Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

News announcements and other topics => News => Topic started by: Rapadura on April 14, 2010, 05:35:36 AM

Title: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 14, 2010, 05:35:36 AM
First of all, I have to apologize to CLaNZeR for this unauthorized thread. But I have to create it, because I'm very impressed with I just watched.

I have just watched this video:

http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments1.wmv

That was an experiment made by CLaNZeR in 2008 with Halbach arrays.

This video has something very impressive: CLaNZeR made the runner overcome the gate of the second Halbach array after exiting the first Halbach array...

It's just after the message "Now for two Halbach Array Gates". He puts the runner after the gate of the first array. Okay, he used his hand to do that. But after the runner exits this first  array, the runner enters the second array ALONE!

And he did it again after the message "Entrance Sticky Spot seems less than the Tri-Force Gate".  The second "gate" (entrance sticky spot) is entered ALONE by the runner!

How long that could be? If CLaNZeR had put a third array, the runner could overcome the gate (entrance sticky spot) of this third array? And a fourth? And a fifth?

And after the last Halbach array, there's no sticky point. The sticky point is always at the beginning of the array, not at the end.

From what I had seem in the video I can't imagine any theoretical obstacle for the runner entering array after array, gate after gate, for a very long distance.

Now, just imagine: if the rolling surface was covered by piezos, how much power could be stored after 2000 meters in a bank of capacitors? Couldn't this energy be enough to make the runner overcome the first gate of the first array of magnetic track coming in the inverse direction? After passing the first gate of the first array, couldn't the runner goes on without need for more external energy input?

Mr. CLaNZeR, please try that experiment again!!!!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 14, 2010, 05:59:23 AM
If he did it with 33 Tri-Gates, he can do it with lots of Halbach arrays:

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: teslaalset on April 14, 2010, 09:17:27 AM
This is not overunity.

It's been said already many times elsewhere in this forum: look at where the roler magnet starts.
To put is there, you have to use already some energy.
This is what is overlooked all the time.

You can prove that it does not work by simulating forces using FEMM and calculate the whole stretched area from way before the array until way passed the array.
Sum all calculated forces over the whole distance and you find exactly 0 (zero) as the integral result.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Magluvin on April 14, 2010, 10:02:19 AM
Has anyone ever done a wheel with this array?

Mags
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: 4Tesla on April 14, 2010, 10:30:38 AM
This array seems different as I think you may be able to close loop??  If so, I have an idea of placing in a circle and then have a track for a stainless steel ball.  If can be in a closed loop.. the ball would spin around the track in a loop!

See attached (not to scale.. quick drawing)

4Tesla
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: 4Tesla on April 14, 2010, 10:34:13 AM
Has anyone ever done a wheel with this array?

Mags

Hi Mags.. didn't see your post.. that is the question!  I think it would be worth trying, but with a ball instead of a wheel.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Airstriker on April 14, 2010, 11:39:49 AM
Steel ball ? Why should it work ? The steel ball would  be attracted to the first magnet and not move any further ;]
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: 4Tesla on April 14, 2010, 05:02:47 PM
Steel ball ? Why should it work ? The steel ball would  be attracted to the first magnet and not move any further ;]

Did you watch the video?  But.. CLaNZeR rolled it down the side of the array to show there was no attraction.. it didn't go by itself.. didn't notice that.. I still think it may be looped though.

Watch this video.. one side attracts.. the other canceled out.. very cool.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments2.wmv

4Tesla

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: mscoffman on April 14, 2010, 08:07:24 PM
This array seems different as I think you may be able to close loop??  If so, I have an idea of placing in a circle and then have a track for a stainless steel ball.  If can be in a closed loop.. the ball would spin around the track in a loop!

See attached (not to scale.. quick drawing)

4Tesla

Along these same lines if one arranged Halbach array magnets in a
2.5ft diameter circle and have the runner mounted on an arm. It would
seems like this would work. How strong could a collective sticky spot
become with a Halbach Array magnets? The other thing one could do;
reverse the polarity of Halbach arrays 1/2 way though and have gaps
where the arrays reverses so that the runner could be mechanically
flipped. Also the arm could store a small amount of gravitational energy
by lifting the runner very slightly then having a sharper ramp to
provide some propelling power at where ever the sticky spot there is.
I guess this would be a little like a "Yog motor".

The only possible way this would not work is like user teslaaset
says...that there is no power gain from any part of the array.
But then where is power coming from to make the runner roll
slightly uphill?

:S:MarkSCoffman
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: 4Tesla on April 14, 2010, 09:51:40 PM

Along these same lines if one arranged Halbach array magnets in a
2.5ft diameter circle and have the runner mounted on an arm. It would
seems like this would work. How strong could a collective sticky spot
become with a Halbach Array magnets? The other thing one could do;
reverse the polarity of Halbach arrays 1/2 way though and have gaps
where the arrays reverses so that the runner could be mechanically
flipped. Also the arm could store a small amount of gravitational energy
by lifting the runner very slightly then having a sharper ramp to
provide some propelling power at where ever the sticky spot there is.
I guess this would be a little like a "Yog motor".

The only possible way this would not work is like user teslaaset
says...that there is no power gain from any part of the array.
But then where is power coming from to make the runner roll
slightly uphill?

:S:MarkSCoffman

I agree.. a magnet rotating on a arm seems possible.. the way to collect some power is, if the arm keeps rotating, to use a small collector coil.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Airstriker on April 15, 2010, 11:51:36 AM
Did you watch the video?  But.. CLaNZeR rolled it down the side of the array to show there was no attraction.. it didn't go by itself.. didn't notice that.. I still think it may be looped though.

Watch this video.. one side attracts.. the other canceled out.. very cool.
http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/CLaNZeRHalbachExperiments2.wmv

4Tesla
I've already seen this many times - it's not the steel ball - it's a magnet. Didn't you notice it's a part of magnetic toy - Geomag or similar ?
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 15, 2010, 12:39:15 PM
This is not overunity.

It's been said already many times elsewhere in this forum: look at where the roler magnet starts.
To put is there, you have to use already some energy.

Okay, okay, I will not say anything more... This is not overunity, OK...

Just want CLaNZeR put some thousands Halbach arrays like those used in the video in a straight line and make the ball travel a few kilometers... But it still is not overunity because it took energy to put the ball inside the first array. Ok, Ok, I give up. If it's not overunity, nothing will be overunity.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: jsd453 on April 15, 2010, 03:12:40 PM
Quote
Along these same lines if one arranged Halbach array magnets in a
2.5ft diameter circle and have the runner mounted on an arm. It would
seems like this would work. How strong could a collective sticky spot
become with a Halbach Array magnets? The other thing one could do;
reverse the polarity of Halbach arrays 1/2 way though and have gaps
where the arrays reverses so that the runner could be mechanically
flipped. Also the arm could store a small amount of gravitational energy
by lifting the runner very slightly then having a sharper ramp to
provide some propelling power at where ever the sticky spot there is.
I guess this would be a little like a "Yog motor".

The only possible way this would not work is like user teslaaset
says...that there is no power gain from any part of the array.
But then where is power coming from to make the runner roll
slightly uphill?

@mscoffman, Perhaps a "hybrid" system combining the recently discussed DDWFTTW cart on a hallbeck array or tri gate track.  The magentic momentum should get the cart moving and the wheels on the cart drive the propeller and the propeller drives the cart... this should provide enough energy to get past any sticky spot to begin another revoultion.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: ResinRat2 on April 15, 2010, 04:34:08 PM
[Okay, okay, I will not say anything more... This is not overunity, OK...

Just want CLaNZeR put some thousands Halbach arrays like those used in the video in a straight line and make the ball travel a few kilometers...[/quote]

All that needs to be done is to scale this up to locomotive size and stretch the track around the planet. Everyone along the way can set up coils to draw Energy from it and we would have the first "global" power generator. Promoting peace, love, and brotherhood among nations. (Can you see the pretty butterflies flittering around?)

