Building a self looping "SMOT"

[powercat]

@tinman @TechStuf
Science and God do not go well together, Darwin proved how mankind evolved, nobody has been able to prove the existence of any God, and there are many who claim their God is the real one.

People who believe in science are never going to win an argument with a true believer in God (whichever one they follow), we may as well argue the existence of Santa Claus or that magicians actually perform real magic.

This is supposed to be a science forum, an alternative one maybe but the foundation of proving your claim is based in science not religion.

May your God be with you and bring you much happiness but please let's stick to scientific verification on this forum, I'm sure there are many religious forums you can join if you want to talk about Gods.

[TinselKoala]

My logic is sound thank you TK.It is yours that is faulty.

Come on, give me a reference that supports your point. I gave you one that explains just why and how your statement is a classic logical fallacy. Did you read it?

According to your "logic", we don't know everything, therefore you can't say it's not possible for you to swim nude to Tasmania dragging a 200 pound block of concrete. In three hours. Who knows, you might suddenly sprout water wings and discover that Foster's makes your belly swell up to make a float. Impossible I say? Nonsense, we don't know everything. Just find the right can of Foster's, shake it up and swill it down, and when your belly begins to swell, it'll be time to set off to the beach. And the concrete block will of course lose weight when it's submerged, due to buoyancy. All you have to worry about is the clock.... right? So just swim faster.

How can you say you wont get a flat tyre on your trip,befor you have reached your destination?-maybe you have the power to see into the future?

No... I'm walking, so there is no possibility of a flat tyre.

Of course I could step on a nail and go blind....

There is no sound physical principle that _prevents_ getting a flat tire if I travel by a vehicle with tires (air filled tires of rubber.....) but there are sound physical principles that make SMOT self-looping impossible.

Now you are resorting to another logical fallacy, the false analogy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

(I'll bet you didn't know that the road to logical thinking was so full of potholes and stray roofing nails. Better carry a patch kit so you don't get halted by a flat tyre.)

You missed my point about the God post. My point is ,people choose to believe some things without having hard evidence,and yet need hard evidence to believe in other possabilities.

No, I didn't miss your point at all. Perhaps you missed mine. I see no hard evidence for a personal God of the Christian variety... in fact I see many things in the world that indicate that such a "merciful, loving, all-knowing and all powerful" God does NOT exist, or at least not locally, having abandoned us to our own evil devices. So no, I don't "believe" in that God. I was baptized and raised a Catholic, by the way, and educated by nuns in elementary school (Mass and communion three times a week), by Jesuits and Christian Brothers through high school .... and you know what they say: Jesuits make the best atheists. It's true.

A rabbi, an imam, and a Jesuit priest are crossing a raging river in a boat, which springs a leak. The rabbi starts muttering, rocking back and forth and pulling his beard. The imam says "it is the will of Allah the great, the merciful, that we drown." The priest knocks off the rabbi's hat and starts bailing out the boat with it, and says "thank God for silly hats."

Quote: and koalas are nasty buggers with a vile disposition...

And where did that conclusion come from?Youtube?

No, from Zoos. We don't have a lot of koalas running wild in Texas. I'm glad to hear that you find them cuddly and aren't worried about those claws.

Maybe I was thinking of Drop Bears, I understand you have to watch out for those "down under". But they don't fit into my anagrams.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WD_Nh_rboQ

Koalas are quite the opposite,but like all other animal's,will defend them self if threatened.
So what do you believe?,what you have seen on youtube,or what the guy that has been amongst them tells you?.
This is exactly how a wild koala is,unless provoked.But like all animal's,you will get one or two with a bad attitude-and yes,it's on youtube lol,but a correct interpretation non the less.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Irrr4ISn5ps

So that being known,we can see your knickname now represent's a flashy,cudly little critter.

Often our avatars represent what we would like to be, rather than what we really are, don't you think? In reality I am very drab, not cute at all, and I hate to be touched, I'm not a bit cuddly. And many people have commented that my claws ...er.... my fingernails are dirty when I demonstrate remarkable things on YT. Working hands do get that way, as you know.

Anyway,back to topic.
The thing i was refering to in my question of the overlooked action takeing place in the smot(of inclined ramp type),is the transfer of weight on the ramp as the ball rolls along it. As the ramp is fixed,that transfer is simply sent to ground. But who said the ramp had to be fixed?This is where i was looking at a different design-a tilting ramp. So what would a tilting ramp do?,well it would remove most of the angle at the exit point. So we would go from a 90* angle,down to about a 3-4* angle on the exit ramp.This would allow the ball to retain much of it's kinetic energy.
So i will post a pic below,so as you can have a look at it,and see if you see any advantages an disadvantages in it over the fixed ramp.]
Where would be the gain's,and Where would be the losses?

When the ball gets to point C,the ramp will tilt. The ramp will ofcourse return back to it's starting position under it's own steam-another point of work being done.

So now a teeter-totter is somehow a gain mechanism? It's not, of course. The ball climbs the ramp, trading KE for GPE on the way up, and this same stored GPE is returned on the way down, even with the SMOT up there. (Good luck balancing). No net work from the teeter-totter. Why don't you place a scale under the fulcrum and see what it reads as the ball travels.

It seems that where people are often tripping up is that they aren't considering a _full cycle_: the system, in order to self-loop, must return to the initial state, and do it without any external input of work from Mister Hand, electromagnets, etc.  You probably think it's the mousetrap's spring that provides energy to kill the mouse... when in reality it is your effort to set the trap, that is stored in the spring, that kills the mouse. This is where Webby's magnet-drop fails, because it has to be somehow reset in order to make the next full cycle: it needs to be raised up against gravity, and this takes energy from somewhere, and stores it in the GPE of the raised up magnet end. If this energy is to come from the KE of the rolling ball -- then that KE is reduced by the same amount (plus losses). But where else could it come from? Nobody yet has shown, or described, or explained any gain mechanism in a SMOT, there are only losses. You can reduce the losses and make them arbitrarily small if you like ... but without some _gain_ even a zero-loss SMOT will stop as soon as you put any drag at all on it.

[tinman]

@TK
Yes i realize there is no gain by tilting the ramp,other than my thought of reducing the exit angle.Do you not agree that if the 90* exit ramp angle is reduced,then the ball will retain more of it's kinetic energy. So the whole system may be a loss,but im looking at ways to make it as efficient as i can. Then if after all that the ball still return's back to the magnetic ramp after it's exit,we pack up our bat and ball,and go home.
If by that extreemly slight chance that the ball continues to roll out of the magnetic field of the ramp,then we look at makeing the loop.

[minnie]

Hi,
    thank God I'm an atheist!
                                 John.

[TinselKoala]

Nice to see you are getting closer to my question about my possible solution at reducing the escape costs.

If the magnet falls that stored GPE is converted into KE and that KE can be stored and returned to lift the magnet,,  This is why I would like to know if there *is* a cost to the magnet falling when the steel ball is next to the pivot for that magnet.

Certainly. If the steel ball is in a region where the flux through it changes over time, as when the magnet drops, there will be eddy currents induced in the ball. These will be of a polarity that acts against the polarity of the flux, retarding the "drop" of the magnet, and will dissipate power as heat in the ball. (a tiny bit of heat of course but still a loss.) If your ramp is conductive material, like the aluminum channels many people use, then the moving magnet will also induce wasteful eddys in the channel. Remember the demonstrations of eddycurrent braking? Moving a magnet near a conductive material always induces a current in the conductive material, and if it has any ohmic resistance the power is dissipated as heat and adds a braking effect to the moving magnet. Clever people have figured out how to use this fact usefully, in devices called "transformers".