I have seen today a permanent magnet only machine that has OU of 720%. 2.5 units of work were used to lift 18 units of weight.
The device can then mechanically be reset with 4 units of work such that the first cycle of lifting 18 units is repeated.
The next step in its development is automating it to reciprocate.
I have always believed that useful work can be derived from permanent magnets. My first major accomplishment was
the pendulum that is dropped from 2 oclock and raises to 12 oclock and falls back down with no sticky spot.
you can see that here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FzK2XKQ-74
Some of my inspiration came from Butch Lafonte's many ideas. I then made some modifications and began to see OU
in small quantities. But now I have enough extra to make a self reciprocating device.
Stay tuned but it won't be soon. My clockmaking precisions skills are seriously lacking.
I just want you to know that it is real and valid and it is being replicated/verified by a trusted colleague.
And you will ask where does the energy come from? And I will say from the permanent magnet attraction
that we all know but its done in a very simple and clever way that there is very little sticky spot and thus
OU.
Norman
@Norman
Looking at your video,i would say you are providing the extra energy required to allow the pendulum to reach the 12oclock position from the 2 oclock starting point. In the screen capture below,i have marked where i believe the repulsion point is,and that when you lift the pendulum,you are using more energy than would be required to lift the pendulum to the 2 oclock position if that repulsion force from the apposing magnets wasnt there. This is the extra energy that you are adding to the system.
Your hand is adding the extra energy. It pushes the magnet away from the equilibrium position. When the pendulum recoils back you can see that it has lost energy as it does not end up in the same starting position.
That's right.
Hey Norman, here is an easy control experiment you can do in a few minutes. Remove _all_ the magnets around the "clock" except for the one on the rotor, and the "launch" bar magnet that you are using at the starting point, indicated in the image above.
Repeat the test using this configuration. How far does the rotor rotate? More, or less, than with all the other magnets in there?
Tinman, there is no repeling force anywhere near the starting spot at 2 oclock. That fiber block was used as a stopper
so that I could hold it there with a stick and then just slide the stick away so that no induced force was added.
Numerous people have personally seen the pendulum and can only scratch their heads as to why.
There is no trickery of any kind in this device - just magnets, metal and wood. I present this to you so
that you can begin to open your mind and get out of the box and past the sticky spot for some years now.
Remove or reposition the magnets and the "sick pendulum" will perform as expected - it will not go past 9 or 9:30.
The magnets have to be very carefully aligned. Too close here or too close together and it fails.
This device and a copy has been archived for historical purposes but you have the video
to see remotely thanks to Youtube.
Now back to the real issue. Permanent magnets do have real forces and they can be properly harnessed to
do useful work if you can get past the sticky spot and I have done that in numerous ways with
varying results. So clearly if you can use a small force to release a larger force then you will have OU.
The pendulum has OU but I have never been able to use the pendulum's mysterious energy for external use.
One of Butch Lafonte's proposals has OU but not enough to use in a self running machine. But with proper changes it has enough OU to self reciprocate.
Norman
Quote from: norman6538 on August 18, 2014, 09:09:28 PM
I have seen today a permanent magnet only machine that has OU of 720%. 2.5 units of work were used to lift 18 units of weight.
The device can then mechanically be reset with 4 units of work such that the first cycle of lifting 18 units is repeated.
The next step in its development is automating it to reciprocate.
....
Hi Norman,
If you are at liberty to tell any details on the machine you have seen, please throw some bones.
Thanks, Gyula
Quote from: norman6538 on August 19, 2014, 08:00:35 AMThe pendulum has OU but I have never been able to use the pendulum's mysterious energy for external use.
This happens with all permanent magnet contraptions.
Quote from: norman6538 on August 19, 2014, 08:00:35 AM
But now I have enough extra to make a self reciprocating device.
All designers of permanent magent contraptions make that prediction. We do not need predictions, we need veryfied facts.
Quote from: norman6538 on August 19, 2014, 08:00:35 AM
Stay tuned but it won't be soon.
Seems to be a valid statement.
Quote from: norman6538 on August 19, 2014, 08:00:35 AM
I just want you to know that it is real and valid and it is being replicated/verified by a trusted colleague.
Something is real and valid after it has been verified. You are writing wishes not facts.
Greetings, Conrad
Folks I have been benching everyday and as you see not much keyboarding.
