The breakthrough in Free Energy - a system that cannot be debunked

[Jimboot]

Thank You Jim,


Markus did a great job, he is amazing! His modeling of the travis effect was a mistake - here is a link to the original video by Tom.


Travis Effect 5


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW0LKPM0Tvk


Thats my channel if you want to watch all five Videos Tom made.


Wayne

id already found them thanks. Subscribed to the old channel and the fresh one

[mrwayne]

id already found them thanks. Subscribed to the old channel and the fresh one

I wish I could find the old channel lol


Wayne

[Jimboot]

I wish I could find the old channel lol


Wayne

I thought it was this one. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgcpOIwaOtRf37y9hBwuefg

[mrwayne]

I thought it was this one. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgcpOIwaOtRf37y9hBwuefg

Thats It! Thanks

I will see if I can reset my password... Thanks again!


Wayne

[Tarsier_79]

I am sorry if this sounds rough - but it does matter - if the inner and outer are connected - its your demonstrated lack of experience with buoyancy that is confusing you - try to be a bit more patient, you are learning new things.

(slaps hand to forehead). Buoyancy is determined by total volume and total weight. The weight on the left is the same as the weight on the right. Buoyancy doesn't care that the weight on the right is not fully submerged. Due to the fact that the outer container is fixed at this time to the inner container, buoyancy only cares about the total mass and the total volume. The difference between the left and right is only the difference of volume in the outer container. So in magical cartoon world with 0 frictions, the lifting weight cancels the falling weight, regardless of what that is.

The only thing I am learning is just how little you understand your own design.

So for those of you who have been following - a couple of critics here just revealed why my system has a work difference - Now they don't get it yet - but they will.
When the one side is being pulled down - its buoyancy is "the actual air volume" value of buoyancy - and this is the input cost (sinking a buoyant object a distance).
Now this sinking action positions the other side in the Initial Travis Effect position - and as everyone should d know by now - the Travis effect is special for the fact that the buoyancy work exceeds the air volume required.

Work = Force x distance.

firstly, I would like to admit my mistake. No-one picked me up on it, but a self sanity check did. So here is the sanity check: eyeballling the setup, we have approx half the volume pulled down twice the distance, compared to an "effective" twice volume moving over half the distance. So in cartoon land, we have something like a unity transaction, if you look at this single image (cartoon1) It appears like the output looks slightly OU....but when you examine the movement of the air transfer, it is soon apparent the power stroke is less than the calculated 21 x 20. This can be seen in the "cartoon3" image where the air is not pumped as low down in the container due to container positioning at the start. This increases through the movement.

The upshot is my original calculated 76% is incorrect. my mistake was using a buoyancy pulldown of 21 in stead of 14.  In cartoon land, the actual work in vs work out = unity.