Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[Gabriele]

Thanks. But are the weights moving vertically,mirroring one each other? Is the street gone up equal to that goes down?

[Gabriele]

Clear. Thanks

[MarkE]

So, thought experiments are not useful.

Thought experiments described in terms that do not even make linguistic sense are not helpful.  If you believe that you can shelve water from one column to the other, then draw that mechanism as it steps through a couple of points and calculate the energy in each column.  If you calculate the energy properly you will see that you have not addressed the problem.  See the handy picture attached for the correct calculations.

I explained how I measured things.

Since you have never diagrammed your claimed mechanism, I beg to differ.

Now you are mixing separate things together.

No, I am stating plainly and simply that you have not shown anything that can overcome the:  N*(X/N)² problem as it applies to fluid transfer between columns that you state your machine executes.

Let's think about this just a little bit,, water falls,, a loss in potential,, water falls and there is a loss,, Gravitational Potential Energy maybe?

Why don't we actually diagram a proposed mechanism and show the associated energy calculations?

So a conversion of forces happens in a pendulum but you are saying that the only conversion that can happen is to KE or heat.

Here we go with more disingenuous misquotes.

Resistance,, many uses.

In electrical circuits where resistance is a defined behavior yes, the term has meaning.  Resistance is not a term in kinematics or hydrostatics.  If you mean 'force' say 'force'.

If the water column can fall back down and return the work it took to put it up in the first place,, but you are saying that it can not do that, and so then that would have to infer that the 1\2 input that is lost is destroyed, not converted to heat because there is nothing for that conversion to happen,, destroying work, destroying energy,, and yet you say that can not happen,,

Which is it MarkE, can the water column fall back down and return the input work or does it loose 1\2 of that and destroy energy?

No energy is destroyed, it is lost to heat.

ETA: changed the diagram to show two methods side by side.

[MarkE]

In the balancing lever pic the weights move vertically and in opposite directions.

In the pic I do believe I had a distance of 22mm lifted for 21.something dropped,, so when I let go it would slowly come back to horizontal.

The closer the distance of travel that the two weights moved the less desire they had to move back, and if they were perfect distances they would not move on there own, nor would it cost anything to move them.

If you pull the arms apart to 10:30 and 7:30 and then let go, do the arms:

a. Do nothing, or
b. Exchange orientations, IE if the short arm was at 10:30 and the long arm at 7:30, does the long arm go up to 10:30 and the short arm down to 7:30 or
c. Come to the horizontal, or close to it and stop or
d. None of the above

Calculate the stored energy for your starting and ending states.  Show your work.

[MarkE]

MarkE,

I already stated that they will move back to horizontal by themselves if the distances of motion are not the same.

If you are not careful they will go past this internal balance zone,,

If that is representative of your supposed column to column transfer scheme then you have proven what I have been telling you.  Take a good long look at the drawing that I posted.