by exxcomm0n

Yeesh.

It's YEARS after the proposed (and now it seems indefinitely postponed) "release" of proof and there is yet to be built a successful SOG,.....

the original 'toy' device works.
im confident now that archers first one worked, just as mine did and the youtube guy. thats 3

i've carefully studied everything that has been since proposed, from the time archer went off on a tangent and started throwing 5 gallons of water 20-feet into the air just to prove a point..
to the magnetic-loops,
(batmans mayernick was the best by the way...)
to that rediculous hair-dryer convection loop...

some of them were great innovations, but i saw nothing about overunity in any of them.  his ultimate "sword of god" design that he morphed into on a large scale, obviously had too many 'problems' to substantiate Newton's Destruction. because he dismantled it and stopped showing us videos.

wether or not he could have gotten that to work if he kept trying.. who knows.
what i do know is the simpler design at the begining of the thread works, not only with two magnetic arrays, but also with only one lower array. theres no question that it does what it does and produces, albeit a tiny ammount,.. more power than the cycle consumes and allows the system to perpetuate.

i still maintain my stance of uselessness. size for size,. a 10-15 inch wheel that weights a few pounds magnets and all, MIGHT- be able to turn a small DC motor under load, while keeping enough power to keep running. that doesnt make it any less important in achieving our goals here. the fact that this exists and can be replicated is a huge step forward in the advancement of OU research.

we know how and why this works. we're just starting to figure out all of the problems and get rid of them systematically.

theres always going to be people that yell at you, and tell you man cannot fly, thats for the birds..  archemedes flew. and so did the wright brothers. today, we dont even think about stepping onto an airplane and traveling across the country or to the other side of the world...  the question is, in 300 years will they look back and see the full potential of what Archer Quinn offered to the world?
or will it be swept under the rug like Howard Johnson, Tesla, Pascal, Morray, Schauberger, bhaskara and countless others...

personally, im not giving up on this until i have one thats stable enough i can take around and show people.

@ SmOky2

Do you have any photos or videos of the "original 'toy' that device works."

Bill

if i had to guess, i'd say somewhere between pages 10 and 138
when i posted the first good replica, theres a few videos on my youtube page that show the wooden wheel, during the construction phase. i documented what i was doing up to the point when it broke itself apart unrepairably.

out of roughly 36 variations,. thers only 3 or so that i thought were worth even showing to anyone, and possibly a 4th that demonstrated what NOT to do.. the rest either went into the trash or dismantled and recycled for parts, ect.

some of the pictures were posted earlier in the thread, but this whole debacle was going on on 4 different forums and a website..  and i honestly cant tell you what was posted where.

the device is very simple in operation, i broke it down as best i could in the later part of the thread once i figured it all out.
you can make it work with virtually any magnet size/strength
although Neos and stronger mags might require a little more accuracy.
ive been using ferrites and ceramics

simple test, put them above each other, and the ones with the furthest lift are your best bet.

its simply using the difference between the magnetic lift force
and the gravitational down force.

once i figured out how it works, 100% of the problems havent been with the operation of the device, but with the logistics and mechanical construction of the replicas. There are a lot of slamming, crashing, weights pulling against the parts, and stuff just breaks..

the wooden one with square rods is probably the best one to see, picture and video wise,
theres a whole other set of problems with using square rods, but it will give you a good idea of how this thing works.

@ Smoky2
 You said " its simply using the difference between the magnetic lift force
and the gravitational down force."

All of my attempts have shown too much magnetic lift force.... creating what I call a back wall (EMF) resulting in not enough gravity force to keep the rotor going.  When I reduce that force by distance etc. it is not enough to get through the gate where gravity takes over.    Do you think materials make a difference?   Neo's then some less stronger ferrite magnets at the trailing end of the rotation? 

well, first off, im not in this to prove anyone wrong
ive shared everything i thought to be of value to this project.

those that were here when this started can tell you i thought this whole thing was a crock of $&!%. I've tried to build hundreds of magnetic-vs-gravity type devices and they all seemed to have the same problem - either gravity cant pull it out, or it cant push it back in to be lifted again. This wheel goes right around both of those problems in various adjustable ways because of its design.

 i dont blame people for being skeptical, in this line of research you HAVE to be, in order to seperate the truth from all the b.s. and misinterpretation that goes on around here.

