If You Want To Build A Simple Machine, This May Be It

[NathanCoppedge]

If you lower the position to a lower altitude, you get that amount of energy back.
Recycling potential and kinetic energy is in perfect balance that is only outbalanced by friction. So the event will finally stop.
Vidar

Actually, in my design the counterweight remains at a higher altitude, and the modular units are horizontally-arranged, not vertically-arranged, so perhaps there is an advantage from this, as well as other factors. It does not need to lose all the potential energy it uses, because it is all basically expressed in mass through the use of counterweights.

[NathanCoppedge]

1. I can see how you think, but what you think is the right thought, the nature will prove you wrong. Every construction that is suppose to work using gravitational forces, will not work because the mass in the objects and the force of gravity is the same all the time. Therfor you will never gain more kinetic energy than the available potential energy.

2. Also have in mind that you CAN lift a heavy weight with a light weight if the light weight is further from the pivot point than the heavy weight. However, the small weight must compensate its weight with longer travel than the heavy weight.

Vidar

On (1) I think you're over-generalizing.

On (2) clever ratios are what I have already considered in my design. It is a pre-requisite.

[TinselKoala]

Are you still building your "overunity" devices out of cardboard, and making your "measurements" with carpenter's levels and children's rulers?

[NathanCoppedge]

Are you still building your "overunity" devices out of cardboard, and making your "measurements" with carpenter's levels and children's rulers?

Some things are real even with poor tools.

As much as what you say may sound grand, I'm not convinced I would make a much better point with better measurements. Most likely the critics would ignore the video of the new measurements, too.

The answer is to notice what's already there. (Perhaps Apply your brain.)

THERE IS NO RULE AGAINST LIFTING ONE END FROM EQUILIBRIUM OF WEIGHTS. THE DESIGN PERMITS THE MARBLE TO HAVE A HIGHER MIDPOINT THAN THE START ALTITUDE. DO YOU SEE ANY BARRIERS? NO ONE HAS MENTIONED ANY REAL PROBLEMS WITH THE DESIGN---SINCE IT HAS MOMENTUM FROM REST AS PROVEN BY THE VIDEOS.

[NathanCoppedge]

Are you still building your "overunity" devices out of cardboard, and making your "measurements" with carpenter's levels and children's rulers?

The video has an obvious flaw that isn't really a flaw.

While in the Successful Over-Unity Experiment 1 it looks like the marble would not be able to regain the altitude it lost, in the actual design the marble would apply itself to the next lever without lifting the first lever again. Instead, the first lever is lifted just once, from the high point of the lever before that. The actual change of altitude is small, as most of the motion occurs horizontally in a loop. Arguably, if the marble can lift one lever at the beginning point it can easily lift another at the end-point.