Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[minnie]

    Webby,
            please just explain a "real" ZED.
                                          John.

[MarkE]

Mark,

Show exactly where Wayne has said this.

Since you can not then this is an absolute falsehood, and one done with full understanding and knowledge.

How much is left in a real ZED Mark,, you keep avoiding the question, after lift how much input is left in the system.

I can tell you how much, all of it is still there and still at full pressure.  This simple fact is enough for any reasonable person to realize that the "ideal ZED" is not a ZED and that your conclusions drawn from those experiments about the functionality of a real ZED are false.

Read his posts Tom.  The fraud Wayne Travis claims that he has Ph.D.s and engineers who support his fraudulent claims. He does not.  He has cooked up the claim that NDAs prevent him from identifying such individuals.  They do not exist.

You are surely free to continue to demonstrate your ignorance of basic science by trying to suggest that Wayne's fraudulent claims have any possibility of being true.

[mondrasek]

If I am to understand that you added a 0.101715694N weight then what do you think that changes behaviorally?  It does not change the fundamentally lossy behavior of the device.   What is the point?

MarkE, here is what I sent to Fletcher (and some others) last Friday.  Just to be clear:  The full cycle I am considering is State 1 -> State 2 -> State 3 -> State 1.

Quote (from previous e-mails)

I modified it to include a Mass for Riser 3 (the outer riser) so that the system would NOT lift from State 1 to State 1X.  I marked this minimal change and all locations needed for how it integrates into the other calculations by highlighting the first row of my additions with yellow.  Also, I added that first blank row as I prefer spreadsheets not to start without blank boarders (just me being me).  And I removed the annoying graphics since they are not needed.  And changed the time constant for the spillway from 0.5 sec to 5 seconds to make that process more "Ideal."

Energy at State 1 (ST1PrefillEnergy) is still 3.4123 mJ.
Energy add to charge the system from State 1 to State 2 (ST2_EnergyAdded) is still 2.0984 mJ.
And the total Energy at State 2 (ST2_EnergyAddedPlusSt1E) is still 5.5107mJ.

Due to the added Mass of Riser 3 the lift is now only 2.41136mm.

The new Spillway Energy that could be collected (Spill_water_energy) is 1.6510mJ.
The Work performed in lifting the Riser 3 Mass (.101716N * .00241136m) is .24527mJ.
Energy at State 3 (ST3_EStoredTotal) is now 3.6145mJ.

If you sum the above 3 values you get (1.6510 + .24527 + 3.6145) = 5.5107mJ.

So it is an exact match.  All the Energy present in State 2 is accounted for in the transition to State 3.

HOWEVER, please note that there is more Energy left in the system at State 3 (3.6145mJ) than we began with at State 1 (3.4123mJ).  And it takes NO ADDITIONAL ENERGY to return from State 3 to State 1.  IE if we "pull the plug" when at State 3, the input water will naturally vent (under pressure) and the system will settle back to State 1.  The amount of excess Energy that must be vented is the difference of the Energy values at State 3 and State 1 (3.6145mJ - 3.4123mJ) = .2022mJ.

End quote.

That is what I am considering now.  I'm not sure if it means anything or not.

[mrwayne]

That is actually a quite funny and revealing statement, mr fraud.
Can you post a copy of the document?

Diversion....Troll

[mrwayne]

What a joke, just like Mark Dansie "correcting" the understanding of your alleged TEAM OF ENGINEERS.  There is no team of engineers from what I can discern, just you and perhaps a few cronies.

You ask a nonsensical question complete with zero information, no diagrams, no setup information, and you ask for an answer?  It's just as retarded as your entire alleged development team allegedly working for months and months on the project and not knowing if it's over unity or not.  That was a slip-up on your part, Wayne.  That was a line that you could feed to a bunch of rich old ladies at a retirement home and get away with it.  But not for me.  You got caught saying something totally and completely nonsensical, something that simply would be impossible to happen in real life.  You got caught.

Like I said before, you are a clown, just like John Rohner was and is a clown.  I am the one that knows about developing products and launching them into production and working with teams of hardware, software, manufacturing, test, and quality engineers.  And I can tell you from real-world experience that what you say rings hollow, it's all a fake.  Your whole narrative about developing your product comes of as a complete fake, an imaginary story by Wayne about what he thinks it should sound like.

I really hope you get swarmed and hammered by the media one day.

I can imagine the headlines:

"Self-declared developer of 'Free Energy' device convicted of fraud."

MileHigh

Wow, you took the time to write that but did not answer the question:
How much of the input into our ZED is not Consumed while producing external work??
Troll