 It's not about "belief", wether or not I ( or you) believe that archer quinn had a working device doesnt determine wether or not this works.
Its the only explaination i have that cooincides with what i have seen during this long adventure. It seems logical to conclude that the author of the invention, had a working device. I have seen two of mine work, and a 3rd independent replicator whos identity didnt seem important at the time, among the many videos that littered all of the threads.
could the "youtube guy" have been a hoax? thats possible.
could some maniac from Austrailia randomly spout out the precise technical details of a working device, and NOT ever had one actually working? i suppose that could happen... it just doesnt seem likely to me at this point.

i'm not asking anyone to "believe" or "not believe". All i ask is that you take a realistic look at this situation. I have no reason to lead anyone on, i dont stand to gain anything here. Everything ive added to this device has already been given to you freely.

i dont waste my own time, and i certainly wouldnt waste anyone elses by telling you to build one of these.

but if you choose to, i would certainly appreciate the help in advancing the technology, in hopes to take this to the next level.
the main principals of operation have remained intact from the originally proposed machine. and i have documentation along every step of the way taking up 2 folders in my file cabinet.

the design i ended up with 3 years later, is the works of dozens of minds working on the problem. im still bouncing ideas off of the people in this thread to put the final pieces of the puzzle together.

Here's three of the most important adjustable factors that seperate this machine from the "other magnet vs gravity" machines mentioned above.

1) with the rod in repulsion, the leveraged weight imbalance on the entire wheel is much stronger than the back-attractive force of the magnets.

2) the entrance of the field can be adjusted to non-perpendicular angles to a radius of the wheel. This allows you to minimize or even remove the "wall" effect at entrance into the field.

3) the mass-to-flux ratio of the magnetic pair is the key to operation.
   the greater distance the magnet can lift its' partners mass, the less "fine tuned" the components of the system have to be, which makes it easier to achieve an operational state.


you see a lot of people in the videos of non-working machines
they spin the wheel. spin it and watch how long it keeps spinning, tic-tic-tic as each arm thuds against the wall and jumps upwards to push the next arm in. Its obvious these people weren't paying attention to what everyone else was learning about this thing.

i dont spin the wheel..  i gently ease one arm into action, and let the wheel spin itself. Once each arm is adjusted and operates properly with the outer magnets and balanced with the center of mass of the wheel,
it takes itself through each stage, one arm at a time.
you get the arms all balanced with each other, so every one can push its neighbor into the array, and the machine is operational. The little bit of energy you put into it to start it is, by design, less than is required to stop it from perpetuating. i.e. - the entrance into the magnetic array
vs. the momentum of the heavy wheel.

This excess energy is mathematically derrived from the difference in force of the gravitational and magnetic fields over their respective duration of time. The physics is there, the principals of the technology are there, and we have a design that functions.

if its "proof" you're looking for, the very best i could offer your
(and very least i would attempt) would be to finish the build, get it working, and let it run for weeks in the most enclosed/undisturbed enviironment i could construct for the thing, then make a video.
 BUT, even then some would ask if there were hidden wires, motors, pulleys, ect.. would that really be "proof" to you?
So if you seek proof, then the best way to obtain that is to do it yourself. Then you can sit there and argue with yourself over wether or not to accept what you have just done.

You can look at any of my videos, or anyone elses and clearly see the functional components of this device. The actual designs have gone from one end of the scale to the other, and each has their own difficulties. But all mechanics and logistics aside, the magnetic and gravitational components of this device function exactly as they were proposed to do. 

im not looking for fame, or recognition. hell i dont even think im IN any of my videos...
 im just trying to open everyones eyes to the fact that the crazy s.o.b. was right. 1,300 yr old archemedian knowledge, ressurected by Mr. Archer Quinn

you can take it for what it is, or dont let the door hit you...
 

