How this was done in 1821.....

[Omnibus]

Conclusively production of excess energy in SMOT can be demonstrated in a closed loop as in http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847 shown schematically here: http://data.image.zabim.com/o-wa51V9glc9.jpg.

[bitRAKE]

People that measure the SMOT ignore the fact they are placing the bearing and that require more energy when the magnets are present. If the bearing could be dropped onto the rail (from far outside of the magnetic field) with or without the magnets present then it would be proof. But that experiment will not have the desired outcome!

[NerzhDishual]

Hi (few) skeptic gremlins, patented nay-sayers and blind nit-pickers!

(Of course, Ommibus and the majority of the members of this forum are not part of these designations ))

My 2C.
OK.

"Over-Unity" is a very usefull (and slightly provocative) denomination (especially for a web forum, for example  ) but it is also a confusing oxymoron.

Why? Because this denomination implicates (for some) an *efficiency* greater than One. Now, by definition , efficiency is <= One. Is it not?

We better should talk about COP (Coeficient Of Performance).

A heat pump has a COP of about 4. It's a fact.
That means that you, the operator, gives/spends 1 unit of 'electricity' and this device gives you back about 4 units of heat. Free NRG .
The extra energy comes from the environnement.
No CoE is broken here and the environnement is clearly defined.
Of course, the efficiency of the 'motor pump' is less than One.

BTW: according to some, you should be able to close the loop and have your heat pump self running. Obviously, this is not (still) the case. Is it?
Theorically, we should be able to collect some part of the heat, transform it into electricity to feed back the compressor. Not so easy... A matter of "efficiency", I guess. So: that is why a device with a COP >1 cannot be automatically self running.

In case of "Over-Unity" devices, it is the same.
The only CeO (Conservation of Energy) that is broken is the 'official/maistream science' CeO, the Albert Einstein's CeO with his (in)famous fu@*$? 'Void Space'.
Of course if you "beleive" (*you* are the beleivers) in an Empty Space you just will not able to understand how could and "over-unity" device work.
Actually, the NRG comes form 'somewhere' and no 'extended' CeO is broken.
From where?
Actually the 'environnement' here is not still clearly defined; but, do you really *beleive* that the present science is complete?

Best

[bitRAKE]

Well said. Concepts like "closed system" are just that - concepts and nothing more. It takes a lot of energy to isolate a system.

I think distributing small models to demostrate an idea is great - sure beats reading another text book!

[Omnibus]

@bitRAKE

People that measure the SMOT ignore the fact they are placing the bearing and that require more energy when the magnets are present. If the bearing could be dropped onto the rail (from far outside of the magnetic field) with or without the magnets present then it would be proof. But that experiment will not have the desired outcome!

That?s incorrect. Please see above my analysis which explains why you?re incorrect.