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

[mrwayne]

Thanks for trying again, you get closer each time.


Let me first say the "ideal" set up is in the spread sheet - which is near 200%


The cartoon depiction you are referencing is [size=78%]147%[/size]


The outer container - of the Travis effect is called a Riser - it does in fact travel twice the distance of the Inner displacer called a Pod.


Important helpful note - half of the riser movement is caused by the air transferring due to air seeking its lower pressure.  It was paid for with the same cost of lowering the pod and riser.


A bit more knowledge for you:

Buoyancy is a "result" of "pressure differential times the Surface area" which is not a new understanding - but until the Travis Effect discovery - volume was sufficient to determine lift.


Once it was discovered that the volume was not always predictive of lift in every scenario and design - a more in depth (pun) understanding and method of prediction is required.


Notice how difficult it has been for you to grasp the function - as you tried to stick with volume. one of the reasons this simple energy generation was not discovered sooner.


What you will discover, if you study the process closer, is that When a liquid is displaced, four potentials are created - not just buoyancy:

Compressed air
Raised Water
and lift potential
Downward force on the tank
   
Add clever design,
such as the pod switching from being a weight to being neutrally buoyant
Moving air as a secondary reaction to another work (which means unpaid for)
Adding complexion a systems to "increase efficiency" as the free moving air proves.



All of these aspects are important, as they are simple reactions which when controlled in such a manner to create an asymmetrical work process proves free energy, or caused energy is completely and simple possible.


Thank you all.


Mr Wayne

[citfta]

(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.

The statement I highlighted is incorrect.  Bouyancy is also determined by how much of the object is submerged.  That is the part you are missing.  Try to push a cork underwater.  As you try to push it down the bouyancy increases.  Or try to lift a neutral bouyant object.out of the water. As soon as you start to lift it out of the water you will see that it gets much heavier.


Respectfully,
Carroll

[mrwayne]

Ok, Overunity,


A bit of back story - I observed the Opportunity to exploit "under Input" in 2008 - In fact every single system I built, using that method conformed to standard physics - pay less than ideal cost - subtract losses and you have a "Remainder".


p.s. I built over 40 different types - 1/3 of those models used the Travis Effect, 1/3 used the Concentration of head or mass, and 1/3 used the COTI Method (which is an admixture process where the design counter acts the Primary work and utilize the secondary).  [size=78%] [/size]


All of them had different scientific discoveries, and all of them caused a remainder. The Model I shared is the least mentally complicated of all, which is why I selected to share it. The dual System will max out at 200% but a quad system will max out at 400% and so on, a 4 pair system will max at 800% Because the cost reduction is additive.




I know it looks exactly like Over Unity, as in the end result of Under Input is the same thing as a Over unity device would have - so for the sake of avoiding an argument on the real deep physics, I will go with the Term Over unity - since to most that really just means some form of free energy.


I have spent 12 Years full time studying the science and mapping the New Laws which govern the discovery, and the new physics and i have at least 5 Nobel prize worthy - improvements to physics, all of which benefit mankind. 


But most of the world is like MemoryMan, and the other guy, who attack and slander what they don't understand, Of my 12 years working on the science, I have a total of 9 years being attacked by the US Government - FBI and State Securities, get this, they had no victims and no crime - just an outside complainer saying "EVERYONE KNOWS THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE",


Yes, I won both cases - but the point wasn't to convict me - neither had any evidence what so ever of wrong doing... What they did was try to slander me - just to slow or to prevent progress and that worked - my first closed looped system was in 2010. Think on how much waste and time has been lost, how much benefit has been prevented..


I invited Markus, who is an engineer, and does media as a hobby, to make a few videos, his next video is on why I am patented internationally and how that allows me to authorize partnerships world wide, and how that will work. Hint its designed to empower builders around the world.


The Spread sheet is from a member of this forum, sharp man.


So - here is the way the World works - "Disinformation" I mentioned those two you tube videos Markus produced - they wont show up in any searches - unless you know Markus, but 500 phony free energy machines will, and 25 debunkers, and an uncountable number of people who call free energy Stupid.
[size=78%]
[/size]
Now, Why I post here - the Model I showed is so simple, and is undebunkable -and part two - I am looking for some good research writer or university to share the 12 years of knowledge with - to be published. Honestly I don't care if you take credit - as long as I and my team are mentioned as contributors..


I will advise you, we already have a lot in the works - so  "Net flix" type series, three stages of funding lined out, over 500 high energy consumers, LOI s from several Unities and more designs being built.


My Email is traviseffect@protonmail.com


Sincerely,
MrWayne

[Tarsier_79]

Hi Carroll

Bouyancy is also determined by how much of the object is submerged.   

Correct.

Try to push a cork underwater.  As you try to push it down the bouyancy increases.  Or try to lift a neutral bouyant object.out of the water. As soon as you start to lift it out of the water you will see that it gets much heavier.

Correct

That is the part you are missing.

I am not missing anything. Look at the diagram. The weight is essentially in a container of air, and all of the container is submerged. Its buoyancy is determined by its displacement and weight. The volume of the weight still displaces the same volume of water, even if it is in the container, and the remainder is displaced by the air.

[Tarsier_79]

Thanks for trying again, you get closer each time.

I am already the closest to the correct answer. The answer is: in an ideal world this system is designed to be as efficient as possible, and closes in on 100%. In the real world you will experience massive frictions and losses in your moving parts + powering your actuators.

It is your understanding that is flawed. Your spreadsheet is incorrect. Your physical design is inherently inefficient. Any device you build based on this will not produce OU. Any money investors give you will be as if they had tossed it into the wind. (Just like my time here arguing with you.)

I have given enough of my time on this stupidity. I will happily help anyone understand why your design doesn't work if they ask though.

Time will show your design for what it truly is......worthless.

What I haven't figured out yet:  if you are just unable to grasp the true physics behind your flawed design, or if you are a very skilled con artist.