got over the sticky spot

[Mad Scientist]

What do you mean by ?extracted?? The excess energy is being extracted with the SMOT every time the experiment is carried out. Excess energy is produced (extracted) periodically also in the experiment Scott has shown us so far in his videos. These are laboratory experiments done for scientific purposes, to prove the effect, to prove the principle. If, however, you mean extracted for practical purposes, no scientific experiment does that. Of course, these effects, already proven experimentally, may be used to make practical devices if someone wants to do it. That?s the trivial part.

Even the experiment we are waiting to be shown by Scott for continuous extraction of excess energy will not do it for practical purposes. If he succeeds, it will be the first public demonstration that I know of, of a continuous production of excess energy using magnets. But even if he doesn?t succeed, the ability of the SMOT and of the devices in the videos Scott already posted, to produce excess energy periodically, will still be real.

The only type of energy that interest me is the kind that I can use. Electrons spin round and round the nucleus of an atom without any fuel or energy. There are lots of types of free energy, but I just want a motor that will run without fuel so that I can power my house and maybe an electric car. But I still am skeptical about the motor of Scott's. How many times have we heard someone come onto one of these types of forums and do this very thing? Many times. They blow smoke up our asses and see how high we jump, works every single time. They either leave us all hanging waiting for the confirmation that they promised us or they say that they cannot reveal the secret or whatever. It's always something. Never fails. I will be very surprised if this time is any different. However, with that said I hope more than anything that I am wrong and I am still holding my breathe with the rest of you on this one.

[Omnibus]

?The only type of energy that interest me is the kind that I can use.?

The excess energy which is periodically extracted from the SMOT and from the device Scott showed in his videos is the type of energy you can use. The principle has been confirmed and now it?s up to you to find a way to put it into practical use.

?Electrons spin round and round the nucleus of an atom without any fuel or energy.?

No, this is only a primitive picture from the high school textbooks. Modern understanding does not involve mechanical spinning of electrons around nucleus. The information for the electron is extracted from a psi-function which is a solution to the Schrodinger?s equation and has nothing to do with mechanical motion.

?There are lots of types of free energy?

So far, as far as magnets are concerned, I have only seen confirmations in two cases ? SMOT and Scott?s movies. In general, one other example is with a combined cathode-anode electrolysis cell. No other claims so far are viable in my opinion.

?but I just want a motor that will run without fuel so that I can power my house and maybe an electric car.?

That?s a trivial consequence from a viable principle. Not very interesting. 57 years ago noone had a compute on his desk although some people knew the principle was there.

?They blow smoke up our asses and see how high we jump, works every single time. They either leave us all hanging waiting for the confirmation that they promised us or they say that they cannot reveal the secret or whatever.?

Not so in Scott?s case. He showed us in two videos the periodic production of excess energy. For a skillful person with talent in engineering that is enough to make a practical device.

What remains for Scott to show us is the continuous production of excess energy which he said he has achieved. However, even if he doesn?t demonstrate it, it doesn?t mean that he hasn?t shown us one principle of production of excess heat. In that sense he did not fail. Obviously he?s a man of great talent and determination and I admire him.

[ScottClarke]

Whoa - hold on people!

The motor will run again and you will see video. When I post it you will be left with no doubt as to it's authenticity. I won't post video that leaves questions, nor will I post fakes.

I have taken a day off - been rather unwell since getting it going - heart racing and blood pressure near 200. Never guessed at those effects..........

I have decided to rebuild it on a glass platter. Further - An anomally occured when I was tidying last night. Gave the wheel a spin (you know - check it's real) and it failed to clear 300 degrees. The 3 balls are identical but after swapping bits around it was clear something was different about this ball. Ferrofluid showed nothing of interest........

The only thing I can think is that whilst at rest 2 of the balls can sit in a position surrounded by poles whilst the third is in the free zone and fully subject to the onboard neo's effect only.

Thats what I put it down to - saturation - though it can't simply be that or the FF would show it.

Obviously something going on here - can anyone enlighten me please?

I have lots more balls so a swap won't be a problem.

For now - well tomorrow I am going to get a hole cut in glass or perspex then start the rebuild.

Interestingly, when it was setup and ran perfectly it could also almost run backwards................

The cut on the ceramic.......... words will do. start by grinding a whole corner to clear the ball - so the arc formed is 1/4rd the ball diameter and the full thickness of the magnet. Now take off one face only leaving the pointy end (arc) sharp yet either side 2mm or so thick. The angle formed is perhaps 25 degrees.

When I video the new run I will also supply high res pics.

Scott

[Omnibus]

Scott, don't you have the old setup running? Never mind it will leave questions, post the video as is.

[Mad Scientist]

?The only type of energy that interest me is the kind that I can use.?

The excess energy which is periodically extracted from the SMOT and from the device Scott showed in his videos is the type of energy you can use. The principle has been confirmed and now it?s up to you to find a way to put it into practical use.

?Electrons spin round and round the nucleus of an atom without any fuel or energy.?

No, this is only a primitive picture from the high school textbooks. Modern understanding does not involve mechanical spinning of electrons around nucleus. The information for the electron is extracted from a psi-function which is a solution to the Schrodinger?s equation and has nothing to do with mechanical motion.

