Pauls Device; a damn shame he regrets revealing it.

[Omnibus]

It's mighty strange that virtually every successful perpetual motion machine ever built is either lost after its inventor dies, or is abandoned just because it's too finnicky or too much trouble.

That isn?t true.

Wesley Snyder is very much alive and well and his machine isn?t lost or abandoned at all.

Neither is lost or abandoned the machine invented by Walter Torbay.

People who talk nonsense like you and badmouth the inventors are worse than scam artists.

[Omnibus]

It's mighty strange that virtually every successful perpetual motion machine ever built is either lost after its inventor dies, or is abandoned just because it's too finnicky or too much trouble.

To this day you could not understand that the ball in the experiment we?re discussing ends up at the same gravitational as well as magnetic potential as when it started.

You will never understand that. Don?t torture yourself. Give it up and don?t waste bandwidth in the forum.

[_GonZo_]

Omnibus:
Still not answered why that simple ramp device works or does not work.
Please study basics Newton fisics.
Your posts have no sense at all.
I can see that you do not understand nothing that we talk about.

You think for example that something that is turning or moving with no stop (perpetual motion) is a overunity device and that is an error.

Belive it or not it is the same machine, but much more simple.

Gonzo, for kicks I've uploaded a graph for a variation where the ball winds up at the starting magnetic potential but lower gravitational potential.

I'm really baffled how people can think these things make free energy.? If they're confused by something this simple, there's little hope.

Yes you are right Berferd, the difference is that the ramp should going down instead of up but the result is the same you know, but did not find a image of a device with the ramp going down to the magnet...
I did not wanted to post a wheel with the magnet down because then it will be to complicate for Omnibus brain as momentuns will be implied...

[Omnibus]

Still not answered why that simple ramp device works or does not work.
Please study basics Newton fisics.
Your posts have no sense at all.
I can see that you do not understand nothing that we talk about.

The device you have shown doesn?t work. However, this is not what present discussion is all about.

That you don?t understand not only the SMOT device we?re discussing but also what overunity is is confirmed by your following statement:

You think for example that something that is turning or moving with no stop (perpetual motion) is a overunity device and that is an error.

On the contrary. A device which is turning by itself, that is, a device producing energy, without energy being spent for its turning, is the ultimate overunity device ? a perpetuum mobile (perpetual motion machine).

Belive it or not it is the same machine, but much more simple.

Gonzo, for kicks I've uploaded a graph for a variation where the ball winds up at the starting magnetic potential but lower gravitational potential.

I'm really baffled how people can think these things make free energy.  If they're confused by something this simple, there's little hope.

Yes you are right Berferd, the difference is that the ramp should going down instead of up but the result is the same you know, but did not find a image of a device with the ramp going down to the magnet...
I did not wanted to post a wheel with the magnet down because then it will be to complicate for Omnibus brain as momentuns will be implied...

No, that?s incorrect. In the device we?re discussing the ball starts and ends up at the same magnetic and gravitational potential ? the ball starts at point C (?initial position?) and ends up at point C (?initial position?). In the device we?re discussing the ball goes along a closed loop. One cycle in the device we?re discussing consists of a closed loop. You?d better understand that first before posting your replies because otherwise they will always be incorrect.

[berferd]

It's mighty strange that virtually every successful perpetual motion machine ever built is either lost after its inventor dies, or is abandoned just because it's too finnicky or too much trouble.

To this day you could not understand that the ball in the experiment we?re discussing ends up at the same gravitational as well as magnetic potential as when it started.

You will never understand that. Don?t torture yourself. Give it up and don?t waste bandwidth in the forum.

You're making unsubstantiated claims.  Please show me a graphical representation of the gravitational and magnetic potential energy budgeting of the SMOT, and show me where the excess energy comes from.

The ball in the SMOT moss assuredly winds up at a lower potential than when it starts (but is raised to the starting potential when the operator picks it up and places it at the "input" again.

Stop your arm waving and prove your point.  I've proven mine, so prove yours.