Perpetual motion, no sticky spots, and world cooperation. What a concept!!!  :D
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: onthecuttingedge2005 on April 15, 2010, 07:14:11 PM
nobody has tried a diamagnetic ball yet, made of either Pyrolytic carbon and or bismuth. of course the magnets would have to be pretty strong.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: 4Tesla on April 15, 2010, 09:40:28 PM
I've already seen this many times - it's not the steel ball - it's a magnet. Didn't you notice it's a part of magnetic toy - Geomag or similar ?

No, it is a steel ball.. they are only magnetized when connected to the toy magnet stick.. It is true that there are magnet balls, but that isn't one.

4Tesla
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Airstriker on April 16, 2010, 10:43:24 AM
No, it is a A ball.. they are only magnetized when connected to the toy magnet stick.. It is true that there are magnet balls, but that isn't one.

4Tesla

Oh ok, good to know that. Sorry.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 16, 2010, 01:29:03 PM
I'm still waiting any of our dear skepticals to explain why the runner entered the second array in Clanzer's video, overcoming the gate, and why it would be impossible to the runner overcome the entrance gate of a third array, after exiting the second, or overcome the entrance gate of a fourth array after exiting the third.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2010, 05:14:56 PM
I'm still waiting any of our dear skepticals to explain why the runner entered the second array in Clanzer's video, overcoming the gate, and why it would be impossible to the runner overcome the entrance gate of a third array, after exiting the second, or overcome the entrance gate of a fourth array after exiting the third.

@Rapadura, this same cascading can be done with a SMOT. Look aroung for Naudin's videos where he has chained three SMOT's one after another. As was explained earlier, this may be due to the fact that the energy spent to place the roller (the ball) at the beginning may be greater than the energies it can overcome later. Imagine a ball let go from a tall mountain peak which overcomes peaks of lesser heights along its way.

The real proof for OU would be to have the ball (the roller) travel along a closed loop, not just overcoming some series of gates, but that hasn't been demonstrated so far.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 16, 2010, 10:03:19 PM
Imagine a ball let go from a tall mountain peak which overcomes peaks of lesser heights along its way.

There's a enormous difference between a ball falling from a tall mountain peak and what I had seen on Clanzer's video:

1) The runner in Clanzer's videos is not losing gravitational potential energy. In fact it can even gain gravitational potential energy going uphill in a gentle slope.

2) At the end of the very last array, the runner don't gets stuck at a sticky point. The sticky points are in the beggining of the arrays, so at the very end of the last array there's no sticky point, the runner keeps moving after exiting the last array.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Omnibus on April 16, 2010, 10:26:42 PM
There's a enormous difference between a ball falling from a tall mountain peak and what I had seen on Clanzer's video:

1) The runner in Clanzer's videos is not losing gravitational potential energy. In fact it can even gain gravitational potential energy going uphill in a gentle slope.

2) At the end of the very last array, the runner don't gets stuck at a sticky point. The sticky points are in the beggining of the arrays, so at the very end of the last array there's no sticky point, the runner keeps moving after exiting the last array.

No, no, read again carefully what I explained and try to think it through more thoroughly. Never forget the initial energy necessary to be put in when placing the roller at the start. Also, understand that the experiment with the roller is the opposite to the experiment with SMOT. This whole thing has been discussed at length in several threads. Like I said, the main problem is that so far no one has been able to make the ball or the roller travel along a closed loop.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: mscoffman on April 17, 2010, 02:39:43 AM
@all

The problem in a open magnetic system is that the magnets in a large
long array will tug at the ball or runner on it's return path even though
it is not in the array's central hot spot. The slower the runner returns
the more "mischief" the collective magnetic field can do on its return
path. The thing would be to shield the magnets in the array with an
iron armature that would focus the magnetic field heavely into the
track area and have less lines of flux flowing off generally. The halbach
array and to some extent the triforce gates do that, but is it
enough??? There was a youtube video of a person shaking a
magnetic "wand" and one observes a similar suspended wand let's
say 6 feet away, moving vigorously...That's the effect we are fighting.

---
Eventually you will want a magnetic runner that will reject arbitrary
magnetization which a steel ball can not.

:S:MarkSCoffman
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: billmehess on April 17, 2010, 06:22:16 AM
His video #2 showing the exit from the array is very interesting. Notice that there is a acceleration through the gate to allow the exit to happen. I wonder if it would be possible to have a single long enough array for the device to exit as such as to speed to loop over and enter a
over head "tube"  The tube would be angled slightly downward and allow the device to reenter the initial array-just a thought.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2010, 06:38:17 AM
His video #2 showing the exit from the array is very interesting. Notice that there is a acceleration through the gate to allow the exit to happen. I wonder if it would be possible to have a single long enough array for the device to exit as such as to speed to loop over and enter a
over head "tube"  The tube would be angled slightly downward and allow the device to reenter the initial array-just a thought.

Unlike SMOT, there is an insurmountable entrance barrier in this case, if you remember the demonstrations when this was discussed. If you don't put the roller just right it will go the other way, not toward the track we see it rolling along in the video.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: billmehess on April 17, 2010, 04:03:32 PM
Yes  I see what your mean, but what if the device  "dropped' into
the entrance of the array at an angle just due to gravity of it " falling" through the tube.
Again if sufficent speed could be atttained the device exits the array loops back over itself. Sounds to easy though, I think the problem would be the looping over at the exit.
I would like to see a ramp built at the entrance of the array and the device in effect rolled into the array.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 17, 2010, 04:51:23 PM
Come on guys... If the roller can really enter a third array after exiting the second, and enter a fourth after exiting the third, and a fifth, and a sixth, and a seventh, and this thing can go on continuously for any distance, then it's pure and genuine overunity.

Look the drawing I have put in the first post of this thread. If we use two "tracks" of Halbach arrays side by side (separated, let we say, by one or two meters), it can obviously achive a closed loop. Just use a piezo film under the rolling surface, and after certain distance (I don't know what that distance will be, probably well less than the 2000 meters I wrote in the drawing), the energy accumulated in the capacitor bank will be far enough to drive the roller at the end of the first track and put it in the right position at the beggining of the second track. Remember all Halbach arrays used are equal, and to make the roller enter the first array of the track is as easy as make it enter any other Halbach array along the track.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Thaelin on April 17, 2010, 05:45:16 PM
I have stayed out of this but now I need to ask if
you have made up a loop of halbach arrays and see
if it demonstrates the same problem as in regular mags.
You have the thrust until you join the two ends and then
it is gone. You have created a closed loop magnet like
a torrid and now all the force can flow internal.

thay
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Omnibus on April 17, 2010, 10:17:45 PM
It's overunity without a doubt. This is the only categorically proven overunity device so far. The problem is that the excess energy is only produced discontinuously and, as I already said, it hasn't been shown yet to travel along a closed loop, that is, to have the excess energy produced continuously. Unfortunately, thus far, large part of the excess energy is in the form of losses (heat losses) and that prevents it from closing the loop.

As a matter of fact, that (the losses) is the main reason why Steorn's eOrbo can't be made self-sustaining at this point, although it's also an OU device, producing excess energy.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 18, 2010, 01:27:51 AM
I had just edited Clanzer's video to show only the most important parts, and posted on YouTube:

I hope people understand that, if it can really make a roller travel for thousands of meters in straight line, it's overunity, even if a closed loop wasn't achieved yet.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2010, 01:54:37 AM
I had just edited Clanzer's video to show only the most important parts, and posted on YouTube:

I hope people understand that, if it can really make a roller travel for thousands of meters in straight line, it's overunity, even if a closed loop wasn't achieved yet.

