I have seen allot of magnet motors and possible magnet motors. But I have never seen any of them do anything but spin. A friend of mine challenged me to rebuild a magnet motor that I did back in the 70's that I did for a science class in school. Well I got it to spin until my cardboard waller ed in the middle and then it stuck to the side between two of the outer magnets, but I still got an A. I don't truly recall any of them under a load but one, that I know of and it only lasted a short time and quit.
So back to the topic. Do they just spin or can they do work and prove it? This is my question.
If I remember correctly you have asked the same question a while ago and I kindly asked you to directly show or otherwise to provide a clear link/evidence for such a spinning magnetic motor.
(Accept my apologies in advance if I made a confusion).
The issue is quite simple imho: there is no perpetual magnetic spinning motor.
If it was, it would have long and dramatically changed the actual science because continual (perpetual) spinning equals work against friction and other losses and it does not matter how small these are, it would still be a ground shaking device.
Remember that, since the oldest times, people of all kind (philosophers, priests, scientists, cons, amateurs, nuts, sailors, workers, technicians, you name them) were playing with magnets. Only legends survived about magnetic motors and we have all reasonable rational reasons to conclude that magnetic motors do not work. Steorn is just a recent and over advertised name on that list of legends. Bedini had (maybe he still has) similar but untrue claims on his web-page about a magnetic motor. (I am 100% confident that Al will soon take his place too into the same category if he fails to identify the outside source of energy for his motor if it indeed works as shown.)
Besides history, science also clearly shows that perpetual magnetic motors can not possibly work. Regardless, swirling magnets around is considered fun and it is actually very attractive to many people. Probably billions will continue to do it and learn interesting lessons along the process. It?s just the delusion I try to prevent and the manipulation I fight against.
Do the above respond to your question?
Tinu
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise on these matters because you?ve shown embarrassing misunderstanding of elementary physics, let alone that you can?t in any way vow that such motors haven?t existed throughout history. You?ve heard this here and there but you aren?t actually privy as to whether that?s true or false. Further, implying that @alsetalokin?s device runs on an external power source which he hasn?t identified is obviously frivolous let alone it also implies that @alsetalokin is being fraudulent. Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
I can only quote what I have seen and done. My experiment worked back thin, and I have been racking my brain on how I did it. I remember 12 magnets on the outside and 4 possibly 6 but I think 4 on the inside. I know I left a fair distance between inner and outer magnets and the inner didn't go that fast and it was a little jerky. I also remember setting each magnet individually to get the center past each spot. This is all I can remember. If it helps somebody good. But I would have to see one do work to look at it as more than a toy.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise on these matters because you?ve shown embarrassing misunderstanding of elementary physics, let alone that you can?t in any way vow that such motors haven?t existed throughout history. You?ve heard this here and there but you aren?t actually privy as to whether that?s true or false. Further, implying that @alsetalokin?s device runs on an external power source which he hasn?t identified is obviously frivolous let alone it also implies that @alsetalokin is being fraudulent. Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
@omnibus,
After seeing your real scientific skills, I?d say you take your opinions and shove them somewhere.
I told you already that I?m done with all of your nonsense.
Besides, I was not even talking to you.
So please take the bus and go.
Good luck again!
@AB Hammer,
If it really makes full turns without external energy then it's more than a toy. Just show a jig doing what you claim and have it replicated by independent parties. That's all it takes. I tend not to believe you that you had such a device spinning on its own, though. Unless you can sustain them by actually demonstrating such motor and ensuring that others replicate it it's better not to make such claims publicly.
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 06:16:47 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise on these matters because you?ve shown embarrassing misunderstanding of elementary physics, let alone that you can?t in any way vow that such motors haven?t existed throughout history. You?ve heard this here and there but you aren?t actually privy as to whether that?s true or false. Further, implying that @alsetalokin?s device runs on an external power source which he hasn?t identified is obviously frivolous let alone it also implies that @alsetalokin is being fraudulent. Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
@omnibus,
After seeing your real scientific skills, I?d say you take your opinions and shove them somewhere.
I told you already that I?m done with all of your nonsense.
Besides, I was not even talking to you.
So please take the bus and go.
Good luck again!
You'd better restrain from pushing your confusion on others. Study first, educate yourself properly and only then allow yourself to teach others.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 06:19:04 PM
@AB Hammer,
If it really makes full turns without external energy then it's more than a toy. Just show a jig doing what you claim and have it replicated by independent parties. That's all it takes. I tend not to believe you that you had such a device spinning on its own, though. Unless you can sustain them by actually demonstrating such motor and ensuring that others replicate it it's better not to make such claims publicly.
