Building a self looping "SMOT"

[TinselKoala]

Figured you'd resort to a straw man argument when pressed. I requested you let eclair do his thing, rather than distracting from the topic with immature bullying. He didn't claim to show OU yet. Is that too much for the mighty TK to grasp? Mendacious seems to be one of your favorite words when applied to others, I do believe you should buy a mirror.

You have some kind of problem with comprehension. I don't think anyone --  except you -- would say, from reading this thread, that elecar did NOT claim to have a SMOT that was OU, that he was trying to patent it and that he was trying to sell it to a toy company. Further, he pretended to be able to teach us how to make an OU smot ourselves. Just as LibreEnergia and others have pointed out: any SMOT that self-loops is OU. What is the title of this thread?

What he "claimed to SHOW" is different from what he claimed to have.

What he DID show is the video I analyzed, which clearly shows just what I said it does, and I provided evidence for all to examine in the still frames from that video: energy storage in the system, that is all the energy returned, and no evidence of any progress towards a real self looping SMOT.

He also arrogantly claimed other things that aren't true, especially that nobody has ever seen a smot making two full turns. (We will ignore his paranoid accusations that I have "minions" who do my bidding and are interested in suppressing real Overunity... a claim that has been made before, but never with any shred of evidence in support.) Well, now you have seen the evidence that that last statement of his isn't true, and isn't even very difficult to do if one has a bit of skill in building and knowledge of just where losses come from. Most especially, it is easy if the input ramp isn't part of the "looping".

You complain about the cheese? Fine, you don't have to eat it. It's really not very good cheese anyway, a fake "light" mozzarella with basil.
But you DO have to look at the evidence: My apparatus uses a ramp that is not part of the loop; so does the device in elecar's video. My apparatus does NOT provide any extra energy by "cocking the magnetic spring" or "flicking the ball" into the track; elecar's does. My video clearly shows, with no hint of fakery, the ball making more than two full turns around the track... twice; elecar's does not.

Further, we now have a statement from someone who seems to know his business, that another video, clearly presented to LibreEnergia as _proof_ that elecar had what he CLAIMED TO HAVE, which is an OU SMOT self-looping ...... almost certainly has been faked. I haven't seen that video myself... and I don't know LibreEnergia, but his statements are a lot more credible on the face of it than elecar's are.

These are not straw man arguments, there, mister Happyfunball.

Quite the contrary, they are examinations of evidence that elecar himself provided in support of his claims of OU, and which clearly fail to do so. As I said in my analysis, even before LE began his, it appears that elecar may be willing to cheat to get his point across. Such things have happened before, even down to the insults and campaigns against the skeptics like me. Do you not recall Mylow?

In my analysis, supported by frame extracts from the video elecar posted, it can be clearly seen that he places the ball down on the track within the influence of the magnets, then pulls the ball back to the left, storing energy in the magnetic "spring", then flicks the ball to the right, giving it an additional KE boost into the track system. Elecar protests that he did not flick the ball... but the video clearly shows him doing so and the still frames clearly show the position of his fingers when the ball is being released: well to the right of the initial placement of the ball. Nobody but elecar has yet disputed my analysis. 

Furthermore.... we have LibreEnergia's analysis of the other video which nobody else has seen yet, which arguably took more work than mine, and which seems to reveal much more willingness to cheat on elecar's part. Where does any of this fit into the definition of a "straw man" argument? In fact, happyfunball, it is you who are engaging in various fallacious arguments, including the straw man, but more than that, you are attacking ME personally rather than confronting the issues. You have no credibility, and with every insult, every instance of avoiding the issues, you are just proving that point more and more. Where is your work refuting my analysis, refuting LibreEnergia's analysis? Nowhere. Where is your work supporting elecar's claims, which most certainly include claims of OU performance from an apparatus he claims to possess? Nowhere. Instead, you choose, just as I predicted, to carry on your personal attacks against me, and you can't even provide proof or evidence for those. You especially can't provide any evidence of "mendacity" on my part.

Keep it up, you are only proving my points.

[TinselKoala]

LibreEnergia:

That was a slam-dunk.  My impression is that the creator or creators of the video had no idea that this issue was in play.

The likelihood is indeed remote.  Way less than one in a Google.  And you know they say that there are 10^80 protons in the universe.

MileHigh

I'm hoping that LibreEnergia's analysis could be confirmed by someone else as well, although I'm willing to take his word as it stands. If it does turn out that the video shows fakery... I think  that would be pretty damning. But of course this should be confirmed. I doubt if anyone else here has the skillset and knowledge and experience that LibreEnergia has, though; I certainly don't.

[elecar]

Libre. I have no idea what half of the terms you are using mean. I took the video on the sanyo camera that I mentioned earlier, it is the only one I own. In order to be able to upload it anywhere it has to be loaded from my camera to my computer and it has to be changed to a file type that will upload. If I do not do that I can load it nowhere. I removed over 20 minutes of me trying to capture the longest amount of loops. I had managed 20+ which I did not capture on the camera and every attempt after that only managed between 2 and 12.
You give me far more credit than I am capable of because I would not have a clue how to "splice" a video. In fact if you look at my earlier videos loaded you will see exactly how good my camera and myself are at the simplest of edits.
I do not have a clock with seconds on it so this weekend I will try and get to a shop and get one with a second hand and attempt the video again. I can not promise that I will catch as many loops as that video represents two days of messing around with the track and magnets.
I suspect though no matter what I supply you with you will continue to find fault.

I suppose the one thing I should say thank you for is you have stated the ball was not flicked ?

[elecar]

TK again you show that you are a moron an idiot of epic proportion, your so called attempt at replication is nothing but mockery.

You release a ball from a ramp onto a track that is flat and  level. the ball never has to climb. Your ball will travel further if you just have a flat straight level track.
But your ball will not even make one loop if you raise one side of your track by 12mm, with or without the cheese in place.

Of course it was never your intention to try a replication it was again for your own gratification and to keep your minions amused.
Your thinly veiled attempt at interest in anything to do with SMOTs is purely for your own justification.

[powercat]

@ elecar

Can you please post the video on YouTube so everyone can see it or allow it to be posted by a third party ?

This would seem to be a reasonable request, and no justification for you to start making any derogatory remarks about me again.