That's correct. That a device of this type is an OU machine has already been proved conclusively using rigorous arguments and not only qualitatively as it is seen in the video. That's an old chestnut already. Now what's in is the new experiment by Bob Kostoff and if its reality is confirmed that will be a new era in the practical application of the already proven OU effect: http://www.newsourceofenergy.com/Specs.html
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: derricka on April 18, 2010, 02:42:02 AM
An important point that many are missing here, is that magnets inside an external magnetic field don't necessarily move towards (or away) from that field, however, they will align. Place a magnet on a floating piece of wood, and it will only turn to align with the Earth's field, it will not be drawn to the Earth's north or south pole. For a magnet to move inside a field, it must subjected to a GRADIENT (change in field strength).  Closing the loop on a SMOT yields a net gradient of ZERO. Claiming a SMOT works is like saying "Look I can ski downhill without doing any work" Sure you can, but forgot to mention that you had to climb the hill first. For a magnetic field, entering the "sticky spot" is that uphill climb. Anyone can ride downhill for free, but the real trick is to ride uphill for free.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: billmehess on April 18, 2010, 02:59:22 AM
Here's an interesting thought on this subject. We talk about closing the loop in such that the
roller returns to it's start point and reenters the array. What if it could generate enough stored energy in a cap. bank due to a long roll to in effect be simply pushed back through the array. If it can run continously for a long time then it should be able to generate and store sufficient energy to be able to do this in other words when it reaches some point
it simply bounces back in to the array to return to it's beginning and the whole process is repeated over and over.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 18, 2010, 04:36:41 AM
Closing the loop on a SMOT yields a net gradient of ZERO. Claiming a SMOT works is like saying "Look I can ski downhill without doing any work"

It's a pity that you skeptics this time can not use the old argument of comparing a SMOT with a "cliff" or "going down in a mountain" one more time...

You can't do that, because this is not a SMOT, it's Halbach array.

And the video is sufficient proof of the fact that the roller can overcome the gate of the second array just with the speed it gained from the first array, and both arrays are equal.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 18, 2010, 04:58:41 AM
it simply bounces back in to the array to return to it's beginning and the whole process is repeated over and over.

I was thinking of use two "tracks" of arrays, side by side, but you remembered them: the same array can be used in both directions!

Just use the piezos to charge the capacitors bank, and then use the energy in the capacitors bank to put the roller in a position that makes it travel in the inverse direction, through the same track of arrays!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2010, 05:15:36 AM
An important point that many are missing here, is that magnets inside an external magnetic field don't necessarily move towards (or away) from that field, however, they will align. Place a magnet on a floating piece of wood, and it will only turn to align with the Earth's field, it will not be drawn to the Earth's north or south pole. For a magnet to move inside a field, it must subjected to a GRADIENT (change in field strength).  Closing the loop on a SMOT yields a net gradient of ZERO. Claiming a SMOT works is like saying "Look I can ski downhill without doing any work" Sure you can, but forgot to mention that you had to climb the hill first. For a magnetic field, entering the "sticky spot" is that uphill climb. Anyone can ride downhill for free, but the real trick is to ride uphill for free.

No, your understanding of how SMOT works is incorrect. I don't want to get into this here, however. There's a lot written already on the subject.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Omnibus on April 18, 2010, 05:18:49 AM
It's a pity that you skeptics this time can not use the old argument of comparing a SMOT with a "cliff" or "going down in a mountain" one more time...

You can't do that, because this is not a SMOT, it's Halbach array.

And the video is sufficient proof of the fact that the roller can overcome the gate of the second array just with the speed it gained from the first array, and both arrays are equal.

Yes, you can. You can can use the analogy of  going down the hill in this case as well. On the other hand, the reason why this is indeed OU is more complicated but I don't want to get into this here, as I already mentioned. Enough has been said about that in several extensive strings here in this forum and elsewhere. That isn't an issue any more.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 19, 2010, 02:06:47 AM

Since the array can be used in both directions (as we can see on Clanzer's videos), what happens if we block the end of the array with a piece of wood, preventing the roller from exiting the array, and forcing it to stop in the exact point where it should start the movement in the inverse direction? Would it start the movement in the inverse direction?  Or need the roller be rotated 180 degrees, swapping the positions of the two balls in its ends?
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: gravityblock on April 19, 2010, 05:55:39 AM

Since the array can be used in both directions (as we can see on Clanzer's videos), what happens if we block the end of the array with a piece of wood, preventing the roller from exiting the array, and forcing it to stop in the exact point where it should start the movement in the inverse direction? Would it start the movement in the inverse direction?  Or need the roller be rotated 180 degrees, swapping the positions of the two balls in its ends?

The roller will need to be rotated 180o.

GB
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 19, 2010, 01:22:35 PM
So... Time to replicate it.

Now that I have a plan, I'll start buying my neo magnets. This week I will order at least 40 cubic magnets, enough to build 8 Halbach arrays, that can be arranged in 4 sets of two. Let's see if the roller can travel through 4 sets...
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: billmehess on April 20, 2010, 02:19:19 AM
How about a quick explanation on the difference between a Halbach array and a smot being employed in this device.
Also why does the roller have to be rotated 180 deg.?
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: gravityblock on April 20, 2010, 08:06:47 AM
Also why does the roller have to be rotated 180 deg.?

Because the field from the Halbach and roller are still pointing in the same direction, thus the force will be in the same direction.  You either need to reverse the direction of the field on the Halbach, or need to reverse the direction of the field on the roller, which is rotating it 180 o.  If you pay attention to ClanZer's videos, then you will notice he rotates the roller in order for it to go in the other direction.

Here's two videos demonstrating this principal, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvScSTbly1c  and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-kQans2rww  Notice how the direction of force on the roller is according to the polarity of the current (reversing the field of the horseshoe magnet will also change the direction of force on the roller).  Reversing the polarity of the current is the same as rotating the roller 180o (the roller stick has a magnet in it, which magnetizes the steel balls in a particular direction).

[Edit:]  The second video is using the concept of a homopolar motor, but the basic principal remains the same.

GB
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 20, 2010, 01:39:40 PM
So, it's just a matter of distance before the energy generated by the piezo film under the rolling surface can be enough to power an electro-mechanical arm that takes the roller at the end of the last pair of Halbach arrays, rotates the roller 180 degrees, and put it ar the right position to start rolling in the inverse direction, towards the beggining of the track, where there is another electro-mechanical arm.

Of course I'm assuming that the roller can travel through not only 2 or 3 pairs of Halbach arrays, but through 700 or 800 pairs.

I'll start trying with 4 pairs.

I have started the process of buying my cubic magnets (I found a seller), but don't paid for it yet. I hope 10 days from now I will have my 40 cubic magnets in my house.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: billmehess on April 20, 2010, 08:57:50 PM
Thank you for the explanation. I think this is really worth pursuing. I can buy 1000 1/4" neo 45 cubes for \$133.00 from CMS Magnetics. I am going to place the order and build an array as long as possible. With this number of magnets I should also be able to construct a circular or oval tract. It should be fun, anyway I love this stuff!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Cherryman on April 20, 2010, 09:14:42 PM

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 20, 2010, 09:52:53 PM
Thank you for the explanation. I think this is really worth pursuing. I can buy 1000 1/4" neo 45 cubes for \$133.00 from CMS Magnetics. I am going to place the order and build an array as long as possible. With this number of magnets I should also be able to construct a circular or oval tract. It should be fun, anyway I love this stuff!

Things in Brasil are more expensive: I'm ordering just 40 neo cubes and 12 neo spheres for R\$ 120 (120 Reais), what is the equivalent to US\$ 65 or 70.

I notice you said you want to  "build an array as long as possible". My guess is that we should not build only one long array, the key is to build several Halbach arrays with only 5 cubes each (that is the minimum number of cubes to build a Halbach array).

The key is to place each pair of Halbach arrays a few centimeters distant from the previous pair, as Clanzer did in the video. It will be sucessfull if the speed gained by the roller inside the first pair of Halbach arrays is enough to overcome the gate (entrance sticky spot) of the second pair of Halbach arrays.

Let's try it!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: billmehess on April 21, 2010, 12:30:45 AM
Things in Brasil are more expensive: I'm ordering just 40 A cubes and 12 A spheres for R\$ 120 (120 Reais), what is the equivalent to US\$ 65 or 70.

I notice you said you want to  "build an array as long as possible". My guess is that we should not build only one long array, the key is to build several Halbach arrays with only 5 cubes each (that is the minimum number of cubes to build a Halbach array).