Thats rich coming from someone who wont prove they have a whipmag replication, hypocrite!
Quote from: RunningBare on January 25, 2008, 06:36:30 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 06:19:04 PM
@AB Hammer,
If it really makes full turns without external energy then it's more than a toy. Just show a jig doing what you claim and have it replicated by independent parties. That's all it takes. I tend not to believe you that you had such a device spinning on its own, though. Unless you can sustain them by actually demonstrating such motor and ensuring that others replicate it it's better not to make such claims publicly.
Thats rich coming from someone who wont prove they have a whipmag replication, hypocrite!
Don't waste bandwidth with your nonsense.
@omnibus,
For one who does not make the difference between total energy and input energy, paranoid fixation in defending their completely infantile positions makes an acceptable excuse.
But what other excuse than stupidity exists when one is told I?m done with him and he continues?
There is no other explanation. So please post more to confirm it.
Again: I?m done with you. Do you need it spelled?
Good bye, good luck and don?t forget to take the SMOT.
Tinu
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 06:46:57 PM
@omnibus,
For one who does not make the difference between total energy and input energy, paranoid fixation in defending their completely infantile positions makes an acceptable excuse.
But what other excuse than stupidity exists when one is told I?m done with him and he continues?
There is no other explanation. So please post more to confirm it.
Again: I?m done with you. Do you need it spelled?
Good bye, good luck and don?t forget to take the SMOT.
Tinu
The very fact that you don't understand that what you call total energy is also input energy (part of it out of no source) proves your confusion. To lift a ball from the zero potential energy to a position where the ball has energy (mgh1 + mgh1 + Kc) needs energy input. The total energy of the ball at C is (mgh1 + mgh2 + Kc) but this is also the energy input (imparted) to the ball compared to the zero gravitational potential energy at A.
Same thing is when you lift a ball from the floor (at gravitational potential energy 0) to the table which is at (h1 + h2) height from the floor. On the table the total energy of the ball with respect to the floor is mg(h1 + h2) but that energy is also the energy input (imparted) to the ball to lift it from the floor to the table. Simple as that.
You'd better learn these things first before engaging in such discussions.
@omnibus,
You really need to prove my point above, don?t you?
In A the ball has plenty of potential energy (Ma).
Ma is not zero and it can not be zero since you already have chosen Mc=0.
This Ma potential energy, if you need to be educated, is due to SMOT position; when you are done with SMOT (I doubt you will ever be but lets assume for a second) and decide to put it back to its place and the ball elsewhere, you spend Ma Joules every time. So, this is not unaccounted, neither is Mb.
I doubt you can understand it since you made such gaffes in the past and keep continuing like a broken robot. But I don?t care anymore. You had your chance. Now I definitely made my mind. I do not consider you have much if anything of relevance to say to me and I?m done with you. This is the third time I say it. I don?t want to say it again. Got it now?
Tinu
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:11:00 PM
@omnibus,
You really need to prove my point above, don?t you?
In A the ball has plenty of potential energy (Ma).
Ma is not zero and it can not be zero since you already has chosen Mc=0.
This Ma potential energy, if you need to be educated, is due to SMOT position; when you are done with SMOT (I doubt you will ever be but lets assume for a second) and decide to put it back to its place and the ball elsewhere, you spend Ma Joules every time. So, this is not unaccounted, neither is Mb.
I doubt you can understand it since you made such gaffes in the past and keep continuing like a broken robot. But I don?t care anymore. You had your chance. Now I definitely made my mind, I do not consider you have much if anything of relevance to say to me and I?m done with you. This is the third time I say it. I don?t want to say it again. Got it now?
Tinu
No, no. I'm talking about the energy (mgh1 + mgh2 + Kc) which isn't at point A as you incorrectly understand. You're confused and it's better not to continue because discussing it with you won't lead to anything of substance but will only serve to clarify your confusion. You should clarify confusion of this type only by yourself without bothering other people.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise on these matters because you?ve shown embarrassing misunderstanding of elementary physics, let alone that you can?t in any way vow that such motors haven?t existed throughout history. You?ve heard this here and there but you aren?t actually privy as to whether that?s true or false. Further, implying that @alsetalokin?s device runs on an external power source which he hasn?t identified is obviously frivolous let alone it also implies that @alsetalokin is being fraudulent. Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
Omnibus
Please stop cluttering the thread with your insults on other members.
please comment on the point not the person.
