Would a self looping SMOT be proof of OU?

[exnihiloest]

The topic is the question. Please weigh in on this, any comments would be appreciated.
Bill

A self looping SMOT is proof of OU only if it works as an isolated system. The fact that there is neither external varying fields nor temperature gradient (in space or time) must be checked.

[mscoffman]

So are you saying that a working smot would be a game changer and the possible precursor to a working magnetic motor?

I cannot see mechanically how an operating smot runner would not allow
a yoke type device to be connected from it to a central point - that's
my definition of a motor. Once something was working it would be easy
to optimise to higher power densities and build one as one goes.

:S:MarkSCoffman

[mscoffman]

"I am trying to figure out if it is a self looped SMOT... just like the topic states"

I completely appreciate what you are saying. As for trying to determine if it self loops it must start, run, and then go past its "start" point multiple times. Without revealing what you have does it do this?

Here's the thing it is possible to get a machine that operates more than
one turn what one would call probablistical. Which means it would *not*
run past a given point with sufficient configuration energy to *always*
come back around every time, for example something with a bouncing
weight that had only a random probability of being in a certain
configuration. Whether a machine stops now and then and had to be
restarted would depend on how much restart energy is required. Even
computer circitry doesn't work every time - but with a probability is small
enough to ignore the number of times when it does fail. The key is to
cut the friction down and improve the device's operating margins.

:S:MarkSCoffman

[billmehess]

I have added a poll to the top of page 2
Bill

[Omnibus]

The significance of a closed loop smot is well beyond the unquestionable marketing success.