The key is to place each pair of Halbach arrays a few centimeters distant from the previous pair, as Clanzer did in the video. It will be sucessfull if the speed gained by the roller inside the first pair of Halbach arrays is enough to overcome the gate (entrance sticky spot) of the second pair of Halbach arrays.

Let's try it!
Will do, thank you!
Bill
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Tito L. Oracion on April 21, 2010, 12:04:24 PM
Has anyone ever done a wheel with this array?

Mags

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FreeEnergy on April 21, 2010, 12:17:27 PM

don't think that is real
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Airstriker on April 21, 2010, 12:55:22 PM

lol - free energy - yeah ! :)
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 21, 2010, 03:23:41 PM

To post that video in this thread is an attempt to discredit this thread. That video don't use Halbach arrays, has nothing to do with this thread.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: mscoffman on April 21, 2010, 03:51:01 PM

I agree with Rapdura. This video shows a hand magnet.
If you disagree with us...come up with it then...it apparently
should be easy. People are discussing effort required
experiments and you have played the MIB...Sorry Tito,
but facts are facts.

:S:MarkSCoffman
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 22, 2010, 02:43:07 AM
I already paid for my order of 40 cubic neo magnets. Now, just waiting it being shipped by the seller...

My first neo magnets! I can't wait!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Tito L. Oracion on April 22, 2010, 05:44:21 AM
I agree with Rapdura. This video shows a hand magnet.
If you disagree with us...come up with it then...it apparently
should be easy. People are discussing effort required
experiments and you have played the MIB...Sorry Tito,
but facts are facts.

:S:MarkSCoffman

No sir! This is just my observation of what possible we can make about the clanzer experiment, it seems to me that there is a big similarities with this.

This tells me that if we arrange the magnets the way clanzer did then maybe this is possible.

just an observation ok. no offense.

like this one sir:

sorry if i disturb you ok.
just trying to put some idea. bye!  :(

ok just ignore me!  >:(

happy now!  >:(

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: X00013 on April 22, 2010, 08:32:35 AM
Shout Out To Clanzer Man  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcCw1ggftuQ

Nice Red Baron!!!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 22, 2010, 01:14:10 PM
I don't think a circular Halbach array is useful to make a magnetic motor...

But linear Halbach arrays are useful... The problem is that, in the configuration Clanzer used in his video, the roller can only go in straight line. Any deflection of the trajectory would probably make the roller stop. Anyway, if the roller can overcome the gate of dozens of pairs of linear Halbach arrays just with the speed it gained from the previous pair, then a closed loop is possible, even in straight line, because we can harvest electricity with a piezo film.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: billmehess on April 22, 2010, 04:04:17 PM
I don't think a circular Halbach array is useful to make a A motor...

But linear Halbach arrays are useful... The problem is that, in the configuration Clanzer used in his video, the roller can only go in straight line. Any deflection of the trajectory would probably make the roller stop. Anyway, if the roller can overcome the gate of dozens of pairs of linear Halbach arrays just with the speed it gained from the previous pair, then a closed loop is possible, even in straight line, because we can harvest electricity with a piezo film.
I think the problem here may be how much electricity can a piezo film produce. The roller will be very light and may only produce in the mv and ua range. The goal is to be able to flip the roller 180 degress and reposition it in the correct alignment to cause it to roll backwards. I think first would be to build the unit that would do this aligment and see how much energy is needed to accomplish this. Then roll the roller over a piezo the length of one of the arrays the amount of elect and amperage that is produced can be measured and then in effect divided into the amount needed to determine the required number of Halbach arrays needed. It might be in the millions. At this point who knows?
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 22, 2010, 09:56:07 PM
The goal is to be able to flip the roller 180 degress and reposition it in the correct alignment to cause it to roll backwards. I think first would be to build the unit that would do this aligment and see how much energy is needed to accomplish this.

I fully agree with you. After we are certain that the roller can travel through any number of pairs of Halbach arrays (I think if it can travel through 4 pairs it can travel thorugh any number), then the next task is to build the mechanism to rotate the roller and put it to travel back, and see how much power this mechanism consumes.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: gravityblock on April 22, 2010, 11:39:21 PM
I don't think a circular Halbach array is useful to make a magnetic motor...

But linear Halbach arrays are useful... The problem is that, in the configuration Clanzer used in his video, the roller can only go in straight line. Any deflection of the trajectory would probably make the roller stop. Anyway, if the roller can overcome the gate of dozens of pairs of linear Halbach arrays just with the speed it gained from the previous pair, then a closed loop is possible, even in straight line, because we can harvest electricity with a piezo film.

Circular Halbach Arrays are very useful to make a magnetic motor.  In fact, they are used in high performance brush-less motors, for magnetic bearings, and magnetic coupling.

There is no cancellation of flux when you build it into a ring.  If the ratio of outer to inner radii is greater than e, the flux inside the bore actually exceeds the remanence of the magnetic material used to create the cylinder.

Halbach Array cylinders can be nested, and by rotating one cylinder relative to the other, cancellation of the field and adjustment of the direction can be achieved.  This effect could be used to have the roller follow a curved or spiral path inside the bore.  Instead of rotating the roller at the end of a linear halbach array, why not rotate the field throughout a nested ring of halbach cylinder arrays?  This way you don't have to worry about rotating the roller at the ends of a linear array.

You'll need many circular halbach's facing each other to form a complete ring.  You'll then place your roller on a track inside the bore of the circular halbach's and the loop will be closed.  The attached image below is to aid in the visualization of how to nest the individual halbach cylinders.  The green arrows are showing the direction of the field pointing in the same direction around the entire ring for simplicity only, but remember the direction of the field can be adjusted throughout the nested cylinders to force the roller to follow a curved or spiral path through the inside bore.

This design is using the "K=2" configuration for a halbach cylinder found on wiki, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array#Halbach_cylinder

GB
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 23, 2010, 02:14:48 AM
@gravityblock: Wow, it seems extremely difficult to build!

Wikipedia shows three ways to build a "k=2" cicrcular Halbach array: A, B, and C. Your idea is based in one particular way, or any of the three should work? Because ways B and C are less hard to build than way A, wich requires magnets with strange triangular shapes...
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: gravityblock on April 23, 2010, 03:36:18 AM
@gravityblock: Wow, it seems extremely difficult to build!

Wikipedia shows three ways to build a "k=2" cicrcular Halbach array: A, B, and C. Your idea is based in one particular way, or any of the three should work? Because ways B and C are less hard to build than way A, wich requires magnets with strange triangular shapes...

My design was drawn for simplicity and for time constraints, because my drawing capabilities are poor.  I believe it can be done with cube magnets with the correct angle and polarity sequence.  I don't see why separated magnets with soft iron return paths, as shown in figure (C) wouldn't work either, unless I'm overlooking something.  Method C would be easier to build, but may not be the best option in my opinion.  Both methods should work if the direction of the field and roller makes one complete spiral through the inner bore.  The track for the roller will need to follow the direction of the field as it spirals through the bore (This is the difficult part).  Only way to know is to test.

GB
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 23, 2010, 04:03:12 AM
When I receive my 40 cubic magnets, and 12 neo spheres, I hope I can use that to build a circular Halbach. I will try the linear Halbach array, and, if possible, the circular Halbach array as well...
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: gravityblock on April 23, 2010, 04:27:19 AM
When I receive my 40 cubic magnets, and 12 neo spheres, I hope I can use that to build a circular Halbach. I will try the linear Halbach array, and, if possible, the circular Halbach array as well...

Yes, test the linear first, then test the circular if possible.  I think I need to clarify something in my drawing.  The individual wedges shown in my design represents an individual cylinder halbach array and does not represent a single wedge magnet.  You will need many circular halbach's, each made from cubed magnets, nested together to form a complete ring with an inner bore that is 360o.  This means you will need to have many magnets and nested cylinders, so I doubt you will be able to test my idea. :(   Method "C" may allow one to test this concept with less cost and difficulty though.

