Big try at gravity wheel

[MarkE]

Wayne Travis has now been selling a false dream that anyone with the least bit of elementary physics knowledge, or ability to find someone with even elementary physics knowledge to analyze if for him  would have known very early on has always been meritless for about six years.  The sheer swagger Wayne still exhibits pitching outrageous claims that he has no factual basis for believing is awesome.  Just look at how he does not even blink declaring his confidence despite the uninterrupted string of prototype failures.  Look at the seemingly effortless way he changed his previous story as to what those aquarium videos meant.  That kind of ability to set reality completely aside, stay on message and tug at emotions with invocations of God and country could make him a super effective: salesman, politician, diplomat, or remorseless fraud.  Mr. Wayne's talents are wasted selling hopeless buoyancy based free energy schemes.  He should be working for the CIA selling centrifuge components to Iran, or BATF selling traceable arms to Mexican drug lords. 

It's little wonder that Wayne has sold complete BS to a number of people.  Then there are those who within a few minutes of seeing what he had to show and say have asked:  "What are we doing here?". 

[MarkE]

MarkE, if I were talking about a dump condition as you are describing I would agree with you, but since I am not and did not talk abut using a dump,, remember I said I started with that but had a fix for it,,,

So why are you describing a condition that is not the one under consideration?

Webby, I repeat again that we are NOT TALKING ABOUT A DUMP CONDITION.  We are talking about the steps as you have stated them.  The figure pressure_equalization_potential_energy_loss.png shows on the left an initially charged cylinder: "A".  The figure shows on the right that cylinder connected to a second cylinder "B".  For purposes of illustration the "B" cylinder is held down by a stop instead of a payload weight.  The two cylinders communicate "Air" through a volumeless line connected from the top of one to the top of the other.  The pressures equalize with the result that the "air" water meniscus is at the same absolute depth in each cylinder.  The pressures, and energies are shown on the figure.

The process of equalizing the pressures dissipated almost one half of the total stored energy.  Now each cylinder holds only about 1/4th the energy that the first cylinder "A" held when charged.  We have not even filled the "B" cylinder that will do the lifting all the way and we have already expended about twice as much work as we can possibly extract lifting the payload weight by your specified 15mm distance.  The total volume of "air" is still the same as it was after we finished charging the "A" cylinder.  We have not dumped any "air".  The remaining steps of pumping air from the "A" side to the "B" side until the "B" side becomes neutrally buoyant and then lifting the payload weight end up costing input work that exceed both the energy just lost plus the energy extracted from raising the payload weight.

11 days ago you said that you would post your set-up and your calculations.  You have not done so.  I welcome you to post your arrangement and show what you think happens when you first equalize the pressure between the two cylinders, before you add more energy by pumping "air" from the charged cylinder to the cylinder carrying the payload weight.

[mrwayne]

To those interested,

A couple of fun notes - apparently lost in translation last year:

First I mostly ignore all slander and misdirection - if a valid point is made in the middle - I would never know. Why would I listen to people who spit in my face first and last in every breath. (why do they think they add value to anything)?

I shared last year - some want to learn - others just want to be "read" - ask questions relevant to the understanding and do not try to take over the conversation.

My reading here is short - I have those that have proven they can not control themselves on "block".

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

A few things missed by some -

In the ZED system - the stored energy is in the individual water columns in each layer.

(When you displace a fluid - as in Archimedes'- you also create an equal value in water column - hard to see in your drawings - but is there - and very usable - if so designed - the ZED is so designed.)

Our columns connect in series - transfer of the stored energy only requires access to one point in each ZED
(If you get stuck on one ZED - you ignore half the cycle - look at the whole cycle and OU stares you in the face.)

Moving one - moves all - this means the ratio of volume to movement is reduced with the number of series - or the number of water columns created does not add to the input volume. Making Operating speed optimal.

The same as Archimedes' in some aspects - there is a difference:

Even our single layer ZED with Pod - creates more buoyancy than the space it occupies - very simple to verify.
and It can lift many more times than the whole system weighs.
(P.s. john/Tk - that's where you should focus to understand the reduction in foot print to capture large amounts of gravity)

Few notes regarding slander:

Zydro Energy has 210 investors - they all have always known and had the right to a full refund with interest - one has exercised that due to handle a personal home issue - and another wanted to support another inventor - another inventor who did not have as many supporters - I returned his money and let him keep his shares.

They supported me and my efforts to bring good from our work - most of our investors read the slander and accusations on this web site, and most did their due research and saw the value to humanity.

