Tri-Force Magnets - Finally shown to be OU?

[Omnibus]

@ OMNI

the inclined Tri-Gates are nothing like the smot, except for the fact that it goes up an incline.


If i had to compare the Tri-Force Gate to anything, it would be the Howard Johnson Linear Motor, Like in the You-Tube video i linked above.
as you can see in the video, their actions are identicle. as are their magnetic fields when observed through the gaussviewer.

the magnetic field of the Smot looks nothing like this.

The inclined version is just like SMOT in that there are two conservative fields properly overlaid--magnetic and gravitational. That's what the SMOT principle is, nothing else. Like I said, this version we're discussing now may be better than the original Taisnierius (SMOT) idea because it doesn't need the ball to drop from a height to escape the sticky spot. That may be a major advantage over Taisnierius' device when continuous traversing of a closed loop is sought. However, like I said, it must be understood as to whether that energy acquired at the apex would be enough to overcome the entrance repelling barrier.

[Omnibus]

@All,

I'm ordering these: http://www.supermagnetman.net/product_info.php?cPath=42&products_id=430%3Cbr . Does anyone have experience with them, seem the right ones, neos at that?

[Rusty_Springs]

Hi All
I totally agree my trigate is more like Howard Johnson Linear Motor and the only thing SMOT like is it has parallel magnets for a runner, I can do the same with overlapping magnets but they don't kick the runner away, I also have what I call a corner gate this attracts in and kicks out but the force isn't as strong and the trigate.
With both the corner gate and Trigate I change the flux to work for me using the principle that magnets move from repultion to attraction and if you draw a square around a magnet to represent its field and you will find that the corners are the opposite poles to the pole there comming from so if you have two south pole magnets comming towards each other when one reaches the corner of the other they will attract before they repel and the opposite for attracting poles, I showed this with a experiment I did were I floated one magnet above another magnet both with attracting poles before the corner they attracted after the corner they attracted but at the corrner they repel causing the one above to float.
I also notice that magnets work in halves and not two poles which means at the attracting pole at both ends of the magnet the flux runs into the middle so what ever end of the magnet you put another magnet it will attract towards the centre and with repelling it repels away from the centre in both directions so I angle the magnets so when the other magnet is comming in its follows the path to the middle of the attracting magnet then it follows the path of the repeling magnet which is away from the middle repelling it away giving you a gate that attracts in and repels out the only thing I havn't stopped is the repel comming in and attract going out and that comes from the corner as I was saying earlier, take a look at the corner gate and you will see the principle I talk about, again that is at http://www.fdp.nu/shared .
As I have said maybe nothing will come from this but it does show with the firetruck and experiments I have done that magnets do work.
Take Care All
Graham

[Omnibus]

@Rusty_Springs,

That's incorrect. According to the scientifically most rigorous proof so far for violation of CoE. yours would violate CoE only if an additional field (gravitational) is properly superimposed on the existing magnetic field of your stations.The principle of SMOT is nothing else but such proper superposition of mutually assisting conservative fields. Like I said, yours may be more advantageous compared to SMOT, however, because of the probable possibility for a smooth transition to a reverse sloping plane at the exit. That remains to be confirmed, though. Also, what remains to be confirmed is that the gravitational potential energy gained at the apex (at the exit) will be enough, together with the kinetic energy gained at the apex, to overcome the repulsive barrier at the entrance of the stations so that a self-sustaining motion can be achieved.

As for the horizontal variant, I've said many times that I have serious doubts which may be shown to be unfounded if indeed the energy out turns out to be greater than the energy in. That's still not evident despite some indications to that effect in @CLaNZeR's fifth video.

[sm0ky2]

@ OMNI

the inclined Tri-Gates are nothing like the smot, except for the fact that it goes up an incline.


If i had to compare the Tri-Force Gate to anything, it would be the Howard Johnson Linear Motor, Like in the You-Tube video i linked above.
as you can see in the video, their actions are identicle. as are their magnetic fields when observed through the gaussviewer.

the magnetic field of the Smot looks nothing like this.

The inclined version is just like SMOT in that there are two conservative fields properly overlaid--magnetic and gravitational. That's what the SMOT principle is, nothing else. Like I said, this version we're discussing now may be better than the original Taisnierius (SMOT) idea because it doesn't need the ball to drop from a height to escape the sticky spot. That may be a major advantage over Taisnierius' device when continuous traversing of a closed loop is sought. However, like I said, it must be understood as to whether that energy acquired at the apex would be enough to overcome the entrance repelling barrier.

@ OMNI - could you shed some light on this?  i do not understand how/if hte gravitational field is effecting this device in ANY way, except when the angle is to great to allow travel through the gates  - and in that instance, gravity is working against you.

in the SMOT - the gravitational field works to pull the magnet out of hte attraction zone at the end of the track. in the Tri-Force this attraction zone in completely inside the track, leaving a repulsion at the end. Much Different.
Also to note in the SMOT, the two magnetic fields are off-set. this is the working principle. for without this, the SMOT is inoperable.
I have not yet read your description of the working principle of the SMOT device, i will eventually find your postings on this and give it a thorough reading.
::::::::However, it is my opinion that the SMOT works because of the magnetic induction in the ferromagnetic sphere. - the two field being off-set - causes a rotational motion in the ball.
This is not the same as the linear force produced by the Howard Johnson Linear Motor, and the Tri-Forge Gate.

I'm ordering these: http://www.supermagnetman.net/product_info.php?cPath=42&products_id=430%3Cbr . Does anyone have experience with them, seem the right ones, neos at that?

---  Yes those should work perfectly, and they will be considerably stronger than the GeoMags, because of their higher gauss rating (more Teslas !!!)