Magnetic OU principle, You should really take a look at this !

[Ergo]

can we agree that magnet can easily trevel from one fanner to other no stickys at all ? (I say Yes)
can we say that energy for moving (mechanicall friction) magnet is 1/10th of energy that fanner can develop ? (I say Yes - it is very possible to have that strong magnets and taht low friction )

Multiplay magnet pairs by five (make this gif longer, more fanners...). pure mechanicall friction stays 1/10th. mechanical energy of all fanners is now 5 times greater so 1/50 of force of magnets goes to friction. here is your 1/50 OU mode.

Please Ergo tell me that you see it now.

Sorry, I missed this message from you, simply because of your odd expressions. Not being rude, I'm just telling you.

But I can tell you that your saying is not true for a fast moving motor.
The discs will not have the time to shift position simply due to sheer inhertia.
And if you make the discs to thin they not have the power to perform any useful work.
Least but not last, the mechanical solution to extract power from repelled fanners will consume any excess energy.

In my book there's still no free lunch here. But feel free to build it and surprise me. Hopefully I'm wrong in this matter.
You see, I want overunity as well. Just like anybody here. I'm not against it you know, but I have to question solutions that doesn't seem to add up.

[wizkycho]

I understand that to be true with the (un-saturated-magnetic) washers. 
Due to the fact that they have magnetic properties the flux lines want to short circuit through them;
so they move into position without too much resistance. 

But if a non-magnetic weight was applied on top of the washers, what affect would it have on the magnet's path? 
I am unable to verify at this time.

If weight (or part of it) is inside magnet pair, material for weight must be non permeable (rel. mag. perm. 1 same as air) and non conducting 
so it would not induce eddy currents.

Wiz

[mscoffman]

@All

Hi;

I began reading this thread only recently and it really look like you have
something impressive.

First, I wanted to say that to me;  recruitment -> implies overunity.

The external high remnance magnets, recruit magnetic domains in the lower
remnance steel washers. Since domains in these washers are being recruited
radially, these washers then in turn repel each other perpendicularly to the
radial field, and washers move apart.

Note, that at least some extra force created in the stack remains in the stack
of washers and that indicates force/energy gain. One should also note that
except for losses (like lenz law losses) the force trajectory should be the
same going out as coming in and therefore a machine that supports
two opposite phases (like a seesaw) should be able to null out force
imbalances if they prove a problem.

One can see that even in a stator field array of magnets that creates a "magnetic
wall", the rotor composed of one of these stacks should adapt to the magnetization
of wall rather than fight it as there is no permanent magnet there, so I think sticky
points because of "walls" will be minimal.

I propose that a really good way to test this would be to place one of these expanding
stacks inside a toy balloon and form a bellows volumetric displacement pump. This could
then, as broli proposes, form a gravity wheel by transferring a working fluid between one
reservoir and the next on opposite arms of the machine.

One would propose to first use a local electromagnet to power the antisymmetric
volumetric stacks and get the wheel timing optimal then later switch to PM's to
do same operations.  Lenz law losses seem could be reduced by slower RPM
of the wheel movement if necessary.

I feel that this is a better proposal then trying to build a mechanical machine
straight away as one must get "mechanical impedance matching" correct
the first time, or else the method may be blamed.


:S:MarkSCoffman

[wizkycho]

Ergo Ergo Er go go go go ......!

Progression Session 1 - or help THA MAN to come to it's senses.

look at the animation and answer honestly (not religiously) to Me and Yourself this two questions.

can You agree that magnet pair can easily trevel from one fanner to other no stickys at all and there is no resistance from fanners no matter the weight applied ?

can You say that energy for moving (mechanicall friction) magnet can be (good construction) only 1/10th of energy that fanner can develop ?

If answer is NO think again or say why do not You think so, fair enough ?

Wiz

[Topguner]

If I'm wrong in my last statement, then for gods sake, please explain how this device is 50:1 overunity.

Ask Stefan, he is the one that posted the 50:1 overunity claim.