I have made 7 versions with varying results and most show overunity - more power
out than in. But you won't believe that. A friend did view and verify that I am
right but does not have the time (just a day) to replicate one.
As I said I am working toward reciprocation which you still probably won't believe
but here is the bugaboo...
the bugaboo is the extra power needed
to reset and then start the cycle again.
I use simple units of work and they are 1/8 movement up or down
of one 1/2 washer ( as opposed to foot pounds) because it can clearly
be seen without calibration doubts.
the bugaboo defined.
ie. if 8 units of work can switch attraction on and 10 units of work is done
with that attraction and we then need the same 8 units of the 10 to switch attraction
off then in addition we need to reset the original 8 units back where it started
to repeat the cycle again but we only have 2 units left so we are 6 units short.
So to reiterate - the measurements show that a small unit of work can
switch on a permanent magnet and do a larger unit of work and the
attraction can be switched off so the cycle can be repeated.
There really is hope for simple visible and verifiable overunity
because I have seen it numerous times and have shown it
to a close colleague. Unfortunately he is too busy to be a significant
part of this history in the making.
Be patient with the benchers.
Norman
Quote from: TinselKoala on August 19, 2014, 03:54:56 AM
That's right.
Hey Norman, here is an easy control experiment you can do in a few minutes. Remove _all_ the magnets around the "clock" except for the one on the rotor, and the "launch" bar magnet that you are using at the starting point, indicated in the image above.
Repeat the test using this configuration. How far does the rotor rotate? More, or less, than with all the other magnets in there?
TinselKola I won't disturb the working device to do this test but I know from much experience that what it will do is not even go up to 9 oclock because one magnet alone will slow the pendulum down. Try that yourself and you will see. Let the pendulum go for now. It simply shows that magnets do have power to do work and not get stuck...
The key question is where does that 2 extra hours of movement upward come from?
And the answer can only be from the magnets and metal arrangement. If you observe closely it appears that the pendulum is pushed along when it goes clockwise and when it comes
back counterclockwise it appears to be slowed down and even stops at 6 oclock.
Another point, the pendulum is only about 15 degrees up from flat so that the magnetic
power can be matched to the gravity power. If tilted to high or too low it will not work.
Norman
I'm sorry it took so long but this work is very hard and slow to accomplish so here it goes.
Today I am releasing to public domain the basic principle that makes
it possible to derive usable work from permanent magnets.
The annimation is not labeled but you are seeing a metal plate that
is pivoted and lifted up by a permanent magnet and then the magnet
is pulled away without getting stuck there thus allowing usable work
from the magnet to metal attraction force.
There are many more enhancements required to increase the efficiency
enough over 200% to make it self reciprocate.
Study this well and you can add your own enhancements to make it
self reciprocate.
I have worked real hard for about a year to get this far. It all started
with what Butch Lafonte said below.
begin Butch Quote
gammarayburst:
September 06, 2013, 06:06:52 AM ยป
Norman, it (a magnet on wheels) will slide so easy you could push it with a
feather. Think of sliding a magnet down the side of a file cabinet with an air
gap of .003" between the magnet and metal side. That is what I base the
whole Pseudo Solid principle on. It won't grab on to anything till it
gets to the end of the metal cabinet. There is no end with the bars
in this. I have many video's showing this on youtube at the LaFonte
Research and LaFonte Group site for 5 years now. Think of a magnet
sliding down the front of your refrigerator door. The only reason it
does not slide all the time is because of the friction between it
and the door surface. Put an air gap of .003" between the two and
watch it slide down like a rock being dropped.
Butch end quote
Thanks Butch for that idea that started me down this path.
But what Butch never said is how to use this principle to get useful work.
So in the annimation gif you can see clearly how it is done. The bottom
metal plate is pivoted at one end so it can lift and drop at the other
end But due to the closer stronger principle of
permanent magnets you will need a strong mounting/pivot
to build this setup. I have found that mounting the movable magnet on
a bicycle front wheel axle does well. And you will need to measure
the weight lifted by the pivoted plate.
I have measured overunity numerous times and have made a detailed sequence
that will make this a self reciprocating machine. But a warning - due to
the fact this this is a reciprocating design hughe power out will not be
possible because rotating designs can increase the rpms and get great power
but this design cannot have high rpms for high power.
Your are free to experiment for yourself with this concept but I retain the
copyrights to the idea but you are not free to manufacture and sell such a
device. I retain that right.