?There are lots of types of free energy?

So far, as far as magnets are concerned, I have only seen confirmations in two cases ? SMOT and Scott?s movies. In general, one other example is with a combined cathode-anode electrolysis cell. No other claims so far are viable in my opinion.

?but I just want a motor that will run without fuel so that I can power my house and maybe an electric car.?

That?s a trivial consequence from a viable principle. Not very interesting. 57 years ago noone had a compute on his desk although some people knew the principle was there.

?They blow smoke up our asses and see how high we jump, works every single time. They either leave us all hanging waiting for the confirmation that they promised us or they say that they cannot reveal the secret or whatever.?

Not so in Scott?s case. He showed us in two videos the periodic production of excess energy. For a skillful person with talent in engineering that is enough to make a practical device.

What remains for Scott to show us is the continuous production of excess energy which he said he has achieved. However, even if he doesn?t demonstrate it, it doesn?t mean that he hasn?t shown us one principle of production of excess heat. In that sense he did not fail. Obviously he?s a man of great talent and determination and I admire him.

Who do you think that you are talking to???
I repeat in case you did not hear me the first time. Scott has NOT ACHIEVED ANTHING AS OF YET THAT I HAVE NOT ALREADY ACHIEVED MYSELF. NOTHING!!!!! I have built near permanent magnet motors that have WAY out performed what I have already witnessed on his so called video's of proof. I too at one time thought just like he, I performed experiments and had apparently built a functional flux gate. But once I closed the loop it quit working. What he thinks to be his flux gate is probably an area of lower gauss despite it's closer proximity to the rotor when compared to the other magnets in his array. All his rotor is probably doing is moving from an area of low gauss to an area of higher gauss, the proximity of the magnets to the rotor is irrelevant. I am no rookie in this area Omnibus. But I can tell that you are. There is no way that you would speak the way that you do if you have done all of the research into this matter as I have done. What have you done anyways? Anything? I doubt it. Which explains why you are so nieve.
Now, as far as the SMOT goes. I have said it before and I shall say it again and again and again, there is NO, I repeat, No energy produced by the SMOT. I have built dozens of SMOT ramps, dozens omnibus not one or two. Every size and shape that you can imagine. I even had one that was over two feet long weighing over 50lbs and had over $500.00 worth of magnets in it. It would roll a large steel ball up the ramp but no matter how big of an SMOT that I built, I could never get the steel ball to a point that was higher then what it started. But, I know what you are thinking, "but there is horizontal movement, that must be proof of energy being produced" I tested that hypothesis too. I built a wheel that would attempt to extract some energy from the ball as it passed by on its way up the ramp. And it worked, it extracted some energy, but guess what else? The more energy I took from the ball on it's way up the ramp, the lower a point the ball had to end up at on the exit in order to escape the magnetic field at the end of the ramp. I'm telling you, I have tried EVERYTHING AND I MEAN EVERYTHING to get energy from an SMOT. All an SMOT is, is a fancy way to move a ball from a higher point to a lower point. If an SMOT really produced excess energy of any kind then the ball would exit the ramp at a height that was equal to or higher then it's starting point. This has never been achieved BY ANYONE. I even thought, "OK so the ball wants to exit at a lower point then what it started, then I will just let it go lower and lower as it passes from one ramp to another and stop trying to fight it and I will just link a bunch of them together and build up the horizontal speed" Then guess what happened? Did the speed build up? Sure it did, allot. So then I took that array of ramps that went lower and lower with each one and beside that I set a track without any magnets in proximity to it and rolled a ball down that track beside my SMOT array. It was a race, both balls started at the same height, one ball was assisted by the SMOT ramps as the ball fell lower and the other was just allowed to fall by the force of gravity alone. Guess which one won? The gravity powered one, not the one that had gravity and the SMOT ramps both. The SMOT took energy from the ball, they did not add any to it at all!!! ? SMOT argument over, I win you lose, deal with it rookie. You speak of things that you have NO PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OR KNOWLEDE OF WHATSOEVER. Once you have spent thousands of dollars and hundreds upon hundreds of hours of your free time on the SMOT subject as I have done, THEN I will listen to what you have to say. I am probably one of the FOREMOST experts on the SMOT. Simply because I know how much effort I have put into the idea and I doubt that many others have put forth an effort that equals or exceeds my own. I was at one time MUCH MUCH more confident about the fact that the SMOT produced energy. Even more so then you are. Much more so, why do you think that I put so much time and effort into it? Obviously because I felt that I could get it to work. But an energy gain has never been confirmed by anyone, anywhere in any laboratory or anywhere else. SMOT case closed.
Now, if you want to praise Scott for being a man of great talent and determination, then that's fine, but I suggest that you hold your praise and applause until he actually succeeds.
I don't have anything against free energy research such as this, quite the contrary, I love this stuff, I just get annoyed when people like you talk down to people like me when I know allot more about this subject then what I am willing to share or that you could possably imagine. There is no substitute for experience. And in the suject of permanent magnet motors I have over ten years worth of research, thousands of dollars, and hundreds of hours of my life invested thus far, how bout you???