It will more than likely be another design that remains on the drawing board without actually being tested due to the difficulty, cost, or precession necessary for the build.

GB
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on April 24, 2010, 01:59:46 AM
I just confirmed with the seller: my order was shipped today! My magnets are on the way to my city!

Can't wait to receive my first neo magnets and build my first Halbach array!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on May 06, 2010, 04:45:36 AM
Ok, my 40 neo mags are here!!!

Let the fun begin!

Here are my new "toys":

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on May 07, 2010, 12:22:25 AM
It's enormously difficult to build a Halbach array! It's simply impossible to build it using adhesive tape! The magnets strongly refuse to stay in the position! And I don't have the hability to build a plastic or wooden holder! Sad...
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: CLaNZeR on May 07, 2010, 12:55:32 AM
It's enormously difficult to build a Halbach array! It's simply impossible to build it using adhesive tape! The magnets strongly refuse to stay in the position! And I don't have the hability to build a plastic or wooden holder! Sad...

TUT learn your magnets.  ;D

Divert the flux while assembling. You can then pop them in any order you want.

Get a piece of metal/iron can be sheet or solid, place your magnets on this and it will divert the flux and allow you to position them in any config you wish.

Place extra bits of metal around the edges to divert the flux and will make it even more easier.
Can be small bits or large bits, knifes and forks!

As you add more metal, you will find the bulldog becomes a puppy !

Tape it all up and when happy that it is secure, remove the metal and away you go.

Cheers

Sean.

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on May 07, 2010, 10:01:41 PM
I give up... I don't know how you did that Sean, but I simply can't put this neo mags in position. Buying neodymium magnets was a mistake: this little things are excessively strong. With the two small ferrite magnets I have, I can easily make equal poles touch each other, and easily wrap it with tape. But with neodymium I can't do anything, this things just cause injuries to my fingers.

I'm going to search for some small ferrite cubes... Ferrite good, neodymium bad...  :-\
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: mscoffman on May 07, 2010, 10:50:23 PM

this things just cause injuries to my fingers.

I'm going to search for some small ferrite cubes... Ferrite good, neodymium bad...  :-\

See, they told you there was no energy there. ;)
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: CLaNZeR on May 07, 2010, 11:06:15 PM
I give up... I don't know how you did that Sean, but I simply can't put this neo mags in position. Buying neodymium magnets was a mistake: this little things are excessively strong. With the two small ferrite magnets I have, I can easily make equal poles touch each other, and easily wrap it with tape. But with neodymium I can't do anything, this things just cause injuries to my fingers.

I'm going to search for some small ferrite A... Ferrite good, neodymium bad...  :-\

Did you not read my above post ?

Get two strong neo magnets and try and push them together, you will struggle, like you have found struggle like mad.

Now get a metal plate and stick the two magnets onto it. Then slide them together.
Surprise, Surprise you can actually get them hell of a lot closer.

Now add a bit more metal around them to divert the flux and reduce it enough that there is hardly any strength left in the little buggers!

Now tape them up, nice and tight with your tape. Remove the metal and Bingo you are there.

Just divert the flux, get as much steel around the magnets as you can, they will soon stop acting as strongmen.

Ferrites are a waste of time, as they will get weaker over time and you will have to go bigger to get the kick you want, you will never get the Gauss/Tesla strength out of them compare to a Neo.

Cheers

Sean.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Rapadura on May 08, 2010, 03:55:45 PM
I stuck the two neo magnets to a metal plate... I saw little difference... It still incredible hard to approach equal poles... Deception...

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: CLaNZeR on May 08, 2010, 04:31:05 PM
I stuck the two neo magnets to a metal plate... I saw little difference... It still incredible hard to approach equal poles... Deception...

hehe don't give up yet mate. It is easier if you have a holder, as will stop them twisting and snapping together.

If there is anyway you can make a holder it will help heaps.

(http://www.overunity.org.uk/halbach/clanzhal3.jpg)

Even with the holder you can see the magnets twisting.

http://www.overunity.org.uk/cmps_index.php?pageid=HA

Cheers

Sean
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 20, 2010, 12:00:35 PM
I stuck the two neo magnets to a metal plate... I saw little difference... It still incredible hard to approach equal poles... Deception...
Deception my A\$\$...  What really happened is that you realized it didn't work and you didn't want to own up to it.  It's better to own up to it so others are able to gather valuable info on what direction to go or not to go.  That's the whole point of sharing information in a forum like this.  It's quite easy to make a halbach array with the instructions above.  But you would rather call "deception" and bail from the thread like a coward.  What happened to the people who were going to replicate in this thread and report back?  Only one of you reported back with "deception" due to not being able to make a halbach array ::)  You people are of no use to this forum without the ability of being honest.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: ramset on July 20, 2010, 02:28:31 PM
Hugo
He might not be as strong as Clanzer!
might need to exercise more to play with Neo's

No easy task taming those Neo's!
Clanzer Cracks Walnuts with those Mits of his!

Chet
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 20, 2010, 04:25:38 PM
Hugo
He might not be as strong as Clanzer!
might need to exercise more to play with Neo's

No easy task taming those Neo's!
Clanzer Cracks Walnuts with those Mits of his!

Chet
lol ;D
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: e2matrix on July 20, 2010, 06:10:58 PM
I stuck the two neo magnets to a metal plate... I saw little difference... It still incredible hard to approach equal poles... Deception...

Take a bathroom weigh scale.  Practice daily.  When you can pick it up and squeeze it and hold it at 250 pounds or more than you are ready to assemble your Hallbach arrays.  :D
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: tak22 on July 20, 2010, 07:58:08 PM
K&J have cubes for making Halbach Arrays

http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=B888%2D2PE%2DN52 (http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=B888%2D2PE%2DN52)

http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=B888%2D2PA%2DN52 (http://www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=B888%2D2PA%2DN52)

Quote
Dimensions: 1/2" x 1/2" x 1/2" (- 0.127" hole)
Hole perpendicular to magnetization direction
Material: NdFeB, Grade N52
Magnetization Direction: Thru Thickness
Weight: 0.482 oz. (13.67 g)
Pull Force, Case 1: 21.48 lbs
Pull Force, Case 2: 24.24 lbs
Surface Field: 6451 Gauss
Max Operating Temp: 176ÂºF (80ÂºC)
Brmax: 14,800 Gauss
BHmax: 52 MGOe

These 1/2" cubes are designed to be used with our B888-2PA-N52 cubes to create Halbach Arrays. The holes are sized to allow a 1/8" rod to pass through, which will hold the magnets in alignment in two dimensons, allowing easier assembly. Threaded rod can be used, which will allow nuts on each end to provide the clamping force needed, or plain rod can be used with any other clamping force.

We are working on a detailed page all about Halbach arrays, but in the meantime, a lot of good information is available from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halbach_array.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: infringer on July 21, 2010, 04:30:30 AM
Rapudura technically speaking it would be overunity if you measure the amount of energy to put into getting it past the sticky spot then measure the output once you achive COE > 1 it is overunity I don't care how you slice it!

We all know overunity is possible or we would not be on this forum today.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 21, 2010, 11:57:55 AM
We all know overunity is possible or we would not be on this forum today.

You ought to rephrase that sentence:
We all hope overunity is possible or we would not be on this forum today.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 22, 2010, 08:51:13 AM
Quote
We all know overunity is possible or we would not be on this forum today.
You ought to rephrase that sentence:
We all hope overunity is possible or we would not be on this forum today.

hmm....
some of us know that overunity is possible.
some of us hope that overunity is possible.
some of us are convinced overunity it is impossible.

I think that all of us are at different points along the path of enlightenment.

ClaNZer has achieveD overunity, more than once. and he can/will do it again, the next time a quilified device presents itself before him for testing. He's much better at it than most of the rest of us.

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Airstriker on July 22, 2010, 10:19:44 AM
ClaNZer has achieveD overunity, more than once. and he can/will do it again, the next time a quilified device presents itself before him for testing. He's much better at it than most of the rest of us.
I've not really seen any overunity achieved by ClaNZer. If you have, please enlight me.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 22, 2010, 10:45:18 AM
some of us know that overunity is possible.