If you have serious interest in persuing the idea with enhancements
then email me with your background and availability.
I expect to finish the self reciprocation within a year myself. It takes
long to make such a strong and precise machine. But you should be able to
make a simple version that will get you excited about its OU reality.
See the attached annimation for the basic principle.
Norman
Norman, rather than talking about POWER, measure ENERGY input and output.POWER does not do work, ENERGY does.
Hi Norman, I couldn't see any animation, just the still shots.
IMO, It will come to rest.
Momentum can carry a magnet past the sticky point.
Add that with gravity.
artv
If you download the .gif file it is an annimated gif and when you view it it moves
back and forth. What you see on the web is only 1 frame.
Study it and it will wake you up to OU.
Norman
There is a bug in the overyniuty forum that breaks the annimated gif files. So I have zipped that file and uploaded it to try to get a good one for you.
If that does not work please inform me.
Thank you Guyla for informing me about it.
So to view the annimation download the following zip file and unzip it and then
view it and it should run the annimation frame sequence.
I added some simple text explaining as the magnet moves and lifts the metal
plate and any attached weight.
Norman
Quote from: tinman on August 18, 2014, 10:07:40 PM
@Norman
Looking at your video,i would say you are providing the extra energy required to allow the pendulum to reach the 12oclock position from the 2 oclock starting point.
If I recall properly, it is essential to study one COMPLETE cycle, or preferably several cycles.
Quote from: Paul-R on April 11, 2015, 08:36:40 AM
If I recall properly, it is essential to study one COMPLETE cycle, or preferably several cycles.
I agree.
In fact endless cycles would be required to show OU.
I just tested a device and have some interesting results.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP8Ogl1ccLo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP8Ogl1ccLo)
Quote from: lumen on April 11, 2015, 06:40:24 PM
I agree.
In fact endless cycles would be required to show OU.
I just tested a device and have some interesting results.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP8Ogl1ccLo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP8Ogl1ccLo)
Says "Video Is Private".
Bill
Quote from: Pirate88179 on April 11, 2015, 06:57:54 PM
Says "Video Is Private".
Bill
Sorry about that.
I was so busy trying to get the audio back to the right level I never made it public.
It should be ok now.
Quote from: lumen on April 11, 2015, 08:48:09 PM
Sorry about that.
I was so busy trying to get the audio back to the right level I never made it public.
It should be ok now.
Thanks, I will check it out.
Bill
Thanks Lumen. Sweet build.
Great build there. Those neutral points are indeed interesting. I am not sure what you can do with this but, I have not seen this before so...who knows?
Bill
Yes, some nice machine work on there. That "neutral point" is the same thing I'm illustrating in my "Nikolayev trailer hitch" videos, but you've implemented it in a very nice way using the linkage.
This design was shown to work in the simulator but I was sure it would not work and now I am forced to take the next logical step and modify the block holding the diametrically polarized cylinder so it can rotate.
The cylinder is intended to rotate at the neutral point where there is equal repelling and attracting forces and logically it should rotate with near zero effort but I believe this must not be the case or this device would likely be OU.
The rotation of the cylinder magnet must require work to increase the potential of the system or the energy expended on first release could be used to rotate the cylinder magnet at the end of it's stroke and restore the potential required to traverse back. Then repeat continually until it breaks.
Actually, what I think you will find is that the orientation of the cylinder magnet at the "neutral point" is unstable; that is, if it is free to flip over (or rather rotate 180 degrees around its long axis since it is diametrically polled) , it will, and then it will crash into the stationary magnet by attraction. The mounting you are using is keeping it from flipping over. In my Nikolayev trailer hitch, the analogous magnet (bar magnet endwise-polled) is prevented from flipping over by being constrained in a tube. In my system it would also be possible to stabilize by being spun around its axis, I think, like the original Levitron toy.
It would be interesting to see if I'm right about this in your system. Is there some way you can make it possible for the cylinder magnet to rotate freely in its mounting?
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 13, 2015, 04:59:54 PM
Actually, what I think you will find is that the orientation of the cylinder magnet at the "neutral point" is unstable; that is, if it is free to flip over (or rather rotate 180 degrees around its long axis since it is diametrically polled) , it will, and then it will crash into the stationary magnet by attraction. The mounting you are using is keeping it from flipping over. In my Nikolayev trailer hitch, the analogous magnet (bar magnet endwise-polled) is prevented from flipping over by being constrained in a tube. In my system it would also be possible to stabilize by being spun around its axis, I think, like the original Levitron toy.
