Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Building a self looping "SMOT"  (Read 296275 times)

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #495 on: November 03, 2013, 11:02:38 PM »
Tinman:

I am assuming that you are referring to Michael's setup when you talk about the drop and the right angle turn.  I agree that a lot of energy is lost in that process as I have posted before.  I agree that some kind of a v-ramp will not be of any use.

Quote
So this is why i chose a tilt ramp.  So now the ramp tilts,which means more work is being done in the system-but where dose the loss come from?

Based on what I saw in your diagram, a tilt ramp only takes energy away from the moving ball and turns it into heat.  The tilting ramp will go through a movement cycle and all of the energy to lift it and turn it will go nowhere, which means that it will turn into heat.

Quote
So why would there be a loss if the ramp tilts?

Because it takes work to lift up the center of gravity of the ramp and it takes work to accelerate it to a certain angular veloicity.  None of that work is returned to the system, it becomes heat.

Quote
But now as the ball is going down hill(once the ramp tilts)gravity and the magnetic field are working together on the ball,so we get greater speed on a down hill run.This gain is ofcourse the equal and opposite to the lost potential in the lost hight of the ball.

I know you are aware of it but it's worth it to mention it again because your statemet above is not true.  The gain is not equal.  That's because some of the GPE is used to pull the ball out of the MPE well.  The ball will speed up, but less than "expected" because of the MPE well.

Quote
So the two gains i was talking about ,was the unballanced ramp is now more work being done in the system,as it rotates in one direction,then back to its starting point,and we have reduced the 90* turn to around 3-4*-depending on ramp angle ofcourse.

Well I disagree with both of your points.  The tilting ramp is just interfering with the moveemnt of the ball and it absorbs energy and turns it into heat.  For "reducing the turn" you have made many statedments like that.  If the ball makes a tun in some sort of well-designed track then there is a negliggible loss in energy.

I imagine a track that the ball follows between the two ramps that is something akin to this kid's toy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrCRtPfE240

So the ball exits one ramp and then follows a track that goes downwards and also makes a 90 degree turn.  It's like a mini bobsled run for the ball, what could be simpler?

Quote
So the two gains i was talking about

You have an ongoing challenge when it comes to terminology.  We have never been talking about "gains" here.  We are talking about mechanisms to reduce losses.  We know that people discuss energy on the forum where they incorrectly make referecne to "energy gains" when what they really are is "reduction in energy losses."  This is a critical issue were there is no allowance for leeway in the proper way to express what is going on.

The classic example for this problem is Thane Heins, where he has probably read similar comments about his setups hundreds of times and he still intentionally ignores them.  To stay on my soapbox a bit longer you have Daniel Nunez going to the BEM conference and demonstrating the same mistakes in measurement that he also has read hundreds of times from his YouTube channel and on this forum and I am sure other places.  Those two people are arguably free energy zombies repeating the same bad behaviours over and over because they are looking for a payday.  It's simply not right.

A few days ago I posted about a flat square track with machined right angle turns at the four corners to change the direction of the ball with as minimal an energy loss as possioble.  A simple flat track like that is in my mind the way to have the least losses as possible.  The damn thing still won't work and common sense should tell anybody that the thing won't work.

Meanwhile the two people promoting this idea have fallen mute.  I don't know if this thread has anywhere else to go.  Don't anybody for a second believe the first guy's story about it running for three hours but he had to stop it because it was noisy.  In my opinion there are only two explanations fot that, 1) it's a con to try to get money, or 2) there are psychological issues at play.

MileHigh

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #496 on: November 04, 2013, 04:39:33 AM »
Tinman:

I am assuming that you are referring to Michael's setup when you talk about the drop and the right angle turn.  I agree that a lot of energy is lost in that process as I have posted before.  I agree that some kind of a v-ramp will not be of any use.

Based on what I saw in your diagram, a tilt ramp only takes energy away from the moving ball and turns it into heat.  The tilting ramp will go through a movement cycle and all of the energy to lift it and turn it will go nowhere, which means that it will turn into heat.

Because it takes work to lift up the center of gravity of the ramp and it takes work to accelerate it to a certain angular veloicity.  None of that work is returned to the system, it becomes heat.

I know you are aware of it but it's worth it to mention it again because your statemet above is not true.  The gain is not equal.  That's because some of the GPE is used to pull the ball out of the MPE well.  The ball will speed up, but less than "expected" because of the MPE well.

Well I disagree with both of your points.  The tilting ramp is just interfering with the moveemnt of the ball and it absorbs energy and turns it into heat.  For "reducing the turn" you have made many statedments like that.  If the ball makes a tun in some sort of well-designed track then there is a negliggible loss in energy.

