Big try at gravity wheel

[TinselKoala]

Please don't forget about the Cartesian Diver. The nested Zed risers have some "CD" effect happening _due to the compressiblity of air_. The allegation that a Zed system would "work" with 2 incompressible fluids has never been shown, in practice, to do the same thing as the same system with air and water.

The change in pressure on the open-bottom risers causes change in air pocket volume, hence displaced water volume, and this affects buoyancy, enough to make a "CD" float, hover, or sink.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljvp-iR18Ko

[minnie]

  Hi Webby,
              thank you for explaining the transfer pump. I see that you've been
   working on this long before mr Travis came on the scene.
       Here in UK. we're experiencing the wettest winter that anyone can
  remember. One farmer has had to move over 500 cattle because his
  farm is now under water.
     It's probably not as bad as the October blizzard in S.Dakota, is all this
  a sign of things to come?
                                         John

[minnie]

   Hi,
       I get the feeling this particular gravity wheel is shuddering to a halt.
                                    John.

[MarkE]

MarkE,

I am obviously in error in assuming that since we are discussing a buoyant lift of an open chamber vessel over an irregular surface that the required conditions for that would be understood.

To me these conditions are obvious and self evident, I assumed the same held true for you, I was wrong.

We are also discussing a buoyant lift at this time and not a hydraulic lift.

Webby I have constructed drawings against what you have described period.  "Irregular surface" is like the "air gap" something that you have just introduced after five days of discussion.  Prior to today neither phrase appeared in any of your posts back up to and including your opening post that included your sparse sketch annotated above.  It is bad enough that you have been dribbling out details one at a time of the problem construction.  It is understandable that you might miss stating a detail or two correctly along the way.  However, if you are going to insist on fantasies that you have stated anything other than what you have then there is little productive that we can do here.

I leave it to you to draft drawings of the problem you wish to construct.  Ordinary statics will show that the lifting scheme is less than 100% efficient as you found with your own experiments.  That means that to get to the net over unity claimed by HER the lifting scheme by itself harms the result.  A pulley and a string would do better.

[TinselKoala]

"... A simple three layer system that is clearly overunity by itself."
--Wayne Travis


So, according to Travis himself, you do not need "2 lift systems" to demonstrate his overunity scheme. Why are we not shown this simple, three layer system that is clearly overunity by itself? Why aren't Webby and MarkE analyzing this simple, clearly overunity system that has only three layers _by itself_?

I know why.