Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[mrwayne]

Ok MarkE,

Waited a whole day...

Back to the first Anomaly.....

More buoyancy than physical space could accounted for........

Show one example where compounded buoyancy has been utilized or even mentioned in history?

I mean besides the ZED system of course.

Thanks

[mrwayne]

    I fully agree mrwayne, your system is definitely not fraudulent .
                                    John.

OK Minnie, ready for the ...But........

[mrwayne]

OK Mark,

One down.... next one....Next cool Anomaly.....

This one might jog your memory a bit...because you categorically denied the possibility of this anomaly...

connecting the layers in series requires less work and is More efficient to attain pressure in buoyancy than a single column of same diameter

Do you understand how the ZED is designed to utilize that anomaly yet?

I think you said it is more lossy to add systems together.......... so this must be new to you..

[mrwayne]

As has been shown many times already, even the "ideal ZED" is fundamentally lossy.  The risers will not lift going from State 2 to State 3 if the payload identically equals the force versus position transfer function.  The payload must have a lower energy transfer function and that difference is irrecoverable loss.

What drives the contraption that Mark Dansie filmed is energy obtained from the outside used to overcome the internal losses of Wayne Travis' useless prop.

Lol - what a wild leap..... You should stick with what you know --- because your guessing is way off....

From your quote above....

You have examined the simple math in a "Part of our process" and have not examined the whole process.

And then you conclude - and state - as first had knowledge - that the Video of our first closed loop system was being powered from an outside force......lol.......

Wow....... p.s. you made my point about a closed loop system not being proof of anything 

What drove the ZED in Mark D video was the lossy but effective reuses and capture of the "Second' energy transfer function- after the load (the first energy transfer function).

p.s. the stated recapture and observation was 50%........

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

And by the way - the second energy transfer function only needed to cover the lossy system expenses to run closed loop.

Let me break that down - if the first Energy transfer was "only" 50% efficient - the whole system would have still been 100% efficient....... In the ZED - two separate things happen in a ZED - Potential and the stroke of a load.

The potential created to lift the load is then used to reduce the cost of the next load..... simple as is simple does.


A big P.S. The first energy transfer function - the load - was supplemented by the other Zeds Second Energy transfer function.

During the lifting of the load - the energy transfer to lift the load - is not consumed...... and the load is production.

That's a pretty HUGE anomaly to chew on.

[powercat]

Nothing personal powercat -
But where did mark or anyone else show my system to be fraudulent....
That is not a question. It is a statement about your lie.
This is your personal issue.

Clearly you have missed it go back and look at MarkE's posts again, the information is there to see....simple as is simple does...open your eyes and do your duediligence and you will see simple physics shows why you're device doesn't work.

You misrepresent the mats that MarkE and others have shown and that is the error of your ways, open your mind and learn the truth.

The Data, the Math Is the definitive.
You have wasted my time,If you are unable to do the math, unable to think without lies and deception- I understand.  You are a conman with only false promises of a free energy device.