I imagine a track that the ball follows between the two ramps that is something akin to this kid's toy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrCRtPfE240

So the ball exits one ramp and then follows a track that goes downwards and also makes a 90 degree turn.  It's like a mini bobsled run for the ball, what could be simpler?

You have an ongoing challenge when it comes to terminology.  We have never been talking about "gains" here.  We are talking about mechanisms to reduce losses.  We know that people discuss energy on the forum where they incorrectly make referecne to "energy gains" when what they really are is "reduction in energy losses."  This is a critical issue were there is no allowance for leeway in the proper way to express what is going on.

The classic example for this problem is Thane Heins, where he has probably read similar comments about his setups hundreds of times and he still intentionally ignores them.  To stay on my soapbox a bit longer you have Daniel Nunez going to the BEM conference and demonstrating the same mistakes in measurement that he also has read hundreds of times from his YouTube channel and on this forum and I am sure other places.  Those two people are arguably free energy zombies repeating the same bad behaviours over and over because they are looking for a payday.  It's simply not right.

A few days ago I posted about a flat square track with machined right angle turns at the four corners to change the direction of the ball with as minimal an energy loss as possioble.  A simple flat track like that is in my mind the way to have the least losses as possible.  The damn thing still won't work and common sense should tell anybody that the thing won't work.

Meanwhile the two people promoting this idea have fallen mute.  I don't know if this thread has anywhere else to go.  Don't anybody for a second believe the first guy's story about it running for three hours but he had to stop it because it was noisy.  In my opinion there are only two explanations fot that, 1) it's a con to try to get money, or 2) there are psychological issues at play.

MileHigh
Your right,i should say an increase in efficiency-not a gain. Just thinking the wrong way,in that if we reduce the loss,that is a gain for us-but it should be an increase in efficiency insted.

Daniel Nunez-now there we have no disagreement.

I will indeavor to use correct terms in my statements.

happyfunball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #497 on: November 04, 2013, 06:17:09 AM »
A V-Gate is no different than placing a magnet within the sphere of attraction to another magnet and releasing it. Same forces, arranged slightly differently.

minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #498 on: November 04, 2013, 09:51:35 PM »
Hi webby1,
            I guess even if you use ping pong balls it'll still qualify as as SMOT.
 One thing I am sure of is that you'll be world famous if you manage to get
a proven working device!
                                  John

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #499 on: November 05, 2013, 06:45:21 PM »
so lets examine if a 2nd law violation is possible on paper first before we set up a smot.so lets put a gadolinium ball on the ramp at  its curie point 19celcius and let it fling.friction heating and sudden exiting from the magnetic field at the top of the ramp should cause it  to raise in temperature to slightly above its curie point and let it fling far.very far.definitely further than on entry.a smot using a gadolinium ball on a 19degree celcius summer day looks highly favourable.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #500 on: November 05, 2013, 07:12:16 PM »
lets make it simpler and lower a  magnet toward a stationary gadolinium ball on a sunny 19celcius day.the ball jumps up,collides with the magnet raising its temperature to slightly above its curie point,releasing its grip momentarily and we get a small 2nd jump.2 jumps with one stone,the 2nd jump is overunity gain.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #501 on: November 05, 2013, 07:45:08 PM »
lets make it simpler and lower a  magnet toward a stationary gadolinium ball on a sunny 19celcius day.the ball jumps up,collides with the magnet raising its temperature to slightly above its curie point,releasing its grip momentarily and we get a small 2nd jump.2 jumps with one stone,the 2nd jump is overunity gain.

Make a pendulum with the gado ball, with a magnet attracting the ball somewhere up from bottom dead center. Have the ball come into the focus of a lens or mirror at the point of magnetic attraction. Then the system will swing "perpetually" as the ball heats and cools around the Curie point.   Tesla didn't use gadolinium or solar power, he used nickel and conventional heat, but a thermomagnetic motor is a thermomagnetic motor, and Tesla patented many different designs, all of which would work with gadolinium and solar power. #396,121 IIRC.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #502 on: November 05, 2013, 08:04:42 PM »
@ tinselkoala perhaps no need for a mirror when we use gadolinium in that pendulum on a fine 19celcius day.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #503 on: November 05, 2013, 08:09:08 PM »
@ tinselkoala perhaps no need for a mirror when we use gadolinium in that pendulum on a fine 19celcius day.
The ball needs to cool and heat again for the cycle to continue. So moving from shade to sun may be enough. As soon as you send me a gadolinium ball I'll test it for you.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #504 on: November 05, 2013, 08:19:04 PM »
@tinselkoala every collision with the magnet is a heat and cool cycle in and of itself.so you still havent shifted from your couch to the local varsity storeroom i see,tsk tsk.cmon,how difficult can it be to bribe the storekeeper a 20bux man.

elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #505 on: November 06, 2013, 02:15:33 PM »
Hi elecar,

You seem to be silent I hope you are still around?  With your silence you only feed negative opinions.