Quote from: Nutcake on January 25, 2008, 07:38:22 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise on these matters because you?ve shown embarrassing misunderstanding of elementary physics, let alone that you can?t in any way vow that such motors haven?t existed throughout history. You?ve heard this here and there but you aren?t actually privy as to whether that?s true or false. Further, implying that @alsetalokin?s device runs on an external power source which he hasn?t identified is obviously frivolous let alone it also implies that @alsetalokin is being fraudulent. Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
Omnibus
Please stop cluttering the thread with your insults on other members.
please comment on the point not the person.
On the contrary, when the person is impudently abusing the freedom of the net he must be told so. It's a greater abuse to be confused and to impudently impose your confusion on other after the issue has been commented numerous times and is settled than to be told to restrain from posting nonsense.
If you're so sensitive, however, you may not read the exchange.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:11:00 PM
@omnibus,
You really need to prove my point above, don?t you?
In A the ball has plenty of potential energy (Ma).
Ma is not zero and it can not be zero since you already has chosen Mc=0.
This Ma potential energy, if you need to be educated, is due to SMOT position; when you are done with SMOT (I doubt you will ever be but lets assume for a second) and decide to put it back to its place and the ball elsewhere, you spend Ma Joules every time. So, this is not unaccounted, neither is Mb.
I doubt you can understand it since you made such gaffes in the past and keep continuing like a broken robot. But I don?t care anymore. You had your chance. Now I definitely made my mind, I do not consider you have much if anything of relevance to say to me and I?m done with you. This is the third time I say it. I don?t want to say it again. Got it now?
Tinu
No, no. I'm talking about the energy (mgh1 + mgh2 + Kc) which isn't at point A as you incorrectly understand. You're confused and it's better not to continue because discussing it with you won't lead to anything of substance but will only serve to clarify your confusion. You should clarify confusion of this type only by yourself without bothering other people.
You talk nonsense as usual but, at your own choice, the news is that to me you are really stupid.
Let me put it this way: there are +8k members here. Talk to somebody else, moron.
Can?t you understand that much?
The greatest insult and ad hominem attack is to deliberately ignore the arguments of your opponent and push incessantly obvious incompetence. That must not be tolerated by anyone who cares about scientific truth and should be vigorously confronted.
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:44:10 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:33:06 PM
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:11:00 PM
@omnibus,
You really need to prove my point above, don?t you?
In A the ball has plenty of potential energy (Ma).
Ma is not zero and it can not be zero since you already has chosen Mc=0.
This Ma potential energy, if you need to be educated, is due to SMOT position; when you are done with SMOT (I doubt you will ever be but lets assume for a second) and decide to put it back to its place and the ball elsewhere, you spend Ma Joules every time. So, this is not unaccounted, neither is Mb.
I doubt you can understand it since you made such gaffes in the past and keep continuing like a broken robot. But I don?t care anymore. You had your chance. Now I definitely made my mind, I do not consider you have much if anything of relevance to say to me and I?m done with you. This is the third time I say it. I don?t want to say it again. Got it now?
Tinu
No, no. I'm talking about the energy (mgh1 + mgh2 + Kc) which isn't at point A as you incorrectly understand. You're confused and it's better not to continue because discussing it with you won't lead to anything of substance but will only serve to clarify your confusion. You should clarify confusion of this type only by yourself without bothering other people.
You talk nonsense as usual but, at your own choice, the news is that to me you are really stupid.
Let me put it this way: there are +8k members here. Talk to somebody else, moron.
Can?t you understand that much?
Everyone who knows a little Physics 101 knows that you're the stupid one. Semi-educated arrogant slob.
Those concerned with ad hominem attacks should note who starts them first. Anyone such as @tinu who finds himself in the corner behaves like that.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:46:05 PM
The greatest insult and ad hominem attack is to deliberately ignore the arguments of your opponent and push incessantly obvious incompetence. That must not be tolerated by anyone who cares about scientific truth and should be vigorously confronted.
See? Thanks for the tip, stupid.
Bye
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:50:47 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:46:05 PM
The greatest insult and ad hominem attack is to deliberately ignore the arguments of your opponent and push incessantly obvious incompetence. That must not be tolerated by anyone who cares about scientific truth and should be vigorously confronted.
See? Thanks for the tip, stupid.
Bye
You're not needed here with your incompetence. Good you're leaving.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise ...
...
Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
Do you want me to buy you a ticket?
Have a safe journey!
The fact that SMOT violates CoE beyond a shadow of a doubt has to be reminded at every step of the discussions concerning OU (cf. http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3949.msg73154.html#msg73154)
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise ...
...
Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
Do you want me to buy you a ticket?
Have a safe journey!
