New permanent magnet motor on youtube from Roobert33

[Chipper]

Hi Chipper,

I do not get fully your conclusion either, sorry, would you put it with different words, meaning the same please?

Thanks,  Gyula

Here is an attachment of what I did.

1. Circular Magnet Face up (to ceiling). Vertical Plane. Cylinder = horizontal plane, along table top. Measure Distance engaged = 1.56 inches.
2. Circular Magnet on Edge (Balance it). Horizontal plane. Engaged 2.25"
3. Bar Magnet Face up. Vertical plane. Engaged = 1.54 inches.
4. Bar Magnet Face horizontal. Horizontal Plane. Engaged 2.25 inches.

This works out to a 44% increase/decrease in Magnetic Field strength, relative to distance of engagement.

[Omnibus]

Of course, we're not going to forget about theory no matter how much some who claim they know science would surmise.

The distance of displacement of a body of mass M from a position of rest when struck by another body of mass m is a measure of the work done by the striking body. This is well known (known even before 1900).

it is equally well-known scientifically that the potential energy of a body of mass m attracted by another body converts into equivalent amount of other energies (kinetic energy will suffice) when that body of mass m is allowed to approach freely the attracting body from a point of displacement. The maximum potential energy can be converted into its equivalent maximum kinetic energy when the body of mass m is let go from a point where the force of attraction is zero to the point of maximum attraction force. This is also well-known since even before 1900.

This maximum kinetic energy is a potential to do work. In this case we choose the work done by the body of mass m to be the displacement of a body of mass M when struck by the body of mass m when it possesses the maximum kinetic energy.

The common understanding, known since even before 1900, is that a magnet of mass m will always exhibit the same amount of maximum kinetic energy when attracted by another magnet, independent of the point from which it starts, provided the force at this starting point is zero.

The validity of this common understanding can be checked. Use the same billiard ball of mass M, always place it at a point where the attraction between the two magnets is maximum (where the minimum of the potential energy of the two magnets is), remove one of the magnets away from the other to a piont where the force of attraction is practically zero and let it go. If aligned properly, the billiard ball will be struck by the approaching magnet and will be displaced. Move the magnet to another position of zero force and repeat the above. Compare the distances traveled by the billiard ball.

Use different magnets for the experiment explained above and you will find that in many instances you will confirm what has already been know since even before the nineteen hundreds -- the work done by the magnet being attracted done on the billiard ball will be the same (the distance traveled by the billiard ball will always be the same) independent of where you release it from as long as the starting point is where the force of attraction is practically zero.

However, there will be instances, such as the one shown in my vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnqXJbwpNRo where the energies produced from two different points of release are different. In this case the experiment shows that the integral of force over distance is different in the two cases. This means that the integral of the force over distance in a closed loop (the two magnets attracted, one of the magnets removed to a point where the force of attraction is zero, same magnet moved to another point where the force of attraction is zero and then let go) is not zero. Even though the fact that magnets are attracted and that the work to remove two attracted magnets away from each other equals the work done when they spontaneously go back to their initial state has been known since even before 1900 the fact of the non-zero integral value of the closed-loop integral has not been known. This is new to science.

[spinn_MP]

...Even though the fact that magnets are attracted and that the work to remove two attracted magnets away from each other equals the work done when they spontaneously go back to their initial state has been known since even before 1900 the fact of the non-zero integral value of the closed-loop integral has not been known. This is new to science.

Jeeez... What a pretender... What the hell are you blabling about? "This is new to science" WTF
If you have problems with understanding "potential" and "kinetics", don't blame the rest of the World...

And you certainly don't understand what a "closed-loop" means. That's for sure....

If you'll be shitting this site further, I'm going to post some "interesting" quotes of yours from over the last few years. For anyone to see what a shitfarm you really are....
Yadda yada da, OU has already been proven beyond any reason of a doubt, and bla bla & yada..dada..daa....

[Omnibus]

As is seen @spinner_MP is giving no arguments and is continuing to resort to personal attacks. This is going too far, as seen from his disruption also of other discussions.

Therefore, I'm issuing an open appeal to Stefan (as Stefan knows unlike others, I've never complained to him behind anybody's back) to ban @spinner_MP from this board. This would allow for more productive discussions uninterrupted by the attacks of zealous activists and confused individuals. The low class garbage @spinner_MP is spewing continuously does not belong to this or any other scientific discourse.

[spinn_MP]

As is seen @spinner_MP is giving no arguments and is continuing to resort to personal attacks. This is going too far, as seen from his disruption also of other discussions.

Therefore, I'm issuing an open appeal to Stefan (as Stefan knows unlike others, I've never complained to him behind anybody's back) to ban @spinner_MP from this board. This would allow for more productive discussions uninterrupted by the attacks of zealous activists and confused individuals. The low class garbage @spinner_MP is spewing continuously does not belong to this or any other scientific discourse.

Uh.. And Ahh... Lol!
Feeling scared that I may actually provide some proof about you?
What a farce...


Damn, you have a good chance to succeed with your appeal !
(I'm sure you'll be backed up with some members (Wilby, Ramses, &co. ..)). It happened before...

After all, this is The Over Unity site...