The correct statement should be:
some of us think they know that overunity is possible.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 22, 2010, 01:39:59 PM
I've not really seen any overunity achieved by ClaNZer. If you have, please enlight me.

i could point to quite a few of his experiments. but the "non-believers" would surely pull it apart like StringCheeze.
so i will point to one of his more obvious examples.

His Hammell Spinner.  It was not only perpetual, but overcame a great deal of friction, and some marginal wind resistance to boot.

this was undeniably overunity, hands-free, no input, isolated from outside influence, powering itself, and overcomming a great deal of losses.Clanzer went through a great deal of effort to prove this because people kept comming up with all kinds of b.s. excuses for how it was doing what it was.

he ended up eventually putting the whole darn thing underneath a glass bowl to show that there was no wind or anything causing it to self-run.

@ FatChance!!!

What i stated WAS correct.
It sounds to me like you fall into the second or third category.

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 22, 2010, 02:03:49 PM
i could point to quite a few of his experiments. but the "non-believers" would surely pull it apart like StringCheeze.
so i will point to one of his more obvious examples.

His Hammell Spinner.  It was not only perpetual, but overcame a great deal of friction, and some marginal wind resistance to boot.

this was undeniably overunity, hands-free, no input, isolated from outside influence, powering itself, and overcomming a great deal of losses.Clanzer went through a great deal of effort to prove this because people kept comming up with all kinds of b.s. excuses for how it was doing what it was.

he ended up eventually putting the whole darn thing underneath a glass bowl to show that there was no wind or anything causing it to self-run.

@ FatChance!!!

What i stated WAS correct.
It sounds to me like you fall into the second or third category.
I'm actively seeking overunity too, but that hamel spinner is not it.  It's spinning due to an adjusting out of balance of the outer ring which is causing an out of balance drag on the ball causing it to spin.  build the device with all parts stationary and you won't get any spin even if you help it start.

Experiment, then be critical of your experiment, then be honest on this forum about your experiments.  Otherwise you're slowing others down.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 22, 2010, 02:23:43 PM

Experiment, then be critical of your experiment, then be honest on this forum about your experiments.  Otherwise you're slowing others down.

< Sm0ky2 sits down and shuts up >
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 22, 2010, 03:02:51 PM

< Sm0ky2 sits down and shuts up >
if you think that works or is an example of overunity, maybe you should sit down and shut up.  That shows exactly what I said.  You will notice it spins good while it is out of balance(not center to the magnetic field above) as it starts to find center you will see the rotation slow down and it does eventually come to a complete stop, just ask clanzer.

I wish no battle, only that people experiment and report honestly so that everyone can advance from our collective experiments.  I know it's easy to get worked up over something that appears to work but we must examine completely and report honestly even on the experiments that seem most exciting.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Airstriker on July 22, 2010, 03:13:46 PM
if you think that works or is an example of overunity, maybe you should sit down and shut up.  That shows exactly what I said.  You will notice it spins good while it is out of balance(not center to the magnetic field above) as it starts to find center you will see the rotation slow down and it does eventually come to a complete stop, just ask clanzer.

I wish no battle, only that people experiment and report honestly so that everyone can advance from our collective experiments.  I know it's easy to get worked up over something that appears to work but we must examine completely and report honestly even on the experiments that seem most exciting.

exactly
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 23, 2010, 02:16:31 AM

This is as far from overunity as you can get. It's just a low friction contrapment.
Watch and observe the ball spinning slower and slower and it has almost reached standstill at the end of the video.
Any self running device with excess energy should spin faster and faster, not the opposite where it will eventually stop.
I advise you to take a few lessons in the field of energy before shouting overunity whitout proof.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 23, 2010, 06:42:53 AM
Yes it eventully finds a place where the magnetic forces balance out and it stops. Thats why he doesnt have a spinning ball on his counter even to this day.
but he did not spin the ball to get it started, he simply placed the ring on top so the ball stood upright and began spinning around the bowl.

take the ring and bowl off, and spin the ball like a top, there is a great deal of friction between the glass and the ball.
YES - the magnetic attraction "lifts" the ball slightly,lowering the friction, but this is not greater than the gravitational force. There is still much friction being overcome in this set-up.

how much total frictional loss does the metal ball overcome before it stops spinning? in his videos without music you could hear it grinding loudly, metal against glass.
How much energy was input by placing the ring on top of the bowl?
The reason it stops is because he has a center-spot for it to stop on.  if the lower dish did not have this spot (completely concave), there would be no center for it to balance in.

If you cannot see that the ball overcomes more energy in losses than is input into it from this small example, i advise you to talk to some other people that were fortunate enough to have seen David do something similar with a pair of 50-gallon metal drums.
you couldn't spin those drums by hand if you tried.
Yet he could balance them carefully and they would spin for much longer than this little video posted above. Unfortunately, the late mr hamel did not understand what he was doing, and could only achieve the effects spuratically, and what appeared to be on accident, or random occasion between failures.
--------------------------------------------------------------
But this isnt about the "possibility" of overunity.
if its "definitive proof" you seek, i can destroy your concept of reality in another place.....
this is about wether or not Clanz can achieve it.

I don't know about the "entry" repulsion of the halbach, because i haven't played with that one myself, but take a look at some of his other gate-arrays, and the tiny push he needs to give a roller to enter into the first gate.
take away the gate, and give it this same push, and see how far you get....

When the roller is pushed with a set ammount of force, without the gate, the coefficient of friction between the roller and the surface it travels on (within the gravitational domain), defines how far it will travel before comming to a stop.
Energy is conserved is this equation and the roller will stop at (about) the same distance every time you push it.

with a gate array in place, and the same ammount of input energy is given to the roller, it overcomes friction along a much greater distance. (even uphill in some examples)
Once the roller surpasses a total frictional/gravitational energy greater than the input energy: this by very definition is "overunity".

But you won't accept that. Because your mind has been institutionalized. You will convince yourself that the gate array somehow "lowers" the frictional coefficient between roller and surface, (as well as the gravitational constant) and allows the roller to travel a greater distance/incline (or some equivalent b.s. excuse). Like i said, pull it apart like string cheese, until the strands of sticky mess fit into your preconcieved notion of reality.

Go talk to an educated professor about the flaws in current physics and see what he/she tells you, as i did many times in college while working towards my dual engineering degrees.

Many of them know very well that our current understanding of physics is incomplete (at best), yet they continue to teach it. WHY?
because that is what the accredidation board tells them they have to teach. and thats the best answer i could ever get out of them, after showing example after example of how and when certain "laws" do not apply accurately, or sometimes, even at all.
"yes, we know that, but we teach THIS! now stop disrupting my class"

You are quick to discredit Clanzers hamel spinner. But you have not presented a valid argument as to why you do not agree.

i challenge you to do the math yourself. and wether you post your results here and put your foot in your mouth or not is irrelevant.

the coefficient of friction between his ball and bowl is ~0.6
ask him for the mass of the ball
you can see the run-down time shown in the video, and it hasn't even come to a complete stop yet. all of the information you need is right in front of you.

String Cheese......

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 23, 2010, 07:24:45 AM
LOL, you are so completely wrong smoky.  it only starts spinning by itself because it is out of center to the magnetic field.  It is caused by the uneven drag on the ball bearing as it is pulled toward center.  Nobody is trying to discredit clanzer, these are just the facts.  The truth is not an attack.  If you were able to place the bearing dead center you would see it would never start spinning to start with.  You need to be more critical in your examinations otherwise you just waste other people's time.  It's not overunity or even close.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 23, 2010, 08:04:35 AM
LOL, you are so completely wrong smoky.  it only starts spinning by itself because it is out of center to the magnetic field.  It is caused by the uneven drag on the ball bearing as it is pulled toward center.  Nobody is trying to discredit clanzer, these are just the facts.  The truth is not an attack.  If you were able to place the bearing dead center you would see it would never start spinning to start with.  You need to be more critical in your examinations otherwise you just waste other people's time.  It's not overunity or even close.

of course its off-center to the field, that is WHY it spins.
if you were NOT able to position it dead-center, it would KEEP spinning, and spinning, and spinning...

what is "non-critical" about that??
do the math
stop pulling apart the string cheese....

show that its not overunity..
there is more frictional energy consumed by the system than is input to make it start spinning. The fact that it stops long after surpassing a "unity" condition has nothing to do with it.
it is still "overunity".

