Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

Again, he does not have to name anyone. What, just because he gives a name, it proves something to you? Then what, you want their address? Phone no.?? Or you will search and hunt them down???  Real nice. Get real dude. What a farce.

How bout you give us your name, number and address, where you went to school, whats your wifes name? How about your kids names? your mom and dads name? Where do you work?  Prove your credentials?. Or how about you Mark. Milehigh? Tk??? Anyone else want to step up to that plate??? Oh, it is only your 'demands' that count here. Yeah right.

Mags

The fraud Wayne Travis claims professionals endorse his false claims.  That's just another of his lies.  No competent professional ever has does or ever will endorse Wayne Travis false claims.

[MileHigh]

Mark Dansie:

I really [color=#0081BD !important][/color] not sure why you want to attack or shoot the messenger (me). Go read revolution-Green where I regularly expose technologies as scams and technologies that are just BS. I [color=#0081BD !important][/color] running a series on Hope-Girl and the QEG at the moment.

You are misunderstanding the context or I was not clear enough.  There is no attacking of you.  The issue is that Wayne clearly stated that his development group got direction from you that they did not have an over unity system.  The issue is on Wayne's side.

It makes no sense at all that his development team would not understand if they had over unity or not, and they had to get guidance from you.  It's akin to developing an electric shaver and your development team is not sure if it can shave a man's beard or not and they have to get in a consultant to tell them if they are on the right path or not.  It is absolutely ridiculous.

Just like Wayne's description of his system is in absolutely ridiculous nonsensical pseudo technical terms that make no sense.

Wayne poses his 'hardball' question challenging people to explain his alleged technology and the question is absolutely ridiculous and doesn't even make any sense.  Just like his description of his alleged system doesn't even make any sense.

Wayne got caught making a statement that destroyed his already destroyed credibility.  I wasn't there for your visits so I can only use my own common sense to try to make sense of this ZED fiasco.  You advising his 'team of engineers' if they had over unity or not is a completely ridiculous farce as far as I am concerned.  This is not about you at all, it's about Wayne and his alleged team.  It's like a scene right out of the movie Dr. Strangelove.

MileHigh

[mondrasek]

That is just brilliant.  So let's perform the tally: 

State 1 is the initial state. And the zero energy reference.
State 1 to State 2 requires 2.0984   mJ energy added
State 2 to State 3 delivers  1.6510   mJ  energy removed to your spillway payload
State 3 to State 1 you have not specified any recovery mechanism
Now you are back at State 1

You have now completed a cycle are now down 0.4474mJ.   Your efficiency is:  78.7%.You still have a fundamentally lossy scheme.

Very true.

But how does the 78.7% efficiency of this Ideal ZED model compare to the efficiency of a simple hydraulic cylinder?  The answer to that question is why I am still interested in examining the ZED.

Also, how does that 78.7% efficiency compare to the Maximum theoretical efficiency of a simple Archimedes lift system?

Seriously, MarkE.  If you do not want to examine the math behind a ZED, then please move on.  Or join in the investigation.

I would prefer that you join in.

M.

[MarkE]

Very true.

But how does the 78.7% efficiency of this Ideal ZED model compare to the efficiency of a simple hydraulic cylinder?  The answer to that question is why I am still interested in examining the ZED.

Also, how does that 78.7% efficiency compare to the Maximum theoretical efficiency of a simple Archimedes lift system?

Seriously, MarkE.  If you do not want to examine the math behind a ZED, then please move on.  Or join in the investigation.

I would prefer that you join in.

M.

This device is a piece of junk.  If you were to cycle just between states 2 and 3 it emulates a much smaller, cheaper and more robust compression spring.  With the ST1 => ST2 => St3 =>St1 sequence it's an even more complicated and less efficient spring.  The silly claims of over unity that Wayne and his cadre make for these silly contraptions are completely and laughably false.

[Pirate88179]

Very true.

But how does the 78.7% efficiency of this Ideal ZED model compare to the efficiency of a simple hydraulic cylinder?  The answer to that question is why I am still interested in examining the ZED.

Also, how does that 78.7% efficiency compare to the Maximum theoretical efficiency of a simple Archimedes lift system?

Seriously, MarkE.  If you do not want to examine the math behind a ZED, then please move on.  Or join in the investigation.

I would prefer that you join in.

M.

M:

But, how does that 78.7% compare with a simple spring?

Just saying...

Bill