Preserved for the record.

The claim is that the claimant HAS (present tense) a WORKING prototype that runs, on its own, for over three hours. Yet what he has offered in support of his claims... is just the same stuff we have seen for years, working with SMOTs of various configurations. You get part of a full cycle and have to add energy in order to even complete the first cycle.

Perhaps the BEST way to record one's priority, after making the patent application, is to produce a demonstration of the claims, on video and in public.


Of course... that requires the claims to be true.

Conversely
Denying the claim requires the Claimant be called a liar ?
 
Typically this requires investigation [by those of sane mind].

If someone claims something that is literally incredible... like the three hour runtime with no power input... then it is up to them to provide credible evidence. If they cannot-- or will not-- then "if the shoe fits... wear it."

At the very least [in this case] to find The ""effect"" insignificant
so as to base a self run claim?
 
To have Prejudice without investigation is Both ignorant and arrogant.
 
I chose to investigate pryer to Prejudice .

Just what is "unique" and new about what elecar has presented? Nothing, as far as I can see. Literally thousands of people have tried the same things he has presented, and nobody has made one work. Furthermore there are sound, and never refuted, theoretical reasons why it cannot work as claimed. So LET HIM PRESENT CREDIBLE EVIDENCE for his claims! That is where it stands at the moment, and you are doing a profound disservice to all those SMOT researchers who came before, with the same ideas, but could not make them work. The "pryer" investigations have already been done!
When elecar presents his fully working model that performs according to his claims... then let the "investigations" begin. At present all he has done is the usual: he claims one thing, shows another, and insults those who want him to provide evidence.
Well, I can "do the math" on that one, and I come up with "Wayne Travis".

I also read the thread "" the part where he has entered into negotiations
with a MFG comp, ??
 
Its the "" League of extraordinarily benevolent but Poor businessmen  association"".

I should know........
 

Hey, I've entered into negotiations with a major Texas livestock ranch, to breed my invisible pink unicorns. I have a pair in my back yard paddock, don't you know. They eat paper and shit fully charged AA batteries. Unfortunately I can't show you a picture (they are invisible after all). Prove that I don't have them! Look, here is a fully charged AA battery. Smell it! That should be proof enough for anyone.
Or are you calling me a liar? You should know...

Basically You got all your gonna get at this point.
 

I could have told you that at the beginning of this thread, but I waited to see if elecar was going to follow the script. And of course he is, to the letter.

For the record!!
 
thx
Chet
PS
Norman is this the magnet you are using?
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103429

Some thoughts about patenting a SMOT

(All touchy persons, specially the inventor of the SMOT in discussion, should assume that I am writing about any other SMOT, just not their favorite SMOT.)

In case you have a working SMOT (where the steel ball runs endlessly) the SMOT itself becomes unimportant. The "magnet arrangenment" capeabe of moving the steel ball does not need a track (which leads a steel ball around and finally back to the starting point) and it even does not need a steel ball.

This "magnet arrangement" will be the holy grail of all permanent magnet motors. If you can lift a steel ball over the proverbial "sticky point", you can do it with a rotor.

Of course one has to understand the never before understood principle of this "magnet arrangement". And this will be a never before understood property of magnets.

So, if you ever manage to make a steel ball run endlessly in a SMOT, shut up, and try to understand the "magnet arrangement". And if you ever understand it, build the elusive "permanent magnet motor" and patent this motor.

It makes no sense and it will be impossible to accurately describe a SMOT without describing the principle of the "magnet arrangement". And what would you patent besides the principle of the "magnet arrangement"? Do you want to patent some roundabout for a steel ball?

And then of course you run head on into the difficulty (or impossibility) to patent a newly discovered principle, which I explained several times in this forum.

http://www.overunity.com/10596/hydro-differential-pressure-exchange-over-unity-system/msg324092/#msg324092

http://www.overunity.com/12207/quentron-com/msg324294/#msg324294

Greetings, Conrad

Tinsel
Your "script"?? "THE SCRIPT""
 
He has done everything he said would be done in the very first post of this thread ??
Whilst you may require more from him than his original commitment?
 
Some are not so Needy.........
 
Thx
Chet

The guy just likes to pick fights.

Elecar has asked for nothing in this thread and does not claim the test track as shown will self loop.

Quote from the CRETIN   TK

Preserved for the record.

Preserved for the record ? NO  TK you are in your normal M.O mode. It will remain "preserved" on the original page you copied it from. Even a HALF WIT like you knows that you can not (well at least not the un-chosen ones) edit posts here.
You may have special dispensation as the admin here lets you do as you please. Whether that be harassing and stalking elderly ladies or trying to derail other peoples threads.
As already mentioned you have nothing to bring to the table, but please stay as I feel better knowing that no elderly ladies are being abused by you all the while you are here.

Hi Norman, I changed the track a bit, I have run aluminum rod through the center, but have still not found a satisfactory way to space the rails. The friction needs to be much lower than I am able to get from the pipes, but I shall persevere with it until I have to admit defeat.
I managed to get it to loop which is an improvement on the 50mm I was short on the first replication. Not anything to get overly excited about ATM but I hope to improve it further still.
Well anyway, 2 rotations of the track is more than anyone here has ever produced or even seen.

I shall attempt to add the video here on this post so it is "PRESERVED" for the know it all.

Hi Elecar,
I am having trouble seeing 2 rotations from your video.  It looks clipped in the front and at the end. 
Can you do a retake?   Thanks.
Bill

The usual scenario is unfolding, the believers say it works because they believe it works and yet cannot produce a continuous self-running model,
if that wasn't bad enough they resort to attacking any sceptic that says it doesn't work, well I'm very sorry but I cannot run my home on belief or faith I need the reality of a device that actually works.

So the believers should stop wasting their time attacking people that challenge their claim and get on with proving that the claim is a reality by producing a working model,
until they do they have no credibility supporting a claim they cannot show working as claimed

The usual scenario is unfolding, the believers say it works because they believe it works and yet cannot produce a continuous self-running model,
if that wasn't bad enough they resort to attacking any sceptic that says it doesn't work, well I'm very sorry but I cannot run my home on belief or faith I need the reality of a device that actually works.

So the believers should stop wasting their time attacking people that challenge their claim and get on with proving that the claim is a reality by producing a working model,
until they do they have no credibility supporting a claim they cannot show working as claimed

The usual scenario is unfolding, the builders say it might work because one builder has seen it-- after much work and trial-and-error he has seen a model loop for a number of times.  He is working on to produce a continuous self-running replication.  And other builders are jumping in to try to help.

Meanwhile, the skeptics (really, pseudo-skeptics) say it is impossible and they resort to attacking any builder who says it might work. well I'm very sorry but I cannot see how cheap pot-shots on the builders are going to get us to something that will run my home; certainly the belief or faith of the pseudo-skeptics does not help us get to the reality of a device that actually works.

So the pseudo-skeptics should stop wasting their time attacking builders that challenge pseudo-skeptics' claims that it cannot possibly work, and allow the builders to get on with replication.

Meanwhile the pseudo-skeptics have no credibility sitting back and taking cheap pot-shots.