Ring Magnet SMOT

[gyulasun]

In the video he drops the ball from the input when the magnets are further apart. Ofcourse that will change the outcome. I would assume that tests like this is not relevant to prove that the concept provides over unity.


Vidar

Hej Vidar,

You seem to misunderstand the test...

1) The ball had a h starting height at the input of the SMOT and when it went through the SMOT and fell into the entrance of the ramp it covered a certain distance up the ramp, ok?

2) Then Naudin placed the input of the SMOT to the entrance of the ramp and let the ball drop onto the start of the ramp and the ball covered a little less distance up the ramp with respect to the case when it fell out from the output of the SMOT, ok?

It was important to insure that the ball should arrive at the ramp entrance from the same starting height it had at the input of the SMOT, this way the two potential energies for the ball were insured to be the same for both test cases.

And the bottom line is: the distance covered by the ball was longer when it entered the ramp from the output of the SMOT than without going through the SMOT, ok? 

The magnets were indeed further apart when he dropped the ball from input of the SMOT (after he flipped 180 degree the SMOT) but this had nothing to do with the potential energy of the ball, it did not change because Naudin insured the same height for the direct ramp entrance it had at the SMOT input.

When the ball went through the SMOT and left its output, the ball had obtained certain kinetic energy and it must have had higher potential energy with respect to the input of the SMOT because the height of the SMOT at its output was higher than its height at its input.

It is interesting our brain tries to deny what we can see with our very eyes.

Gyula

[Low-Q]

Gyula


Naudin flipped the ramp magnets 90° outwards when he tested the SMOT 180°. This will change the conditions of the experiment.
This experiment is not relevant because of that. He did not show the difference in potential energy by keeping the ramp magnets unmodified - with respect to the magnets locations on the ramp.
Why did he put the SMOT ramp 180° if he did change its conditions for the second experiment? In my mind, it does not make sense.


However, I choose to deny any claimed proof as long the tested device is modified in the second half of the experiment.


He should test the ball without the ramp at all, then with the ramp correctly and 180 degrees. He didn't.


A bulletproof experiment is to make several ramps in a row, so close to eachother that the ball has to go as short distance as possible before entering the next ramp - if it get that far. If the ball continues to the next ramp, and you successfully loop all the ramps, and the ball is still going "forever", you got proof.
In that case with a series of SMOTs, my wildest guess is that the ball wil stop before it reach the top of the first ramp.


Vidar

[gyulasun]

Vidar,

Unfortunately, I used the word 'ramp' to mean only the glass pipe in which the ball rolls upwards (after falling from the SMOT in both tests) to cover a certain distance. Sorry for this, and I see you use the 'ramp' word only to refer to the SMOT magnets and the SMOT platform the magnets are placed on. So please read over my earlier post to consider this, ok?

For the second experiment shown in the video the SMOT magnets were not needed at all, this is why he turned the SMOT platform 180 degree first, (video time 0:23), then he flipped the magnets 90 degree outwards (video time 0:31) and placed the ball to the edge of the SMOT platform, i.e. to the same height it was in the first experiment when the ball went up the SMOT ramp, ok?

So in the second experiment, the SMOT magnets were not involved, only the very edge of the SMOT platform was used (identified as SMOT 'input' in the first experiment) to insure the same height for the ball to see how long it can go up in the glass tube without any magnet influencing it. 

Please try to understand what I am saying, you keep thinking that Naudin changed the conditions for the second experiment, well what he changed was NO any effect on the distance he received from letting the ball drop in the second experiment and cover less distance in the glass pipe, ok?

Naudin did test the ball (the way I mentioned in my previous sentence) without the SMOT ramp at all, the only reason he did not place (say 1 meter) away the SMOT platform with the magnets was to use the edge of the platform to insure the same height for dropping the ball into the glass pipe, thus providing the ball the same starting height it had at the input of the SMOT ramp in the first experiment.  The magnets were not involved in the 2nd experiment.

Here is a two SMOT ramp linking experiment:  http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/s102jln.htm

Here is a three SMOT ramp linking experiment: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/3smtlnk.htm

No, he did not show a full loop where the ball returns to the very input of the first SMOT ramp from the output of the 3rd (or more) SMOT ramp. 
I guess you will say then that there is no proof for excess energy what Naudin did get as per his measurements show, see the bottom of his page here:  http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotnrgt.htm

Webby1:  The effect of Mr Hand was present in both experiments, in both cases the ball was placed to the same height by Mr Hand. 

Gyula

[vineet_kiran]

The first magnet will actually pull back on the ring magnet, with less force than the second one that is lower BUT that force reduces the Force of acceleration the ring magnet receives in the forward direction,, same with the 3rd magnet compared to the second,, and so on.

I agree with it.  Since the array is inclined, the ring magnet experiences greater force in forward direction hence its acceleration goes on increasing after passing every top magnet.

The question here is that whether the final acceleration gained by ring magnet is enough to take it out of the last magnet?

If mass of the magnet, angle of inclination of the top array and strengths of magnets are correctly designed, the acceleration gained by ring magnet definitely takes it out of the last magnet.  Once the ring magnet comes out of first array it has to be allowed into second similar array to repeat the same type of motion.  If several such arrays are placed in a circular track, the ring magnet should execute perpetual motion.

[Low-Q]

In the second experiment, the ramp magnets are involved to some extent - because they are there. If he did not need that SMOT-ramp at all, he could likely removed the magnets completely and used a magnetless ramp. In that case the experiment will fail anyways.
What he should do next is not to tilt those magnets at all. Only then you can measure the energy involved for the ball to enter the SMOT. If he do not change the SMOT ramp, I am quite sure the ball will roll up that tube just as far as in the first experiment.


The experiment is not reliable. Really.


Vidar