Building a self looping "SMOT"

[norman6538]

Work = mass x distance (raised) so if an object is lifted past its original
height and is not stuck to magnets when it escapes then you should be able to cascade this
into a looping device.

That is what we all want to see pure and simple.
Elecar has not shown us that yet.

Norman

[TinselKoala]

I am surprised at you. Mile High is absolutely correct. If the thing could work, the single ramp is all you need. A very shallow slope from the end where the ball drops down, back to the starting point, is all you would need to show a complete self-looper. But of course it can't happen, because energy IS ADDED to the system whenever the hand is used to position the ball at the start. Without this added energy, nothing happens after the first _partial_ cycle, which never completes.

This (what MH says and what I say) has been proven empirically over and over by hundreds of people. You can go back through the various SMOT threads here and on other sites and see many designs that are functionally identical to what's in this thread. None of them work, and there are sound, never refuted, theoretical reasons and mathematical analyses as to why they don't.

You are wasting your time. You all have resources, creative energies, effort. It's all wasted, because this idea _cannot_ work.

What generally happens is that people will add a little solenoid or moving magnet, powered by a little power supply, to add just enough impulse to overcome the final sticky spot. Then they can show something that loops at least, and the sources of loss can be identified and corrected. But you can never get over the final need to supply a bit of energy to overcome the inevitable losses around the "cycle"... and there is no mechanism, other than the external provision of conventional work, that brings energy into the system.

You will find claimants who have designs that they are sure will "work".... who even make outlandish claims, like the usual "I went to work and when I came back after three  hours it was still looping"... .but you will never actually see such a design working. The "smart money" will give up and go work on something that has some chance. The others will insult and weasel, flail and scramble... but they never are able to _prove me wrong_ by showing a self-looping design that works.

[tinman]

I am surprised at you. Mile High is absolutely correct. If the thing could work, the single ramp is all you need. A very shallow slope from the end where the ball drops down, back to the starting point, is all you would need to show a complete self-looper. But of course it can't happen, because energy IS ADDED to the system whenever the hand is used to position the ball at the start. Without this added energy, nothing happens after the first _partial_ cycle, which never completes.

This (what MH says and what I say) has been proven empirically over and over by hundreds of people. You can go back through the various SMOT threads here and on other sites and see many designs that are functionally identical to what's in this thread. None of them work, and there are sound, never refuted, theoretical reasons and mathematical analyses as to why they don't.

You are wasting your time. You all have resources, creative energies, effort. It's all wasted, because this idea _cannot_ work.

What generally happens is that people will add a little solenoid or moving magnet, powered by a little power supply, to add just enough impulse to overcome the final sticky spot. Then they can show something that loops at least, and the sources of loss can be identified and corrected. But you can never get over the final need to supply a bit of energy to overcome the inevitable losses around the "cycle"... and there is no mechanism, other than the external provision of conventional work, that brings energy into the system.

You will find claimants who have designs that they are sure will "work".... who even make outlandish claims, like the usual "I went to work and when I came back after three  hours it was still looping"... .but you will never actually see such a design working. The "smart money" will give up and go work on something that has some chance. The others will insult and weasel, flail and scramble... but they never are able to _prove me wrong_ by showing a self-looping design that works.

Supprised at me?
Some one not showing a looped device dosnt mean it cant be done.
In this case,the ball is droped from one hight into the track.It then travels UP hill,and drops out of the ramp.
So i ask again,what lifted the ball to a higher level,and then allowed it to drop out?.
Can you show me a device that can do the same without useing any energy to do so?
There is a strange situation that take place when you have both sides of the smot magnets faceing like poles in,in that the ball is actualy repell from the magnets-not attracted to them. This may be what he is doing in the video?.Most will set up a smot ramp ,so as 1 side is north facing the track,and 1 side is south facing the track. This leads to the sticky point at the end.But if you have like poles facing the track,the ball is repelled-so no sticky spot at the end. the ramp could be switched in polarity half way up,so as you get an attraction at the start of the ramp,and a repulsion at the end of the ramp.Looking at the video,it dose seem like the track narrows,and then widens again at the end.
A smot dosnt have to loop to show work being done.We would only have to show the ball come to rest outside the smot,at a higher level than it started at.

[tinman]

Here is another video of the smot.this one shows a little more detail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUFhv-QsDvA

[lumen]

I am surprised at you. Mile High is absolutely correct. If the thing could work, the single ramp is all you need. A very shallow slope from the end where the ball drops down, back to the starting point, is all you would need to show a complete self-looper. But of course it can't happen, because energy IS ADDED to the system whenever the hand is used to position the ball at the start. Without this added energy, nothing happens after the first _partial_ cycle, which never completes.

I can agree for the most part that the system cannot work, but you still have it wrong saying that energy is added by placing a steel ball into a magnetic field. The most energy is at the outermost fringe of attraction, placing it anywhere closer is only a reduction of possible gain.
This is only true of a steel ball, using another magnet is another story.

I've never seen a steel ball escape a magnetic field just because I placed it very close to the magnet by hand giving it that huge gain in energy.

The system loss is actually at the end when extracting the ball from the ramp. This is where the attraction is still pulling on the ball and slowing it's decent. That's why the first ramp starts higher up and the final decent is lower than the starting point. By making the exit lower than the start, some additional energy can be gained from gravity and the ball can be moved into another ramp.

Without moving to a lower point on exit, even a second ramp would not work.