass" Our system reduced the mass required - to do the same work of even a hydraulic cylinder - while improving the speed of operation.
Less load in - original work out - and much faster - 11 times faster in our first model....
The bicycle - is the energy flow between the two ZEDs ..... the money is paid and refunded at both ends.
Take care.
TomM showed that in the Travis effect video's many people missed it.
.......................
So how much of the input to either ZED is a external to the system cost.....
How much of the production is reused.... that's right 50%... which leaves 50% for the consumer.
Now - it does take two ZEDs to provide the value of one ZED for free........ That's an ok price to pay...

The reason this works......... and all other buoyancy systems did not work....... because by adding the systems together (layers) in a serpentine input system, improved the efficiency of the buoyancy beyond what any one else has ever seen.
Yes adding layers improved the stand alone efficient function of buoyancy.
It was necessary to accomplish that first - other wise - we would have had the same "force" issues that all other buoyancy systems in the past faced.
Solving the right problem is key.
Thanks

Here we have another silly wall of text from the fraud Wayne Travis.  There is no net energy output in excess of the input from any of his contraptions.  Each serpentine is fundamentally lossy.  Using two just increases the loss.