Big try at gravity wheel

[MarkE]

Question:
Does anybody have some idea to what a validation by Mark Dansie of a OU device would cost?
I believe he comes with a team of engineers.

Red_Sunset

I was not aware that Mark Dansie hired out to inventors.  It was my understanding that he hires out to prospective investors.

[mondrasek]

Mondrasek if you are willing to take the time and expend the effort to do it, I continue to encourage you to set-up an energy balance for a ZED or ZED-like device.

And while I appreciate the encouragement, you have not answered my question:  Is the test I propose a valid one?  Please understand that I would not hold you to a "Yes" answer as being absolute either way.  Even if the proposed test seems valid now, it might not after the method and maths are presented, or just in principle after further consideration.

All I propose to test is if a ZED and hydraulic cylinder act exactly the same.  I would calculate a specific volume and pressure for input to a ZED and calculate the corresponding travel and output pressure (start pressure only since finish pressure is zero).  Then I would modify the ZED construction to a larger diameter overall and repeat.  Changing the overall diameter on a hydraulic cylinder does not change the energy out per energy in.  So a ZED must also act exactly the same.  If not, then a hydraulic cylinder cannot be used to correctly analyze the cycle of a ZED.

This simple test does not test an entire ZED system or test for OU in anyway.  But is it a valid test?  Does it qualify as a valid "energy balance for a ZED or ZED-like device?"

Again, answers and/or input from everyone else would be appreciated. Any thoughts at all?

Thanks,

M.

[mrwayne]

Hmm.  Instructive to who?

Funny thing (to me) is that physical build followed many days of CAD model drawings and calculations where I could not figure out how to prove or disprove anything.  I have probably a hundred hours of time wasted trying to figure out how to figure it out!

At the time I built it there was much request for a presentation of the "3-layer ZED that is clearly OU."  Wayne was not providing that, so I thought I would attempt to build one so that we could all have _something_ other than words to play with.  But it appeared to me that no one was interested in discussing any testing of that build or the test results in the forum.  I personally could not figure out how to calculate efficiencies from the test data, so I resorted to the method that Wayne had presented.  We discussed the validity of that method very briefly in PMs, but that broke down almost immediately into the same rhetoric as in the open forum, ie. no discussion of the experiment and data.

That build was intended to be a stop-gap until a sim or better build was presented.  With no apparent interest in what I had constructed, I shelved it and waited.  Unfortunately the sim and/or better build I have been waiting on has not materialized publicly.

With the reintroduction of the ZED topic in this thread I began thinking about it again (as have so many).  Applying some things I've learned (or think I've learned) since those past days I think I finally figured out a (fairly) simple mathematical test to see if a simple analysis of the ZED system where the ZED is substituted by a hydraulic cylinder analog is, in fact, a valid substitution.  But once again it does not appear anyone (except Red) is willing to agree that what I propose is a valid test of that assertion.  So why do it?

Cheers,

M.

Hello Monderask,

"So why do it?" ................... That is the end game 'here' it is sad..............  You are right.

You and the others are and have been right from the beginning - A hydraulic calculation is simple and makes the obvious point: If you make more stored PV out than consumed PV - you have more PV....it is a no brain-er. The simplest calcs will show that.

Time and speed are irelevant - PV is stored energy - not force. This has been demonstrated at least a dozen times by many of you.

.........................

On the positive note:

Mike- If you would like to come visit our new Temp Facility - while our others are being built - I will buy you a ticket (hotel) to come see our advancements.

Why do it? - You have earned it - and the desire for clean and Net energy is Growing.

You still have my e-mail.

p.s. We are very well funded. Ignore the Slander - it comes from ignorance, and demonstrates the lack of due dillignese.
.........................

To All - this is someone else'  thread - My apology for the interruption.


I have a product to develop - company to run - I won't be back.

Thanks for all the hard research you and a few other good men labored - I have two of those awesome models here with my collection!

God Bless

Mr Wayne

[powercat]

With the reintroduction of the ZED topic in this thread I began thinking about it again (as have so many).  Applying some things I've learned (or think I've learned) since those past days I think I finally figured out a (fairly) simple mathematical test to see if a simple analysis of the ZED system where the ZED is substituted by a hydraulic cylinder analog is, in fact, a valid substitution.  But once again it does not appear anyone (except Red) is willing to agree that what I propose is a valid test of that assertion.  So why do it?

Cheers,

M.

The big problem with any test that doesn't produce a self-runner has been shown in the past to be very debatable, a classic example was the Rosemary Ainslie circuit, the ultimate test will always be, "can you make a self-runner" ? this shouldn't be a problem if you have (excess energy)  the biggest problem Wayne had was that after repeatedly promising verification on his device self-running, he repeatedly broke his word and gave out excuses over two years, to the point that he has now removed the update section from his own website.

[TinselKoala]

Hello Monderask,

"So why do it?" ................... That is the end game 'here' it is sad..............  You are right.

You and the others are and have been right from the beginning - A hydraulic calculation is simple and makes the obvious point: If you make more stored PV out than consumed PV - you have more PV....it is a no brain-er. The simplest calcs will show that.

Time and speed are irelevant - PV is stored energy - not force. This has been demonstrated at least a dozen times by many of you.

.........................

On the positive note:

Mike- If you would like to come visit our new Temp Facility - while our others are being built - I will buy you a ticket (hotel) to come see our advancements.

Why do it? - You have earned it - and the desire for clean and Net energy is Growing.

You still have my e-mail.

p.s. We are very well funded. Ignore the Slander - it comes from ignorance, and demonstrates the lack of due dillignese.
.........................

To All - this is someone else'  thread - My apology for the interruption.


I have a product to develop - company to run - I won't be back.

Thanks for all the hard research you and a few other good men labored - I have two of those awesome models here with my collection!

God Bless

Mr Wayne

Mister Wayne Travis: What happened to all the "self running, no input no exhaust, producing excess energy" prototypes you claimed to have YEARS AGO but were never able to demonstrate? Why is Mark Dansie not endorsing you, since he made two site visits already?

Where is the "simple three layer system that is clearly overunity itself" that you talked about BUT NEVER DEMONSTRATED or explained why you think it's OU?

Nowhere, that's where. Your cynical offer to pay for site visits is now just what it was all those years ago: A cynical hoax. People will come, stay in your provided hotel room, and see just what you want them to see. But just like Dansie, years ago, they will NOT see a self-running device that has no input, no exhaust and makes 20 kW in the footprint of a garden shed, or any other "free energy" system from you.

Why haven't you produced the 50 kW unit that you promised would be ready and installed at your Church in six months.... in that powerpoint slideshow from many years ago? I know why, and so do you.... and so do many of your former investors.

Tell us about your lawsuit. Tell us about your attempt to get some big investor to buy out your early, smaller investors. Tell us why you've changed your website to remove all of the false claims from public view. Tell us why you can't seem to tell the difference between Libel (written statements) and Slander (oral statements). Tell us why NOBODY, except Red_Sunset, is defending you and your claims-without-evidence, why NOBODY has come forth showing a self-running system based on your "explanations".

Or run away from the tough questions just like you did years ago.