This must work! Altering magnetic field without cost. OU or not?

[JayDubya]

That's cool. I have seen that design before. That's the first time I saw it keep going though. However, it's not like the railgun design. But a greater question I have is, does software exist to model this stuff? I guess 3d software is what I'm talking about.

Suppose we want to find out if we should use big magnets, or needle magnets and how far apart to put them; And then watch the result of the action: Does software exist that allows such mechanical action to be modelled?

I mean, suppose I want to use software to place a magnet and then another magnet next to it. I want to press "start simulation" and watch what happens. So I guess it's simulation software.. I want to find out if such a program exists or if we need to create it.

[Ergo]

There is no such public program but I bet the Sprain group
has developed such a tool to help them design these motors.

Btw, here's a guy that seems to have found a way to calculate this.
Read point 3.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3456.msg55584.html#msg55584

[Low-Q]

You right on track with your suggestion of making a circular smot.
The only problem you have is that it has already been made.
And yes, it's well overunity according to sources.
http://freenrg.info/Sprain/Paul_Harry_Sprain_magnet_motor.avi

SMOTs are not OU. It looks like it because the ball is visually higher at the end of the track, and therfor visually contains greater kinetic energy. But the ball is affected by more than gravity - namely magnetism. The magnetism will during one revolution counterforce the ball as well as forcing it to move. These forces adds up in zero. As both gravity and magnetism is conservative, there is no net change made in kinetic energy within a SMOT.

Vidar