Please, Please, look at this video!

[Low-Q]

Vidar, is there no boundary to your ignorance? Are all the experiments that Butch has shown just a white screen to you? It's experimentally and software wise proven that this concept works. But maybe you want to become the employ of the month at your disinfo company.

No @broli. Pleas don't do this to me. I dissagree a statement here. What's the crime?

I agree the magnets, when together, will have a greater grip on the steel bar when the bar is close enough - ofcourse they have, but you have to look at what is happening between that point and beyond. Then you can start to look at the forces times distance - ENERGY. As an experiment, in your simulation if you like, take 1mm increments and look at the forces between the bar and the magnets in every step out to, let say 10cm, when the magnets are together.
You just take force times distance for each step, and add every 100 results up at the end. Do the same calculation when the magnets are apart. Add them up, and substract it from the previous result.
Now you can see what difference in ENERGY is required to move the steel bar away from the magnets. It is these kind of results which is interesting in order to determind OU or not. Forces alone can't determind anything useful unless you include at which distance the force is measured. I believe you will understand this - you are not just anybody, I have understood.

br.

Vidar

[broli]

Maybe you missed the point that slamming the steel bars onto the magnet is energy GAIN. This is also what butch said and what you can see in the concept video. On the top you see two magnet in repulsion. Their job is to cancel out this force.

1) Bars are open.
2) Magnets move together.
3) Bars get closed.
   1) Energy gained from bars attraction to magnet.
   2) Energy lost from repulsion of cancellation magnets fixed to these bars.
   3) End result = no energy needed to push bars together. Theoretically you could blow on them some wind to move them together.
4) Magnets now move apart VERY easily like proven experimentally.
5) Bars get opened.
   1) Now we have the stored energy in the repulsing cancellation magnets + energy from bars attraction main magnets.
   2) But force from repulsion now is far superior because magnets have moved apart and as experimentally shown bars are held by weaker force
   3) End result = bars will instantaneously and spontaneously open if allowed.
6) Process now repeats.

Vidar, I am very certain that you still will deny it after this but at least this shows I'm a nice guy right?

[Low-Q]

Butch here's the double torque version.

http://ziosproject.com/NJ/exvid55V2.avi

Edit: A few seconds after I made this post I realised this gives exactly the same torque because they both move relatively away from each other now so the torque gets divided by two. Unless I'm mistaken.

It is a very nice concept you have animated here. The counterforce you placed on top there can be useful I hope. I'm still sceptic, but I will take this animation into a deep analysis, simulate it in FEMM, and see how much energy is required to move the steelbars back and forth etc., and see what is happening.

Vidar.

[Low-Q]

Maybe you missed the point that slamming the steel bars onto the magnet is energy GAIN. This is also what butch said and what you can see in the concept video. On the top you see two magnet in repulsion. Their job is to cancel out this force.

1) Bars are open.
2) Magnets move together.
3) Bars get closed.
   1) Energy gained from bars attraction to magnet.
   2) Energy lost from repulsion of cancellation magnets fixed to these bars.
   3) End result = no energy needed to push bars together. Theoretically you could blow on them some wind to move them together.
4) Magnets now move apart VERY easily like proven experimentally.
5) Bars get opened.
   1) Now we have the stored energy in the repulsing cancellation magnets + energy from bars attraction main magnets.
   2) But force from repulsion now is far superior because magnets have moved apart and as experimentally shown bars are held by weaker force
   3) End result = bars will instantaneously and spontaneously open if allowed.
6) Process now repeats.

Vidar, I am very certain that you still will deny it after this but at least this shows I'm a nice guy right?

You are an a$$-hole some times, but I can't deny I like your ideas - even if i dissagree in most of them. I'm sure you are a nice guy deeply inside

Going to bed now. It's late. Good night.

[broli]

Quite cheap and the perfect amount. 2 for main action + 2 for cancellation action.: http://www.emovendo.net/magnet/1x-1x-1-cubes.html

I'm by no means a handy man. But let's see what can be needed.

1) Flywheel of modest mass.
2) Piston mechanism attached to this flywheel.
3) Rail allowing piston to reciprocate.
4) Some steel or magnetic ceramic bars.
5) Linear mechanism attached to these bars.
6) Some other miscellaneous stuff.