Testing a SMOT

[Omnibus]

One other aspect of this setup that may be getting overlooked, is the fact that magnetic fields are conservative.

The SMOT magnets do impart energy to the ball by raising it against gravity, but in an equal and opposite fashion, they will take back that energy (due to attraction) upon the release of the ball at point C.

This is incorrect. Read my analysis and stop posting nonsense which clutters the thread.

[gaby de wilde]

I think it's ok to delete harassment posts Stefan. Just make it so that I can read about the SMOT in the smot topic. That would be cool. They do appear to think it's fun to scream and whine at someone the year round. But if you leave such filth up others will feel encouraged to join in. I specifically mean the post not the poster ok.

I did read up on the SMOT documentation

http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/smot
SMOT - magnetmotor

I think the best thing to work towards is to make it much more efficient  and more obvious so that everyone can agree it works. This should not be so complicated.

This ground shaking scientific research is most interesting.

On thinking about it later, I realized that it would stop after the fourth ramp no matter where it was started and that maybe there was just a problem with the fourth ramp. Unfortunately I thought of that too late and (how many times have we heard this :-)) I've since dissassembled it to reuse the magnets.

http://rimstar.org/sdenergy/smot/smotmk1/smotmk1.htm
SMOT Mark 1 Experiments

As the closed loop SMOT's that I know of where the result of at least months worth of tuning it's obvious there is something wrong with his "4th ramp". But he is doing science with clay, one just has to respect that.

A SMOT works much like the testatica device, the charge builds up so the ball enters the field slowly building up flux and it exits with it's flux still inducted into it. This makes it harder to configure it to climb the next ramp. Finstrud used a spring in stead of gravity.

A hollow ball should put the magnet force vectors under better angles. Either filling it with gas or ballast should also make a difference. The arrays of magnets may start slightly above the center of the ball and end slightly below it.

I'm convinced that additional arrays may be constructed to end half way the ramp. The balls will "drop" out of those in favor of the primary array.

I had already re-designed this idea.

http://gabydewilde.googlepages.com/chainreactor

The balls enter and leave the field. It's already a big improvement over just getting stuck onto the magnet. For me the SMOT is a half baked treasure. It may be hard to improve, that should present a challenge IMHO.  Everyone else should feel free to give up today.

I'm still looking for the website where you explain your smot analysis Omnibus.

The video is great but it doesn't cover the story.

[xpenzif]

I would like to see a website further explaining Omnibus' finding also. The equation I came up with was actually the same one Sm0ky2 posted(although his post "disappeared"). When new equations are offered, they are answered "You don't understand/ Read it again/ Of course its OU." Rather than "Here's exactly where your equation fails..." I'm trying to learn about smot, help me better understand it. Tell me why exactly sm0ky2 was wrong.

[Tesla_2006]

Hi, some 10 years ago I buy plans of a generator like the Steorn Company and it works very good, now days I reduce my electrical energy bill just to zero

This devices really works and do a too easy life


Bye

[tagor]

Hi, some 10 years ago I buy plans of a generator like the Steorn Company and it works very good, now days I reduce my electrical energy bill just to zero
This devices really works and do a too easy life

do you have some pic or video of this generator ?