Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[mondrasek]

E = k*N*X/N²

MarkE, could you please define the terms you are supplying in this relationship?  Ie. k = what?  etc.

[Newton II]

Why don't you go for vapourization?  Water in a container behaves as a single mass since the molecules are held by bonds keeping it in liquid state.  But when it is vapourized, molecules get separated, become lighter than air and move upwards to form clouds at some part of the atmosphere.  When water molecules in clouds  join making them heavier than air (due to lightening or any other reason) they again fall down to earth as rain developing enormous kinetic energy which we make use of indirectly in hydel power plants to generate megawatts of electricity.

Is it not possible to replicate the natural process of rain in laboratory?

While most portion of solar energy is used up in heating up of earth and oceans,  a very small portion only is used in evaporating water from oceans and ground.  But when evaporated water falls down to earth as rain,  it developes enormous kinetic energy.

Is not rainfall a natural case of overunity?

[MarkE]

BTW, I did say:
ds is distance which is another calculable (or measurable) physical fact and therefore a CONSTANT.

X ds signifies the change in X per per infinitesimal change in S.  ds is not S, and cannot be substituted for or by S.

And you replied with:
I find it hard to believe that you flunked calculus.  But, if you want to represent that you did, who am I to argue?


Distance is an indisputable fact.  Calculus does not apply.  Distance is simply distance.   It is a measurement that has units of length.  In SI the unit of length is the meter.

ds is calculus notation. integral( F*ds ) only equals F*S for the unique condition that F is a constant, and the evaluation is from zero to S.  Under all conditions where F is a function of S, such as applies here, the integral(F*ds) must be solved.

Once a distance is calculated or measured it is a CONSTANT that can in no way be in dispute.

Distance can be constant.  That does not mean that force along a path is constant.  Here is a simple compression spring problem:  F = -kX, where k is the spring constant.  Let's make it simple and say that k = 10N/m.  How much energy does it require to compress the spring by 100cm?

a. 0.05J
b. 0.5J
c. 1J
d. 5J
e. none of the above

How much energy does it require to compress the spring by 1m?

a. 0.05J
b. 0.5J
c. 1J
d. 5J
e. none of the above

[Magluvin]

So you think this is YOUR thread, then? And you are right about one thing.... you cannot buy ME.

Why don't you AT LEAST learn to spell M. Ondrasek's name properly, you ignorant buffoon.

You have dreams, plans, expectations. You do NOT have what you clearly claimed to have: a self running machine that makes usable excess energy output. Feel free to PROVE ME WRONG by showing one to someone. But you cannot, you will never be able to, and in some dark part of that brain of yours know that you can't.

And every single post you make that DOES NOT provide real evidence for your claims, the more people reading here will be convinced you  cannot do it. So keep up the major work of making these posts here, Wayne Travis. Your employees are wondering why you spend so much time on internet forums promulgating your false claims instead of WORKING FOR A LIVING.

Cmon T. You complain about a misspelled name, that was posted at 1am, as you stated earlier, then put a comma in your first sentence of your post here, which does'nt work there really.  Did'nt work for me as soon as I read it. Does that make you an ignorant buffoon?  Why so much belching of insults? For the audience?  Making your case??  Cheap shot really. I guess thats all that is left.

"You do NOT have what you clearly claimed to have: a self running machine that makes usable excess energy output. Feel free to PROVE ME WRONG by showing one to someone. But you cannot, you will never be able to, and in some dark part of that brain of yours know that you can't."

Well I would say that statement is a claim. Can you prove your claim?  Put it on YT and lets see your proof of 'your' claim. You made numerous vids proving Rosemary wrong, but no due diligence as such here.  And you tell Wayne 'he' should work for a living. You are posting here in greater quantity than Wayne has, yet no proofs of 'your claim', just speculation. Oh the hypocrisy.

Wayne said  "...and above your pay grade"  and you said   "you cannot buy ME" 

It seems to me that Wayne was implying that you are not worth the pay that he would expect to pay someone that he considered capable of doing the work he would expect to pay for. How is that him trying to buy you?  Is that something the readers should understand clearly??? As that is your target audience, right?  "the more people reading here will be convinced you  cannot do it."

See this is the way the comma should have been used...

"As that is your target audience, right?"  not  "So you think this is YOUR thread, then?"  lol  Buffoonery with a bit of hypocrisy?  Any readers here??? 

Mags

[MarkE]

MarkE, could you please define the terms you are supplying in this relationship?  Ie. k = what?  etc.

K is a constant appropriate to the problem.  X is a distance where the evaluated quantity is proportional to the square of X, and N is the number of elements that over which the distance is equally proportioned.