Tri-Force Magnets - Finally shown to be OU?

[HopeForHumanity]

Omnibus, if you take the time to analyze my statement, you will see how it describes your actions in this non-smot thread...

[sm0ky2]

"validated conclusively" ?? Steon has presented the most accurate scientific analysis of the SMOT to date, and they have proven conclusively that their version of the SMOT-device is less than 90% efficient.


i repeat :::
(Mb - Mc) = 0

additionally::  [ mg(B-A)  -  mg(B-A)] = 0
That's your full cycle from A -> B-> C -> A

so again i ask:::   WHERE is this "extra energy" ??

the fact that Ma is less than Mb is irrelevant.
  Mb = -Mc

Ma is greater than Mc.

SMOT is less than Unity.

you have not shown SMOT to be in violation of CoE, even Textually, much less Conclusively.
keep trying.

[Omnibus]

Omnibus, if you take the time to analyze my statement, you will see how it describes your actions in this non-smot thread...

No thread discussing magnetic motors is a non-SMOT thread.

[sm0ky2]

I was wondering how hard would it have been to place a rotor in the middle of that SMOT setup, drill a hole in the steelball and place it on one end of the rotor then place another steelball on the other end so there balanced and start one ball at B once it moves along and down the opposite ball should move across and up to B starting the process again if the disign attracts in but I have to wonder why the guy is lifting the steelball so carefully up to B from A, is the magnetic flux making it hard to lift or does it need to start at a certain point to work.
Take Care All
Graham

@ Graham --  Thay type of device 'works' on the bottom side too. so while hes lifting the ball, its trying to pull towards the refrigerator (point c). hes holding it back against that magnetic potential.

What Omnibus is trying to convince everyone of is that the "pull" towards point C results in some sort of energy gain, while he refuses to address the fact that this energy sticks the ball to the refrigerator.
Hence the need to elevate it for gravity to do the work to pull it back down.

[Omnibus]

"validated conclusively" ?? Steon has presented the most accurate scientific analysis of the SMOT to date, and they have proven conclusively that their version of the SMOT-device is less than 90% efficient.


i repeat :::
(Mb - Mc) = 0

additionally::  [ mg(B-A)  -  mg(B-A)] = 0
That's your full cycle from A -> B-> C -> A

so again i ask:::   WHERE is this "extra energy" ??

the fact that Ma is less than Mb is irrelevant.
  Mb = -Mc

Ma is greater than Mc.

SMOT is less than Unity.

you have not shown SMOT to be in violation of CoE, even Textually, much less Conclusively.
keep trying.

This is incoherent blabber. Restrain from further demonstrating stupidity and confusion.