Mathematical Analysis of an Ideal ZED

[MarkE]

Yep.  You are correct. 

Regarding your comment : "For the dimensions you specify..."

You do remember the reason why those dimensions were selected, right?  To be clear:  the selection of the dimensions of the "Ideal ZED" model were mostly random.  I will concede that I chose one ratio (of height to width) that was recommended by Mr. Travis.

The important point for all to understand about this Analysis of an Ideal ZED is this (IMHO):  If the ZED does NOT react as expected by the currently understood laws of Physics, then could some configuration (Engineering) be capable of providing some benefit from how it does react?

Yet, it has been shown to completely conform to understood laws of physics.  The exceptional behavior that you thought you calculated was all a result of errors on your part.    Make a rock bigger or make a rock smaller and it is still a rock.

[LibreEnergia]

I am not sure you are talking about the same thing ...... how is reuse - creating or destroying energy?
I know what you intended - If the reuse results in more energy than the original - it must be created energy....
I want you to think on that a bit - reused energy ... assumes it was used in the first place correct?
But it does not say that it was consumed....If we consumed the internal pressure - The law of creation / destruction would apply.
As with our first ZED system - we transferred the same displacement left and right - between two ZEDs as many times as we liked - it was never consumed.

Correct, 'Reuse' does not create or destroy energy, as energy can only be transformed from one form to another (First law applies).

However you cannot 'have your cake and eat it too'... If the system is powering an EXTERNAL load , then by definition that energy is LEAVING the system. Once it has left, it is not available to the system again. (unless the system replenishes it somehow.)

Consider a spring. A 'perfect' spring will alternate between stored potential and kinetic energy and would oscillate between the those states forever. However if you were to capture the kinetic energy of the oscillation and divert it to an external load then the amount of energy inside the system would diminish.

So, what is the process that is replenishing the potential in a Zed as it oscillates back and forth? You cannot count any part of the oscillation energy as output as you are mistakenly doing.

You seem to believe your system is conceptually different from a spring. It is not, for you cannot explain where the energy comes from that keeps it oscillating while it powers an external load. Your explanations so far fail the 'having and eating cake' problem.

Given you have only be able to demonstrate this device working for a short period of time it should be apparent to you that your apparent 'output' is merely the initial energy it contains (the pre-charge) winding down, perhaps assisted by the 'flow-assist' you speak about.  (I'm assuming by now you've tracked down the last of the leaks)...

[bw100007]

Wayne,
Have you been able to connect both left and right ZED's together and keep it running yet  transferring the PV back and forth?  If so for how long?  I have lost touch with the team since posting on the other forum you created has all but stopped. I was the one playing with the closed loop back to back idea.

[LibreEnergia]

Does the law say that a "external energy" must be accounted for by energy input into a separate system?
I know this is tricky - not meant to be... but if a boat is floating in the pool - does it take more or less energy to add water to the pool?

To jump you ahead a bit - the ratio of water put in to the value of the buoyancy/ mass of the boat make a huge difference to the results of the next proper question:Does it take more energy in the water to lift the boat and then extract the energy when the pool is drained.....
Depends --- how much energy went into raising the water versus the mass value of the boat....
The discovery of the layered system spanks that answer pretty well.
The ZED layers hooked in series invented a method to raise the water level extremely cheap..
And hooking two together - meant we could reused that water head from one pool to another...
If this is too much... let me know.
Another point - the ratio - that is so important is improved by not dropping the boat/mass to far.

You are completely fooling yourself here.  The amount of energy put in to the system is not somehow magically multiplied by the geometry of the masses ,  boat or container.  If you think otherwise then you are absolutely mistaken.

Some geometries may amplify the FORCES involved but the distances those forces can act over is correspondingly reduced as it is simply a lever)

Now, it is true that the layered ZED system when considering forces only does give rise to a 'non linear' lever.

However when considering ENERGY this no longer applies. As the effective leverage of the system changes so to does the distance over which those forces can act change.

Energy is still conserved and no amount of manipulation of the geometry will change that.

 

[MarkE]

To All,
I am very sorry for the constant interruptions... It is time for the skeptics to become skeptics.
Attacking people and their ideas is not helping anyone - it is just a game to TK, MarkE, Mh, and powercatt.....(got it right this time Pirate-- so sorry)...
I tried very hard for over two years to discuss our discovery only to have every page filled with garbage -
Those men need to work for Jerry Springer.... because as TK said - I look for holes to exploit...(his choice of words)..

Well inventors look for problems to solve - not ways to shut thinking down.... Big difference.
Which purpose is this web site here for???
To compete with Jerry Springer - or solve the energy needs?
.......................
I want to thank those of you who have called for proof of claims - and stopped the diversions..
Most of all - Those of you who support research, put your hands on tests, and due diligence!
Take care

The fraud Wayne Travis speaks.  The fraud bemoans his critics for pointing out that his false claims are belied by math physics and his own actions.  He tlls fanciful tales of being interested in evidence and proof.  Yet, he consistently offers none, and he never will.