Look at the extended tri-force arrays, some of them are not only frictionally overunity, but gravitationally overunity as well.
In some of the set-ups, the roller's ending position is HIGHER (E=mgh)
than the input energy would have lifted it, without the array.
this was tested by measuring the force over distance (work) through the entrance of the first gate.

Clanzers work on the Tri-Force, and its various arrangements made these tests possible.

where people gave up on this, was in the fact that they were unable to "close the loop" and make the system repeat its cycle.
This difficulty does not mean the system is not "overunity", just that they were unable to close the loop.

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 23, 2010, 08:09:09 AM
you might as well call a ball rolling down a long hill overunity ::)
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 23, 2010, 08:39:11 AM
For some people, it is easier to pull strings off of the cheese.
so allow me to break this down for you.

the energy per rotation (around the inside of the bowl) is:

(coefficient of friction)x(force of gravity[sin angle of incline])x(diameter of the circle)

the force of gravity is: (mass of the ball)( 9.8m/s/s)
the angle of the incline decreases spirally with each rotation
the diameter (distance over which friction is performing work)
decreases spirally with each progressive rotation

we can then pull another string off the cheese, and break this down into segments, of approx. equal diameter and angle of incline
multiplied by the (RPM)x (time of the segment)

we'll string the cheese once again

the resultant, when added together gives you the total energy
(work performed by friction)

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 23, 2010, 08:41:55 AM
you might as well call a ball rolling down a long hill overunity ::)

i might be inclined to agree with you, if i didnt have to first carry the ball up the hill..
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 23, 2010, 10:16:42 AM
i might be inclined to agree with you, if i didnt have to first carry the ball up the hill..
::)  as if you do not have to move the bearing back out of center to get it spinning again...
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 23, 2010, 10:20:25 AM
LOL....
sm0ky2, you are truly a perfect example on ignorant perception abilities.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Airstriker on July 23, 2010, 10:55:29 AM
It's actually quite unbelievable how many people like sm0ky2 you will find on this forum. Sad.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 23, 2010, 03:16:24 PM
i have yet to see any of you do the math on moving the ball the 0.0762 meters from the center of the bowl.

much less calculate the energy of the ball performing several rotations around the bowl. We haven't even touched the additional friction due to the fact that the ball is spinning as it rotates, that would take up a whole other page. The energy accounted for above is already past the 1:1 ratio so i didnt feel the need to go any futher than that.

Keep pulling strings off the cheese. What is your purpose for being here? (this question is rhetorical, and meant for inner thought, you dont need to answer this)

ignorant is he who chooses to ignore what is directly before his eyes.

say what you want about me, that doesnt bother me, nor does it change the physics of what is occuring here.

If you are unwilling or unable to do the math yourself, then what is the point in posting these useless comments about that which you do not know?

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: nappolean on July 23, 2010, 07:09:17 PM
i have read and watch most of the videos and post that u guys posted in this thread and i have seen something that most of u have. When the ball reach the middle its stop after a time but it stop. So the problem here is that we need to prevent the ball from coming to the mid. Maybe if u can get a way to not let the ball go to the mid with some sore of blocking u might get what u are looking for.

But in the end how much watts that can produce?
How much would cost to power a house with that?
Will that be cheaper than solar panel systems or wind systems to power a house?
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 23, 2010, 08:20:50 PM
You could never put a load on this device. It would stop it even faster than having no load.
Only if it accelerated up by itself would it be possible to load it down to equilibrium.
Meaning: If it had any excess energy that accelerated the ball then it would keep accelerating
until all excess energy was used up by drag and mass losses and hit its maximum peak RPM.
Let's say that level would be at 100000 RPM.
Then the ball could be loaded down until 50000 RPM. This is the sweet spot where half
the energy is used up to spin the ball and the other half is tapped by us like free energy.

But this will never happen as there is no free energy with this device. It's just a cool toy.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 24, 2010, 05:39:32 AM
You could never put a load on this device. It would stop it even faster than having no load.
Only if it accelerated up by itself would it be possible to load it down to equilibrium....

That is very true. any additional load placed on this would interefere with the magnetic interactions, in addition to causing excessive drag on the ball. it would simply fail to operate.

"overunity" doesnt always mean "free energy". Those two terms have completely different meanings.
the prior simply means that the system as a whole produces (and in this example, consumes) more than was placed into it. while the latter implies the ability to extract energy output from the system, without inhibiting its' operation.

an apple is a fruit, but not all fruits are apples.
While some "OU" systems produce "free energy", this particular one does not.

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 24, 2010, 10:04:28 AM
While some "OU" systems produce "free energy", this particular one does not.

You are absolutely right about this system not being OU as it cannot even sustain itself.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: infringer on July 24, 2010, 11:39:29 PM
FatChance!!! Prove it pretzel boy!
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 25, 2010, 05:47:48 AM
You are absolutely right about this system not being OU as it cannot even sustain itself.

i never said it wasn't "overunity", because in fact it is.
what i said what that it does not produce "free energy".
but apparently that went right over your head..

if you want to pull more strings off the cheese, i should point out that we haven't even begun to account for all of the energy in this system yet.
i have already shown you how to calculate that there is more energy consumed by the system than is input into it.

do i need to walk you through adding up the rest of the equations sill yet unaccounted for?

wind resistance, moment of inertia, resistance to the gravitational force thats keeping the top-heavy ball from tipping over on its side??
need i go on?

keep pulling apart the string cheese.......
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: giantkiller on July 25, 2010, 05:50:58 AM
Well I am very impressed with this. The duration is the biggie. There is another guy who has a table full of spinning bearings on youtube. He does his differently. But the potential is there.
The Hamel device started me on this OU journey. God bless David's soul. He made an effort to get it out there. A spinning device of magnets. Searl is the same. This can be done virtually. Do any of you know this? There is no friction only the speed of light. The TPU does this. A handheld virtual magnetic atom.
Keep on truckin'.

< Sm0ky2 sits down and shuts up >
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 25, 2010, 06:16:30 AM
.... The TPU does this. A handheld virtual magnetic atom.

not exactly..  this is just a simple magnetic imbalance system.

the TPU device has a different means of operation, which is still the subject of great controversy. some believe that the TPU is using ambient EMF, from the electrical lines. Which, could be easily disproven if someone were to take one out into the middle of a national park and show that it still works.. which i haven't seen done yet..

as far as a "macro atomic-structure" is concerned, the hamel spinner does not qualify as such.

Such a system undergoes exponential acceleration, and (in theory) will max out at relativistic speeds. ( a fraction of the speed of light, based on the mass of the moving parts). I was unable to verify the maximum speed of the one i built several years ago (on accident while designing a magnetic gearing system for a client), because the second time it exploded, it was still well under its maximum speed and it nearly killed me, and imbedded ceramic-ferrite magnets into the walls of my office. Which was what began me into this field of research, and ultimately led me to this forum.

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 25, 2010, 01:21:21 PM
If it really is OU as you stubbornly claim then please explain why the ball decreases in speed??
In order to show energy gain, aka OU, then it must increase in speed to show positive forces.
Even if it could be kept in imbalance without energy input it would still decrease due to losses.
But the base line is that you cannot keep the imbalance going without using external energy.
This is not OU. End of discussion. If you keep implying otherwise you're a nutcase.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 25, 2010, 03:47:06 PM
If it really is OU as you stubbornly claim then please explain why the ball decreases in speed??
In order to show energy gain, aka OU, then it must increase in speed to show positive forces.
Even if it could be kept in imbalance without energy input it would still decrease due to losses.
But the base line is that you cannot keep the imbalance going without using external energy.
This is not OU. End of discussion. If you keep implying otherwise you're a nutcase.

there is nothing implied here.
i thoroughly explained how it was "overunity". I gave you the mathematical forumlae, so that you can verify this for yourself. You neglected to do so.