By the way if a SMOT can add gravitational potential energy
to a steel ball by rolling it uphill then this wheel should be able
to do the same when it slides one of it's arms upward against
gravity, as these seem topologically equivalent.

Can it?

:S:MarkSCoffman

Omnibus pointed out that similarity a while back.
i have to partially agree with that assesment.
there area couple of differences though.

 the SMOT uses opposing fields in a linear fashion, like the Tri-Force, or the Howard Johnson linear track, mayernick, ect.
not straight repulsion
But both approaches attain the same goal,
   i.e. lifting a mass through the gravitational field.

for those who had any remaining doubts, you all know i simply build from what my head says without any math as it is not my forte, this comment from the video on the net is newtonian math and i think it says it all.

"Excellent, this video actually shows over unity as it stands, likely the first of its kind in world history, basic math shows in the film something never achieved before, if it was a one metre lift requiring 1 kilowatt, then the fall would equal 1 kilowatt, even if it required a mechanical lift to 9 o’clock costing 500 watts it is still producing 1 kilowatt of fall, so it is still self sustaining. Well done."

It seems to me that there is a score left to settle here, its easy to say "I have something that is perpetual motion" but to build it is problem up to current time. What I don't understand is how can you claim a working unit without first having a working unit? Many folks build stuff in there heads you are not a first believe... I guess it takes a special kind of person to go beyond the initial thought and think of any problems that might arrive from this imaginary build. Maybe it takes an engineer to over come the problems or tell you weather they can be overcame maybe not. To be useful something must be useable and to work something must be working.  While I agree pieces of a puzzle like this may prove important yes! And I do not dispute this.

Would I be semi correct here? Have we all not been down a similar road of thinking what if I did this would it work type thing...

I'll be honest I'd still like to see the working generator you promised to shock the world with but it appears as if you either know it cannot be done and have simply given up or that you are working on mustering up more support to have another go at it I will tell you one thing there is plenty of support that would follow you if you complete the device and it works as promised weather on june 20th of this year or a decade from now but don't expect that someone else will do your work to validate your claim initially it will be you that will have to show a working proof it is just the way it always goes. People will replicate and you will have the archurian world not a bad prospect if I say so myself there is much to gain for any FE device everyone is well aware of this.

-infringer-
www.mopowah.com

Couldn't one just bend that mag configuration partially around a wheel?
Then it would go round and round forever, or until the mags died.

Seems so simple IMO.

from approximately at or around the horizontal line, the magnetic field
switches from upward repulsion to a downward repulsion, and the direction is counter to the direction of rotation caused by the lower array. from the verticle radius, the top-right magnetic array operates in the direction of rotation. If you notice in the original design, the arrays are placed on diagonal quadrants. pushing from below, and lifting from above.

its also important to note, that although the arrays do impart a small rotational effect onto the wheel, it is not the magnetic field that provides power to the wheel, but the gravitational one.
we are simply utilyzing the "lifting" effect of the magnets, to achieve more gravitational potential.


I'll try to break this down into the different systems, so it makes sense.

Magnetic System:
the opposing magnetic fields are conservative. one magnet lifts the other magnet to a height equal to the energy consumed by pushing the magnet into the field. in and out energy levels of this system are equivallent. we can tweak the fields on one end or the other to offset this slightly,. but at the end of the day, the fields are equal in and out.
magnet goes in, rod and magnet lift a few inches.

