New permanent magnet motor on youtube from Roobert33

[Omnibus]

This is an experiment I made yesterday: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnqXJbwpNRo . On the one hand it demonstrates once again why we should be confident a magnetic motor can be real -- it proves clearly that excess energy can be produced. On the other hand it shows how difficult it would be to actually make one in view of the relatively small amount of excess energy produced even when using the strongest permanent magnets available on the market.

[Chipper]

Hi All,
what do you think about this video from
Roobert33:

Regards, Stefan.

I think it is a FAKE.

I have been experimenting with this setup, (not complete as yet).

I went back to view the video and noticed something off-the-wall about it. Observe the Cam closely and you will notice that there are some revolutions where the Cam is not even lifting the upper bar. It also appears to be wobbling, past (around) the bearing that engages the Cam.

You should see some revolutions where the Cam is obviously lifting the top bar, but then you will see some revolutions where it isn't lifting the top bar, at all, and yet it continues to rotate!!!!! I am observing the video over at peswiki.com.

Although it is obviously a fake, I haven't given up on the concept as yet. I am still building and experimenting with slightly different configurations.

[Chipper]

This is an experiment I made yesterday: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnqXJbwpNRo . On the one hand it demonstrates once again why we should be confident a magnetic motor can be real -- it proves clearly that excess energy can be produced. On the other hand it shows how difficult it would be to actually make one in view of the relatively small amount of excess energy produced even when using the strongest permanent magnets available on the market.

Ya know what, I did an experiment very similar to this last night (about 1:00 am) I couldn't sleep, so I got up and experimented.

Only what I did was I took cylindrical magnet, polarized on the ends.

I then placed a Circular magnet at a distance, then slowly rolled the cylinder towards the circular magnet. I noticed that the orientation of the cylinder made a difference in it's engagement. Circular Face up orientation took longer to engage then horizontal, polarization - compared to the ends of the cylinder.

I also did the same thing substituting a bar magnet for the circular one. The results where repeatable.

One more thing. The center of the cylinder was aligned such that the circular magnet always had its edge aligned to the left of the middle of the line of the middle of the cylinder. I wanted it to always be attracted to the left end of the cylinder magnet, and always starting off just slightly to the left of the center line.

My conclusion is that the magnetic fields are strongest when oriented in the same plane.

I think this what you are seeing for sure.

Your test is much fancier and then mine, but at least I can back you up with what you are observing.

[gyulasun]

Hi Chipper,

I would like to understand your test setup and make a simple drawing with three figures. Please tell which of them shows the best your circular-cylinder setup.  (all figures show top view, the rectangular shape is the cylinder of course). If none of the figures is correct feel free to modify them as you see fit, just use the Windows built-in Paint program.

I do not get fully your conclusion either, sorry, would you put it with different words, meaning the same please?

Thanks,  Gyula

[spinn_MP]

This is an experiment I made yesterday: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnqXJbwpNRo . On the one hand it demonstrates once again why we should be confident a magnetic motor can be real -- it proves clearly that excess energy can be produced. On the other hand it shows how difficult it would be to actually make one in view of the relatively small amount of excess energy produced even when using the strongest permanent magnets available on the market.

"-- it proves clearly that excess energy can be produced."
Here we go again... "OU has already been proved beyond any reason of a doubt"....

Hey, is Mr. Hand out there?

"Magnetic gun/cannon" concept is so 1900.... Glad you have discovered it... Again.  No wonder, SMOT is your obsession, alright...

It's typical for such experiments to deceive the innocent. On a first sight, there's a low energy input (v1 of the ball), and considerably higher v2 (with the same mass of the ball, of course).
Which would mean that "OU" has been achieved.
As long as one doesn't count ALL the energies involved in the process (potential and kinetic would suffice).

Ok, forget about the theory, just build the (circular, oscillating,..) track and try to perpetuate the thing.


P.S. Sorry to say that, but you're certainly one of the "thickest wannabe (self proclaimed) scientists" of the last few years....