Big try at gravity wheel

[Red_Sunset]

Hi Sunset,
          There has to be a basic principle, all the rest is a hydraulic gearbox cum air spring.
   With Grimer's explanation and diagram it was easy to see what he was getting at.
       As far as CERN is concerned there is no known way of harnessing the actual field.
                       John. 

Minnie,
How did you check out the fully integrated Sun Drop farm?
With only brak/salt water and sun, nothing else is needed not even soil.
To get aircon, electricity. fresh water, light...ect  with full automation in order to grow everything needed from a garden in the middle of the desert, including fish.
I thought that concept was brilliant.  With a fish pond, then not even fertilizer needed.
A good tried and tested model for Mars
Red_Sunset

PS:  There is a basic principle but one needs to remove the shades to see it

[Red_Sunset]

......................................There isn't a way to harness it.  Gravity is conservative.
Work performed in a gravitational field is the integral of force with respect to displacment
It matters not that the first, second , third or nth derivative with respect to time may be non zero, as Grimer claims.

EnergiaLibre,
If that is the case, what are we doing here ?
We must be the idiots who pre-empt their own actions before they have started !!
Like the dog chasing his tail !

So with this being a fact, I am inviting you all for a beer at the "Thirsty Lion"
Time: >>  After Minnie has put his sheep to sleep for the night
Red_Sunset

[powercat]

I can read just fine, and I can prove it. You, however, seem to be unable to read your own writings deeply enough to provide a cogent logical argument that supports your opinion. Which is all you actually have: opinion. And your opinion in these matters (ZED, Travis, etc) is not supported by the numerous facts that we actually do know for sure.
You cannot provide instructions to construct a device which demonstrates the validity of the effects you claim. You are in the same position as many other claimants who are enamoured of an idea but cannot actualize it because "stuff" just doesn't really behave the way you want it to. Would you like to present a physical situation or apparatus that refutes anything I or MarkE have said? Please do so. We can present situations and references and analyses that falsify your conjectures.  This isn't a joke, it's reality. Support your conjectures with actual facts, checkable outside references, proper calculations, or demonstrations of your own. You cannot, so perhaps you should stop being so critical of those who take the _many times proven_ main line of actual Physics here.

@@  Red_Sunset
You appear to have ignored this important post from TK, hmmm I wonder why ?  I will post its again in bold text

You, however, seem to be unable to read your own writings deeply enough to provide a cogent logical argument that supports your opinion. Which is all you actually have: opinion. And your opinion in these matters (ZED, Travis, etc) is not supported by the numerous facts that we actually do know for sure.
You cannot provide instructions to construct a device which demonstrates the validity of the effects you claim. You are in the same position as many other claimants who are enamoured of an idea but cannot actualize it because "stuff" just doesn't really behave the way you want it to. Would you like to present a physical situation or apparatus that refutes anything I or MarkE have said? Please do so. We can present situations and references and analyses that falsify your conjectures.  This isn't a joke, it's reality. Support your conjectures with actual facts, checkable outside references, proper calculations, or demonstrations of your own. You cannot, so perhaps you should stop being so critical of those who take the _many times proven_ main line of actual Physics here.

In case you missed one of the main points,  "stuff" just doesn't really behave the way you want it to. but you just keep going on and on, if only we could harness the energy from your ego.

[Red_Sunset]

@@  Red_Sunset
You appear to have ignored this important post from TK, hmmm I wonder why ? .....................
......................................................

No..no my dear Cat,
If TK and "You by implication" would have read the preceding posts, he & you would have realized that what you are highlighting was not relevant.
You give me the impression that you are missing my regular posts,  if you do,  just say so in plain language.

In post #654,
I proposed a theoretical method in a rough high level outline to achieve asymmetry. 
Remember the statements
1..  " ** If YES, then our focus will be on creating that symmetry imbalance."
2..  "Don't assume this is the whole story"

But it is clear that it was not the right time for this type of disclosure.  So I shelved it for the time being.
I have no interest to discuss Wayne Travis private or business life, I am sure you would understand that.

If you have any further specific question on #654, I am glad to answer them.

Your statements that require clarification
PS1: >> "stuff" just doesn't really behave the way you want it to." << ,   What do you mean with "stuff"   (I understand with stuff, " fluffy stuff, like wool, haberdashery things")

PS2:  >>   "Would you like to present a physical situation or apparatus that refutes anything I or MarkE have said? Please do so."<<      Please give me some idea's,  to what you have in mind   

PS3:    >> "We can present situations and references and analyses that falsify your conjectures."<<
Please do so,  I am interested.  This what it is all about, an open discussion, I am not claiming to be right.  Post #654 was a concept proposal, NOT A LAW ! 

Just don't give me that "spelling, syntax and scientific notation"  crap MarkE came up with.  I don't do nuts and bolts.

Red_Sunset

[powercat]

Good for you responding to the TK's post, just wish you could come up with some actual evidence, a continuous running device, or some scientific verification, also you keep making out that Wayne Travis has had to keep back a secret bit of information that is crucial to the device running successfully, how does that stopping him demonstrating a continuous working model ?  A simple web cam set up broadcasting the device running, would not disclose any so called vital information, but he has repeatedly failed to achieve this seemingly basic display of his claim