Your nonsense isn't needed here neither anywhere else for that matter. Good bye,
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:54:10 PM
The fact that SMOT violates CoE beyond a shadow of a doubt has to be reminded at every step of the discussions concerning OU (cf. http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3949.msg73154.html#msg73154)
Well, no Whipmag replication show, figures, just like your smot you have squat.
Hypocritical fear of ad hominem attacks (which aren't even such when someone is told not to clutter the threads with incompetence) plays right in the hands of very active arrogant not well educated people who suffocate progress like weeds suffocate the crop.
There are several such not well educated but very active and arrogant people here and, sadly, in every forum who suffocate the discussions. The forum would be a much better place had there no active users such as @RunningBare mostly cluttering the threads with chit-chat and unsubstantial blabber.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 08:01:07 PM
There are several such not well educated but very active and arrogant people here and, sadly, in every forum who suffocate the discussions. The forum would be a much better place had there no active users such as @RunningBare mostly cluttering the threads with chit-chat and unsubstantial blabber.
Oh you have shown you replication of your whipmag rotor?, I'm very sorry, can you give me a link to it?
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:55:17 PM
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise ...
...
Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
Do you want me to buy you a ticket?
Have a safe journey!
Your nonsense isn't needed here neither anywhere else for that matter. Good bye,
Well, I guess I need to go to sleep. It was fun but it?s time for goodbye, hopefully for the final one. Actually, I am trying to say goodbye to you since several days and I said it four times only this evening.
Nevertheless, I wouldn?t trust me if I was you. I might wake up and post something. So, watch the forum at every cost! Your last post is always crucial. Who knows what happens if you miss it. Maybe tomorrow SMOT will not work. Or it may never work again.
Quote from: AB Hammer on January 25, 2008, 01:23:56 PM
I have seen allot of magnet motors and possible magnet motors. But I have never seen any of them do anything but spin. A friend of mine challenged me to rebuild a magnet motor that I did back in the 70's that I did for a science class in school. Well I got it to spin until my cardboard waller ed in the middle and then it stuck to the side between two of the outer magnets, but I still got an A. I don't truly recall any of them under a load but one, that I know of and it only lasted a short time and quit.
So back to the topic. Do they just spin or can they do work and prove it? This is my question.
In my opinion there are quite a few magnet motors that have worked .
The problem is once you get it right .... you tend to get suppressed .
Try reading the last page of posts on . Magnet Motors ..... Perendev?
That looks to me like a typical successful suppression.
When I was in around 6th grade ...........long before I had any real thought of how important energy is I saw something on TV
It was a Daytime talk show ...... There was a man on that explained that he has just been turned down for a patent.
The patent office had refused to give him a patent because his invention would never have enough power to do any useful work .
This man had a little demo model . He had a card table set up and it looked like a piece of wood with about 4feet of HO scale model train track on it
He had a train car with a magnet in it .........I remember it very clearly because the top of the train car was covered with aluminum foil ......I remember wondering " who would go on national TV with a model covered with aluminum foil" .
The man carefully put the train car on the track ...... as soon as he took his had off of it ....it started moving .
It was moving fast enough by the time it reached the end of the track that it flew off and landed 4 or 5 feet away . it then slid on its side a 4 or 5 more feet.
The Host of the talk show looked a little surprised and said .......it seems reasonably powerful to me .
It was more powerful than most of the battery powered cars I had when I was young.
I bought a book on the T Bearden website . It was a reprint of a book by Howard Johnson The Secret World of Magnets
On the cover of this book is that same man ....... older but I am sure it is him .......and that same dorky looking foil covered train car .
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Another thing to think about .
If you were a in control of a large energy company making billions on non renewable energy
OR
If you were one of the most powerful people in a small country that had little except oil .
Would you just sit there and wait for someone to take your source of income way from you ?.........or would you make sure that there are plenty of people in sites like this to throw a wrench in the works whenever possable.
gary
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 08:06:28 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:55:17 PM
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 05:48:43 PM
@tinu,
You?re not qualified to advise ...
...
Semi-educated people such as you should be advised to restrain from expressing their unqualified opinions in forums such as this because they clutter it and make the substantial findings sink into the swamp of incompetence.
Do you want me to buy you a ticket?
Have a safe journey!
Your nonsense isn't needed here neither anywhere else for that matter. Good bye,
Well, I guess I need to go to sleep. It was fun but it?s time for goodbye, hopefully for the final one. Actually, I am trying to say goodbye to you since several days and I said it four times only this evening.
Nevertheless, I wouldn?t trust me if I was you. I might wake up and post something. So, watch the forum at every cost! Your last post is always crucial. Who knows what happens if you miss it. Maybe tomorrow SMOT will not work. Or it may never work again.
