Working Attraction Magnet Motor on Youtube!?

[klicUK]

I've posted another replication attempt on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rA3pGixr5rc

still no luck I'm affraid.

@ klicUK

A good attempt on the replication.    But, it still appears perfectly horizontal and is neither tilted nor off center on the base (this would act to increase the tilt.)  Please compare your picture again to that of the original.  Without gravity assist, this stands no chance of working.

It is the "unbalanced wheel" of the lead out theory that makes this possible.  Please reattempt, putting  the cylinder at a "slight" tilt, with the magnets at the "bottom" of that tilt. 

If you look at the photo of the original, you will also notice that it is "off set" from the center of the base.  This would add additional tilt to the unit.  A little geomotry off of the original photo, and you should get pretty close.

Until someone has replicated "exactly" they can not say that it does not work.  It simply does not work the way they have built it.

Keep pluggin' away, your doing a good job,   
Bruce 

@ btentzer: The device isn't perfectly horizontal. Thats why when I demonstrate the partial build and move the stator away the rotor spins in the opposite direction. Not sure what you mean by 'off center on the base'. As far I can see the device spins in a perfect circle - the distance between the rotor and the stator magnets remains pretty much constant. There is certainly no 'cam' effect.  You also have to remember that even if the rotor is tilted (as mine is), any +ve effect by weight on the downhill will be counterbalanced exactly by the same weight when it moves around to the uphill.

@ Omnibus:  I deliberately chose those screws because the dimensions are very close to those used in xpezifs post, count the threads. Also, I dont beleive that xpenzif took that much care over his build, it certainly isn't precision engineering, and these were probably the nearest screws he had to hand. Very serendipitous if he just happened to get the only screws that would work. I assure you there is no way this device will self start regardless of how the stator is presented to the rotor.

I believe the explanation given by xpenzif is fundamentally floored. Please consider this...

The screw underneath a magnet is in its 'Ground State'. In other words all kinetic energy has been used and the force from the magnet to that screw is at its maximum.  The next screw on the drum/rotor that should move underneath a magnet must have a force acting on it that its greater than the force acting on the screw in the ground state. But the second screw is much further away, and thus the force is much weaker. There is absolutely no reason why movement should take place. Now consider further that screws that have already passed under a stator magnet are still being attracted to their stator - and this force is in direct opposition to the force of the magnet and screw that is supposed to be next under the magnet. So, the force that is required to overcome the screw in its ground state = force of magnet on next screw on the drum minus the force from magnets on screws that have just passed the stator.

My device does exactly what its supposed to do. It breaks and stops when a the force of the magnet on a screw in the ground state is greater than the force provided by my hand when I push start it.

[Omnibus]

@kilcUK,

I don?t accept your explanation because of the following. In http://data.image.zabim.com/o-wa51V9glc9.jpg the ball at point C is at its minimum of magnetic potential energy, the ?Ground State? as you put it. Start it form point C and you won?t have a closed A-B-C-A loop along which the excess energy (energy out of nothing) is produced. The device in the picture produces excess energy, however, if started properly. This is only an illustration of my point. In the discussed case, of course, we have superposition of one type of conservative fields unlike the case in the picture.

[klicUK]

@kilcUK,

I don?t accept your explanation because of the following. In http://data.image.zabim.com/o-wa51V9glc9.jpg the ball at point C is at its minimum of magnetic potential energy, the ?Ground State? as you put it. Start it form point C and you won?t have a closed A-B-C-A loop along which the excess energy (energy out of nothing) is produced. The device in the picture produces excess energy, however, if started properly. This is only an illustration of my point. In the discussed case, of course, we have superposition of one type of conservative fields unlike the case in the picture.

@Omnibus: thanks for response. I need more explanation as to what is going on in the diagram. Is this a diagram of a perpetuum mobile? Does it work?

[Omnibus]

@klicUK,

Please take a look at this http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2733.30.html#msg40090, discussing the experiment here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847.

[klicUK]

@klicUK,

Please take a look at this http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2733.30.html#msg40090, discussing the experiment here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847.

@Omnibus: Very interesting. The ball bearing at point 'C' finds potential energy from gravity. I think this device has way more scope for success than xpezifs build.I'm going to try it, with shielding around one side of the magnetic 'chute' and have the bearing roll back down a tube to the start. Not at all like xpenzifs design - once a screw is in the magnetic ground state it stays.

One more comment Omnibus, and please don't take this the wrong way, why aren't you trying to replicate xpenzifs design. It took an afternoon to make the second device. In fact most of that time was spent making the video. Once you make it you will see exactly what I'm talking about, and you can try tweaking a few parameters here and there if you want.