About 10 days ago you mentioned retaking a video and upload it, please continue and show it. Afterall, you wrote in Reply #193: 

"Hi powercat, I really do not mind the skeptics taking part in the thread, I do take exception to being called a scam, fraud, liar when those skeptics have not even given me enough opportunity to show the effect working.
I have never asked anyone here for anything, I have already said it, but not now and not in the future. There is nothing here for sale
."

And on your own setup you wrote in Reply #194:

"Hi happyfunball, I am not a scientist, I barely understand the concept of CoE or 2LOT, I played with magnets trying to get a conventional SMOT to work, I was inspired by Bills videos. During the course of trying it out I noticed strange (to me) behaviour when one side of the magnet array was removed. I toyed with it until I got the ball to rise to the top of the ramp and then roll back out of the ramp whilst still in the magnetic field.
I do not know what it is classed as, I tried to find out by posing a question on another thread which disintegrated in pretty much the same way as this one.
Here is my take as best as I can describe and my own understanding. The magnets can "pull" the ball up a ramp.
The ball is able to reverse and escape the field of that ramp from a height greater than it started. So in this case magnets = up - gravity = down.
All the threads I ever read said pretty much the same thing, "a smot can not be looped because the ball always leaves the ramp at a height equal to or lower than the point it started."
That was not what I was experiencing when using the effect instead of the conventional smot ramp with 2 arrays.
One thing I can tell you is that when making any application you must steer clear of  OU or perpetual because it will not even be entertained. And that is why I have never and still do not claim either.
"

This is clear enough, your setup is not the usual SMOT, so please do continue your work here.       Your statement from above: "I noticed strange (to me) behaviour when one side of the magnet array was removed. I toyed with it until I got the ball to rise to the top of the ramp and then roll back out of the ramp whilst still in the magnetic field."  sounds significant and especially the second half of your sentence is perhaps the most crucial point in your setup. 

Surely there are some members and other readers here who still give you the benefit of doubt. However, with your silence the number of those people will gradually run out and your setup remains a daydream.

rgds,  Gyula



Hi Gyula, yes I am still around, I have a life outside of this forum that sometimes requires more attention than exchanges with those like your good self.
On the 18th of November I am due to sign paper work, if and when that results in a cheque in my hand I will as promised post here.

I tried on several occasions to load the video on here, the upload seems to go ahead and then I get a message saying the file exceeds 6000KB  and it fails to load after waiting in excess of 20 minutes at a time. 

I am suprised you might think that I gave a rats ass about what others think of me. You really think know it alls like TK and his minions concern me enough to care ?

I have shared everything I am able to up to now. I will continue to take part in the thread. What I will not do is bow to TK, his minions or anyone else who thinks that by name calling and accusations, they will get what they want any quicker.


elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #506 on: November 06, 2013, 02:38:12 PM »
Bill & Gyula

elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #507 on: November 06, 2013, 02:54:24 PM »
Quote from one of TKs Minions

Quote
Meanwhile the two people promoting this idea have fallen mute.  I don't know if this thread has anywhere else to go.  Don't anybody for a second believe the first guy's story about it running for three hours but he had to stop it because it was noisy.  In my opinion there are only two explanations fot that, 1) it's a con to try to get money, or 2) there are psychological issues at play.

MileHigh

Like I have stated Dr Know it all, I have a life outside of this forum. I can not always be here to keep you happy.
I do not give a rats ass about what you believe, but is it really what you believe or your conceived perception of what you believe TK expects you to believe ?
I live in a studio apartment and you can take it to the bank that a steel ball running on metal rails and switching from one rail to another gets tiresome, its loud enough to get on your nerves in a short amount of time.

There is no con or scam here I have stated on record THERE IS NOTHING HERE FOR SALE not now not in the future, not ever to anyone on this forum now or future members. What part dont you understand Dr Know it all ?

There are no " psychological issues at play." so I retract calling you Dr Know it all, because you are obviously not a doctor. Just one of TKs foot soldiers, so you can be  Pt 1st class Know it all.

 

elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #508 on: November 06, 2013, 03:05:22 PM »
Hi Elecar,
This was your last post.   Hope all is well.   I also noticed you took down your orginal video.   
Bill


Hi Bill yes I am still around, I have posted the retake video for you and Gyula. I hope it shows clearly that I did not push the ball which lets face it was the general accusation.
None of the videos have been taken down Bill. Which do you require a link to ?

elecar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: Building a self looping "SMOT"
« Reply #509 on: November 06, 2013, 03:24:49 PM »

Where is elecar?  Busy in writing book on SMOT -  Elecarian Smotics?  (or Cosmetics)

Unlike the real Newton, you are moron. And I shall treat you as such from now on since like so many of the other morons you lost respect by not giving it.