It would be interesting to see if I'm right about this in your system. Is there some way you can make it possible for the cylinder magnet to rotate freely in its mounting?
I am nearly finished with the changes that will allow the cylinder to rotate.
It should not crash into the stationary magnets because it does not do so now and the neutral point exists at both ends due to the large magnets arranged as mirrors to the other side.
I think it would take some work to rotate it but the neutral points will still exists the same as they do now.
Once the cylinder is rotated it will simply work as it does now but in the other direction.
Hi Lumen, looking forward to your changes update, don't really understand what you mean about the magnets being arranged as mirrors to the other side?
Also TK is there a link to your video of this trailer hitch thing?
Thanks artv
Quote from: shylo on April 13, 2015, 06:38:13 PM
Hi Lumen, looking forward to your changes update, don't really understand what you mean about the magnets being arranged as mirrors to the other side?
Also TK is there a link to your video of this trailer hitch thing?
Thanks artv
Here's one demonstration I made in August 2011:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUihboGkJnE
Now we see the issue. Not sure there can be a way around the problem but there is something more complex going on here.
https://youtu.be/Dh0_eN2b-GI (https://youtu.be/Dh0_eN2b-GI)
Bessler obscured the secrets of his wheel in many drawings and behind
a piece of cloth but I have revealed the mechanism in an annimation
that is the key to my device. However most folks would spend
more to see one Pennstate football game than to see a perpetual
motion machine. So maybe I could have made more money by selling
my obscured ideas in a book.
I'm starting to understand Bessler's discouragement.
Norman
Quote from: norman6538 on April 19, 2015, 07:56:20 AM
Bessler obscured the secrets of his wheel in many drawings and behind
a piece of cloth but I have revealed the mechanism in an annimation
that is the key to my device. However most folks would spend
more to see one Pennstate football game than to see a perpetual
motion machine. So maybe I could have made more money by selling
my obscured ideas in a book.
I'm starting to understand Bessler's discouragement.
Norman
consider the following:
an inventor is
a: required to show a working example of his invention, or
b: he is not.
in the case of a:, if the invention cannot be replicated using the patent (because he changed the info) then the patent may be voided because he lied in his patent application.
in the case of b:, there is no way of knowing whether the invention is workable since no working invention was shown.
Take your pick.
Memoryman - When Bessler demonstrated the working model what did it get him?
Critics, Critics, Critics.
I have demonstrated a working version to some trusted friends.
Norman
Norman,
Quote from: norman6538 on April 19, 2015, 03:31:27 PM
Memoryman - When Bessler demonstrated the working model what did it get him?
Critics, Critics, Critics.
I have demonstrated a working version to some trusted friends.
Norman
Why would you not expect critical evaluation?
I don't know what Bessler did/didn't demonstrate.
I would not be stopped, if I could demonstrate OU or something equally important.
So now you have demonstrated, where do you go from there?
How important is this to you?
@Norman6538
Thanks bud.
Were watching.
I'll have a few questions for you when I have time / get done
with some personal business.
best wishes
floor
@Norman6538
Still contemplating your video.
I will do some drawings, and will have some questions, and observations
but can't commit to how soon.
regards
floor
I've been working on Floor's ideas and went back to turning off magnetic fields
that Butch Lafonte showed many times. He had a scissors that had 2 repel magnets
and 2 attracting magnets that balanced each other out. I converted that idea to
a rotor and realized that using my magnet slider concept I could turn off and on
the magnetic attraction to unbalance the rotor I just described so that rotation
could be achieved at the OU level.
I have tested the concept but am still working on the most powerful setup.
See the attached photo.
Norman
All the magnetic concepts I have seen are plagued by some unwanted action that requires additional energy to operate.
Usually taking more than 50% of any cycle and in the end it's usually to close to call over the full cycle to warrant building the device.
Even now I can't see how IEC thinks they are getting past the problem.
Lumen I get your point. I have made 4 permanent magnet machines that are
OU but non have enough extra power to do the switching from making to powering
modes. However I think that if cascaded small to large 2 or 3 times there will be
enough to be a selfruner. It just takes a lot of time to perfect the devices.
I would guess I will have one within a year from now.
One concept alone is not enough but combining several will surely get us over the
hump.
Norman