Your assumptions about this subject are incorrect, which i also explained. i.e. the difference between "overunity" and "free energy".

The energy dissapated by this system is far greater than the energy that is put into it. That by very definition is "overunity".

I ask you this::   Where do the losses come from?
If that much energy can be "lost" without ever putting it into the system to begin with....
How can you honestly make the argument that is it NOT an "overunity" system ??

It is not a "free energy" system. i explained that. If this thread were called "Clanzer can achieve free energy" i would be on the other side of the argument, because he has not demonstrated this. As he himself would surely agree.

You can pout, throw your hands up, call me a nutjob.
But until you are willing to perform the calculations for yourself
or at the very least, present a logical argument to support your
statements......    all you are doing is pulling strings off the cheese.

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 25, 2010, 04:22:16 PM
lol... can you say delusional.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: giantkiller on July 25, 2010, 06:32:19 PM
Group clamor, sole pontification or lone crazed gunman.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 25, 2010, 08:58:21 PM
I thoroughly explained how it was "overunity". I gave you the mathematical formulae, so that you can verify this for yourself. You neglected to do so.
sm0ky2, how is it possible for your to think in physics in such an erroneous and ignorant way?
Your so called "formulae" is worth null and nothing. You have made up your own formula based
on a faulty world perception, not what really happens, and that is so very wrong.

The energy dissipated by this system is far greater than the energy that is put into it. That by very definition is "overunity".
No, you are extremely super wrong here. The input energy to make this thing spin is the energy
spent by placing the two elements together with the imperfection as result. You can't exclude this.
If you don't spend any energy what so ever you can't bring them together and there will be no spin.
That by very definition is "underunity".

Even you must see this and understand that there is no free lunch involved here.
Only if the ball accelerated faster by itself while maintaining its imbalance could we talk about OU.
I hope there's someone else at OU forum that can help me explain it for you somewhat "simpler".
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 26, 2010, 05:09:31 AM
sm0ky2, how is it possible for your to think in physics in such an erroneous and ignorant way?
Your so called "formulae" is worth null and nothing. You have made up your own formula based
on a faulty world perception, not what really happens, and that is so very wrong.
No, you are extremely super wrong here. The input energy to make this thing spin is the energy
spent by placing the two elements together with the imperfection as result. You can't exclude this.
If you don't spend any energy what so ever you can't bring them together and there will be no spin.
That by very definition is "underunity".

Even you must see this and understand that there is no free lunch involved here.
Only if the ball accelerated faster by itself while maintaining its imbalance could we talk about OU.
I hope there's someone else at OU forum that can help me explain it for you somewhat "simpler".

First of all, that was not "my formula",. that is the textbook formula. which , WHEN you go to college, you will LEARN about.

Second, we discussed the input energy. The movement of the ball-mass, and the placement of the upper ring.
These combined are far less than the losses we discussed.
Do the math, stop pulling apart the cheese.

The ball is motionless, when the cycle starts. the ball accellerates, travels its' path of motion, then decellerates once it nears the point of magnetic-balance.
Do your calculations. Add up the input energy on one side of the equation. And on the other side add up the energy involved in the acceleration of the ball, Frictional losses, Wind resistance, Moment of Inertia, and gravitational resistance.

Then sit there and stare at the numbers on each side of the "="

then go pull a piece of string cheese out of the fridge, and lie to yourself once more.

Its obvious you have no clue what you are talking about. You are spouting nonsensical thermodynamic bull*&%*, and doing so incorrectly i might add..

You will think back on this day, when you get to college......

i dont need your acceptance, wether or not you agree with me changes nothing. I'm trying to help you here. But you just want to pull apart the cheese instead of looking at the reality of the situation.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: infringer on July 26, 2010, 05:59:00 AM
No I just simply think that some of these people sitting around on there tuffs should start proving without a doubt that there is not a possible way something is overunity before making the claim just like everyone thinks that the vice versa should happen... Naudin, Clanzer, Dusty, Tinsel Kola, Stephen, excommon, smoky2, and a couple others out there are proving stuff and many others are trying stuff you have this guy fat chance I haven't seen no work no pictures of his projects just a bunch of pointless blubbering that is it and hugo chavez someone elses alter ego probably just like fat chance well he is next in line!

Muahahaha !

Thats going to be the slogan the old rold gold slogan for those who like to do nothing but spout off and sit on there tuffs...

Prove it pretzel boy!

Enjoy don't take me too personal as I don't know myself but I tell you looking at something and actually experiencing something are 2 way different things trust me life lesson number 122 hehe.

Good instance the people that experience UFO rather then just seeing them on youtube are more likely to believe that there might be something more to the whole UFO thing... Now this is just an example do not blow it out of context ;)
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 26, 2010, 06:12:55 AM
::)  Infringer, the only things I've said here is that we should report honestly on experiments and that the hamel spinner is not an example of overunity.  You're going to bust my balls and say I'm next for that?  Really?  Oh dear, such a crime I've committed ::)  Clanzer's own videos prove it's not overunity.  If that's overunity, spinning a top would be an example of overunity.  a top can spin a long time with little innitial input.  Just one little twist of the fingers.  In this case you're just replacing a magnetic field for the quick twist of fingers.  neither is overunity.  Putting the onus on us to prove what is plainly already proven is stupid.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: FatChance!!! on July 26, 2010, 08:13:20 AM
@sm0ky2

I rest my case.
Your are completely right mr Almighty.
I suggest you bring your formulae and calculations to a well established
physics university and declare you have found the holy grail beyond doubt.
Within ten years time you will get your Nobel prize.

Good luck.... you'll need it.  ::)
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 27, 2010, 05:49:23 AM
...  If that's overunity, spinning a top would be an example of overunity.  a top can spin a long time with little innitial input.  Just one little twist of the fingers.  In this case you're just replacing a magnetic field for the quick twist of fingers.  neither is overunity.

Here's something you should try. set up the clanzer experiment. weigh the mass of the upper ring of magnets, and calculate the energy required to position it on top of the bowl. ( if you are really feeling giddy, you can even add in the small ammount of magnetic force from the ball thats pushing against it!!)

Now spin the ball with that same ammount of energy., WITHOUT the magnetic ring on top.  and simply observe what happens.
use a winding spring of known value, so you have consistent results.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 27, 2010, 07:17:15 AM
you need mental help smoke.  You're probably the person from several years back that thought a magnet's attractive force to another magnet was overunity.  His thinking was that very little work was involved in setting the magnets close to eachother and much more work was done by the magnets snapping together.  According to what you're saying this would be overunity too.  Were you the dumbass that thought two mags snapping together is overunity?  Lol, I bet it was you.
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: sm0ky2 on July 27, 2010, 07:54:59 AM
ok, im not even going to respond to that last comment..

go back and read what i said about the hamel spinner.
at this point i have to assume, since you have failed to explain the frictional losses in this system in excess of the input energy, that physics is not your area of expertise, which quite frankly is confusing to me, because you are devoutly worshipping the theory of thermodynamics, which is based on those same physics.... hmmmm

Also having neglected to perform the experiments, shows that you are unwilling to learn about the true nature of the subject.
What exactly is your intention in propegating this indoctrinated theology?

You look at the device, and proclaim that 1 - 10 = 1
Where did the other -9 go? oh nevermind that, we'll just sweep that under the rug,..
nope no overunity here..

Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: Hugo Chavez on July 27, 2010, 08:06:17 AM
lol, you are the person who said two magnets snapping together produce overunity arn't you?...  oops...  same logic...
Title: Re: CLaNZeR can achieve overunity!
Post by: nievesoliveras on July 27, 2010, 04:41:36 PM
@all

What about finding a way to make this one to work using Clanzer ideas to somehow activate the coil without using batteries?

Jesus