Another truth:

Good people choose to take a stand - the fact less based slander spewed on this web site - added credibility to our efforts - those with character to see - saw thru it all - they gave us time to develop our other systems.

Our success adds credibility to all those that desired and tried - against the onslaught of opposition.

In regard to the "law suit" - my divorce 6 years ago. omgosh.. TK you will twist anything.. trying to twist it into to a claim against character, company, or systems - just pitiful. I am sorry you still do not understand the system - don't take it personally. I wish I had logged in that day so that you were ignored......

Where we are today:

I have on average five meetings a week with Utility companies, Inventors, Engineers, legal teams, political figures, and our new partners regarding our future alignments and focus - working together to bring reliable and clean energy to the world (None of those  meetings are for investment  - we are fully funded).

We also have five legal teams - Patents, International patents, Legal team for the contracting, CPA, and infringement and abatement.

Of course - In every meeting - I am introduced to extremely intelligent Engineers, ladies and gentlemen - who do not see the difference or value of our system - (without the distraction of slander and ego's) it takes on average two hours to teach them what Webby and Red, and a dozen other have discovered.....

TK you are "right"  ....hands on models do make a big impact and open minds - several people on this web site built nice ones and were spammed out of desire to share. I think they are onto you.

Of all our visitors:

I have only turned away one visitor in six years. He thought I was seeking investment - I was not.

To All:

It is valuable to learn the logic that made the ZED possible to produce Net energy - we have applied that logic to four other systems which also now work to produce Net Energy. This is a new frontier - ready for open minds. The world might be able to stop a few people - but it can not stop a thought.... And thoughts are powerful.

I do not teach that logic here - it is more valuable than our machines.

A little hint - working with "ideal energy" will not produce Net Excess energy - and focusing on Energy Values in the system will not lead to Net Energy. Red has explained it right at least twice.

I highly highly recommend listening to those who have built models.

And to those that slander and spam them - your on your way out......

Pollution free energy is on the way.

The big picture,

Two of my son's spent last month in China  and toured power plants - the air barely breathable even to the locals - fixing that around the world is what is important.

Nuclear waste is still spilling in Japan, most of our power plant are over 40 years old -

GRAVITY IS ALWAYS ON!


Maybe some of you have forgotten the reason for the search - the reason for this web site - I am sorry for those of you who missed the boat. I certainly tried to help.

Our system will help.


Best wishes to you all,

Wayne Travis

[Grimer]

Frank, you might as well be describing a pink invisible unicorn carousel in detail... because it has just as much reality as your "Keenie" fantasy. No amount of your detailed description can alter the fact that IT DOES NOT WORK. So really, you should quit acting like, and claiming, it does, until you are able to demonstrate it. Until then it's just your fantasy, nothing more, and we are trying to discuss reality here, not yours and webby's fantasies.

I disagree. I think the Keenie did work and does work for the reasons I gave. Why not save the puerile insults and and address the arguments. Red ink is not going to make them go away. 

[TinselKoala]

In regard to the "law suit" - my divorce 6 years ago. omgosh.. TK you will twist anything.. trying to twist it into to a claim against character, company, or systems - just pitiful. I am sorry you still do not understand the system - don't take it personally. I wish I had logged in that day so that you were ignored......

Somehow I don't think you are talking about your divorce six years ago, when you are talking about your lawsuit in your plea for new investment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKctCl_pr7A

Travis, you emit words endlessly, without saying anything of significance, but the Truth remains: You have withdrawn your overt claims of creating free energy from your public websites. You have changed the name of your operation. People do this kind of thing when they have received advice from lawyers as to the nature of their claims and the nature of their solicitations.  You solicit investments, you mention your lawsuit.... People rarely if ever refer to their "divorce" as a "lawsuit" so I am afraid I believe the version of you in the video, not what you are posting here. You have NEVER YET produced any data that support your claims. Yet it would be trivial for you to do so, if you had what you claim to have. But you do not... so you cannot.

Why did you not complete your schedule with Mark Dansie? Why has Dansie not "endorsed" your claims? Why are you not in the news, every day? Why are graduate engineering students from over in Norman not pouring over your design, writing scientific papers and helping you bring it to fruition?  I know why... and so do you.

Where is the "simple three layer system that is clearly overunity by itself", your words exactly, Wayne Travis? I challenge you: either show this system and explain why and how it is overunity in terms a REAL ENGINEER will understand ... OR admit that you do not have any such thing and WITHDRAW the lying claim to have such a thing.