Archemedian (leveraged) System:
when the rod slides one way or the other, the mass of the rod offests the center of mass of the wheel, and this causes a rotational force in the downward direction from the point of greatest leverage.
in and out energy levels of this system depend on the gravitational vector. So it is tied into the gravitational system.
since the rod translates as it approaches the horizontal, the "input" energy decreases infinitely, at 90-degrees, it requires almost no energy to move the rod from one side to the other.
but once at that side, on the horizontal level, the leveraged power is at its maximum, and provides maximum torque to the wheel.
calculated by the archemedian theorems.

Gravitational System:
This system has equal energy levels in and out, E = mgh
the magnet is lifted however many inches, and that is the potential energy gained by the rod as the magnet lifts it.
This energy, however, is leveraged. So as it translates into momentum on the wheel, it is multiplied by the archemedian factor.
like pushing one person further back on the see-saw, the other person goes up to the top, even though they weigh the same.

The momentum of the wheel from the upper, leveraged rod end, caused by gravity on it's way down, translates the gravitational output energy, back into the input energy of the magnetic system.
the mass and the velocity of the wheel, at the entrance into the magnetic field, can be grossly misproportionate to the input/output of the magnetic field. The two systems are entirely unrelated, except by a common change-in mass factor.

the ratio of      m(rod) : m( wheel +rod)
  defines this misproportionality between the systems.

the gravitational system is interlinked to the magnetic system by the equation E=mgh of the rodd mass m(rod).

This is entirely unrelated to the input/output energies of the magnetic system, at close distances. The energies become more discrete at the limits of the field where gravity is the dominant force. Gravity is measured as a potential, at maximum lift, rather than a force throughout the lift.
because of the missing time factor, the two values are not coherent.
At close distances, where the magnetic field is stronger than gravity,
gravities effects can only be measured comparatively by lifting different masses through the field. The strength of the field is determined by distance between the two magnets, irrespective of time.
And the rate of translation is a factor of mass to distance, irrespective of time.

The energy of gravity leveraged on the wheel is measured over the time as the mass drop from its lifted-most point, downwards to its lowest maximum.

the energy of the wheel is a function of its momentum imparted by the gravitational energy, up to the point it enters into the magnetic field.

what is important to note here is that this is at or around a point of gravitational balance of the wheel itself. Leaving the magnetic system to consume as much of the wheels momentum as it wants to, in a direct energy translation slowing the wheel. The effects of leveraged gravity at this point is 0. none, zip, nada...
gravity is not in the equation during this point.
 Any remaining monentum goes into the "pendulum-like" action of the wheel continuing to spin, as the rod approaches leveraged balance.
if the rod does not approach and/or cross the balance point before the momentum is consumed by gravity above the wheel's balance point, then it would swing back down the other way, and out of the magnetic field.  This point is at or around the horizontal line.. and coincidently at the point where the magnetic array begins to have the opposite effect and must be cut-off.

the upper(attractive) magnetic array is not necessary, but can be used to lift more mass, or to more accurately adjust the translation of the rods to increase the extraction of gravitational energy.
this translates directly into increased torque on the wheel, by increasing the m(rod) factor, disproportionately from the magnetic field energy. but also adds another gravitational "input" as it leaves the upper attractive field. The input/output of the upper array is a complex integration of the lower field, gravity, momentum, and its own attraction to the m(rod).
Basically makes the magnetic system into a dual-magnetic system.
Rather than the much simplier / less powerful single lower array.

Ultimately the gravitational system and the magnetic system are not tied together, but independently effect the momentum of the spinning wheel. In a misproportionate manner.

like. umm...  a fieldmouse standing next to a mack truck?

the fieldmouse ate some berries that gives him enough energy to run down the block to the redlight.
the truck gets its much larger self there, by using an ammount of gas 3 times the size of the fieldmouse, 300 times the size of the berries.

you cant compare those two systems, because they are not related.
nor is the magnetic field, and its input/out related in any way to te gravitational effects of the leveraged mass plus the mass of the wheel.
except by the momentum of the wheek, which is used as a medium for the transfer of energy back into the first system.

we can (theoreticaly) tap into at the shaft of the wheel, though i have not seen archer actually achieve this.