SMOT! - (previously about the OC MPMM)

[Low-Q]

@vidar,

exactly, but, how do you show that with "no numbers", the one being a given.

lol
sam

I don't quite understand the question - I'm not the smartest guy here. Maybe you should ask @omnibus... 

[Koen1]

lol

let's hope Omnibus is now finally building his closed looped SMOT in physical reality instead of his imagination.
If it does work, we should expect to get flooded with success videos. In that case I'll gladly compliment him on
the achievement, as it will indeed be a good day for mankind, and perhaps an even better one for Omnibus.
If it doesn't, we can expect never to hear from Omnibus again, or at least we can expect him to never ever tell us about his
closed loop experiment failure...

In any case, it is my sincere hope that Omnibus is now finally moving on to the empirical proof part of research.

[shruggedatlas]

I hope I do not get ribbed too hard for necromancing this smot thread, but I had a question for Omnibus.  In the drawing below, I have an alternate SMOT scenario.  Instead of a magnet, we are using a red bungee cord.  The ball initially dangles around point A.  Then (and this is the position of the drawing) the ball is placed by the experimenter at point B, where it experiences a significant level of tension from the bungee cable.  The experimenter lets go, and the ball of course immediately and spontaneously rises to point C.  At this point, the ball runs out of ramp and of course initially lunges toward the base of the bungee cable.  The ball then falls and comes to rest somewhere at point A.

Assume the ramp is split to allow the bungee cable to remain attached.

Is the principle of CoE broken in this scenario, with the bungee cable substituting for magnets?

[hoptoad]

I hope I do not get ribbed too hard for necromancing this smot thread

Arrrrrrghhh.........My head hurts........   

[Omnibus]

@shruggedaltas,

This would be analogous to SMOT if the ball returns spontaneously to B.