How this was done in 1821.....

[bitRAKE]

What leap of logic allows you to ignore the magnetic field when it suits you and measure from the middle of the experiment?

[Omnibus]

I don't ignore the magnetic field. As I said, you just don't get it.

[bitRAKE]

There is no way you could be wrong? That is not science and there is no reason for that assumption except to perpetuate a farce.

I have attached a picture to help you understand. A person cannot place the bearing at B without working against the magnetic field in red. True, this force is pulling the bearing into the SMOT, but work has to be done to place the bearing at rest at position B. You ignore that fact.

Equating an apparatus with a magnet to one without a magnet is nonsense and certainly not science - it is more on par with magic tricks.

[Omnibus]

Not so. Ma > Mb, therefore, (Ma - Mb) > 0. The work to move the ball from A to B is -mgh1 + (Ma - Mb). Magnetic field helps in placing the ball at B. In magnetic field the work to place the ball at B when lifting it from A is less than the work in absence of magnetic field.

[bitRAKE]

Not so. Ma > Mb, therefore, (Ma - Mb) > 0. The work to move the ball from A to B is -mgh1 + (Ma - Mb). Magnetic field helps in placing the ball at B. In magnetic field the work to place the ball at B when lifting it from A is less than the work in absence of magnetic field.

An invalid assumption which has not been tested.

The magnetic field density is not linear! It takes more energy to place the bearing at B than it does for it to return to A!