Go away. Your rants are useless and aren't needed here because aren't even entertaining.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 08:10:00 PM
Quote from: tinu on January 25, 2008, 08:06:28 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:55:17 PM
Your nonsense isn't needed here neither anywhere else for that matter. Good bye,
Well, I guess I need to go to sleep. It was fun but it?s time for goodbye, hopefully for the final one. Actually, I am trying to say goodbye to you since several days and I said it four times only this evening.
Nevertheless, I wouldn?t trust me if I was you. I might wake up and post something. So, watch the forum at every cost! Your last post is always crucial. Who knows what happens if you miss it. Maybe tomorrow SMOT will not work. Or it may never work again.
Go away. Your rants are useless and aren't needed here because aren't even entertaining.
That?s just your over-competent opinion. But mine is opposite. I?m having a lot of fun and I guess other members have fun too.
Tinu,
please stop with your negative comments about magnet motors
and SMOT.
SMOT is working and if you don?t see it, you have to study it
or you are blind.
Surely, if you build a magnet motor right,
it must accelerate and not just overcome the
friction alone.
Surely the torque will depend on the construction,
so if it just overcomes the friction, then it is a very weak
magnet motor,
but if it is a very well constructed magnet motor,
it should also be able to power a mechanical load without slowing
down.
The most easy to build magnet motor in my opinion
is the Goebkes design,
cause it uses much iron in it, so he can design the magnet
fields very asymmetrically, which is needed in a magnet motor
and the magnet fields are pulled in via the iron and can be a bit compressed
inside the iron this way.
This is probably very important for magnet motors
and in my opinion and experience from many builds
without Iron it makes no sense to try a magnet motor without Iron in it.
So study this field and force graph versus the magnet going into x-direction
and see, how the force changes from positive force to neutral to negative force:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D3979.0%3Battach%3D16777&hash=885a354912681d681a9a16771fe10a2934419339)
With this magnet-iron setup you can build many different magnet motors that will work.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:46:05 PM
The greatest insult and ad hominem attack is to deliberately ignore the arguments of your opponent and push incessantly obvious incompetence. That must not be tolerated by anyone who cares about scientific truth and should be vigorously confronted.
@Omnibus - Again, you should practice what you preach and follow your own directives.
@Stefan - post a video showing a working magnetic motor and you'll be the first person in history to have achieved it, and then you can claim your own prize.
Quote from: hoptoad on January 25, 2008, 09:52:33 PM
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 07:46:05 PM
The greatest insult and ad hominem attack is to deliberately ignore the arguments of your opponent and push incessantly obvious incompetence. That must not be tolerated by anyone who cares about scientific truth and should be vigorously confronted.
@Omni-bullshit - Again, you should practice what you preach and follow your own directives.
Hey, this isn't the place to spew your crap.
Quote from: Omnibus on January 25, 2008, 09:55:38 PM
[Hey, this isn't the place to spew your crap.
As I said - practice what you preach.
hartiberlin
Thanks for the information, it gives a different view than what I been looking at. And unlike allot of people I plan on keeping an open mind, or there will be no chance of advancement.
But I would still like to see one under a load for a period of time.
@AB Hammer
It's important to remember that any self running motor is operating under a load (friction, windage etc,) It is unreasonable to expect someone that is trying to develop a concept for a design to build it with massive magnets, multiple poles, multiple rotors or whatever would be necessary to increase the output until said concept is proven. I would encourage you to try to replicate your design from the 70's and then we can all work together on various permutations of that design.
@leeanderthal
To be totally honest I have been very busy with gravity wheels (great advancements with gravity manipulation) and the armour I build to pay my bills. I just started my magnet notebook for possible patterns. I also agree to try to duplicate the one from my childhood. I remembered one more thing. The inner magnets where not perfectly symmetrical for if is was it would stop and I remember using allot of tape before I glued them to the carboard to get the position correct. More than 35 year is a long time to remember.
Well I have got my old pattern redone and a new one as well which I think will do well. I have also started gathering up the supplies I need to build these. But I won't redo my first one on cardboard LOL I think some other hard board and a good center bearing will work. :D
I tried to say this before, and maybe I am not as skilled as you all here but what if it just spinned indeed. I assume it will be a round device; a wheel so to say. Isn't it possible to tap energy from some kind of a vinyl or glass disk attached on it. I mean if it moves it can be made static, which can be converted (/or contains?) energy, and you don't need to revolutionize the speed to reveal that, just a steady movement will do. So, some sort of a combination of a permanent magnet motor and a testatica. I know it's not the ultimate solution, but well it might be a start. Isn't such thing possible?
Arnold