Building a self looping "SMOT"

[MileHigh]

Another basic building block:

If the ball is at the top of a ramp of a certain height, how do you calculate it's final velocity at the bottom of the ramp?

We simplify and assume no air friction or rolling friction.

First step is to solve the problem using energy.  The potential energy at the top of the ramp will get 100% converted into kinetic energy at the bottom of the ramp.

mgh = 1/2mv^2, just solve for v.  Notice the m's are going to cancel out, so it's not dependent on mass.

It's actually more complicated than that.  Note the ball has rotational kinetic energy also.  So the kinetic energy magnitude is mgh, but the kinetic energy itself is the rotational kinetic energy plus the linear kinetic energy.  So when you solve for v above, that velocity will actually be higher than the true final velocity.  So it's an approximation.

MileHigh

[tinman]

Quote LibreEnergia: I don't doubt that there are untapped energy sources waiting to be found.
Quote LibreEnergia: However I would draw the line at devices such as SMOTs and other magnetic or gravity based devices.

An oxymoron post,and would only be true if both magnetism and gravity were fully understood-which they are not,and that is fact.

Here is another fact. The ball will loose some kinetic energy as it make's the 90* turn at the bottom of the exit ramp. I have posted the question many time's-where in the smot device lies the potential to almost eliminate this loss,without effecting any of the potential energy within the system. Neither you Libre,TK or MH have seen this gain. Insted we get 1 posting statements that are unfounded,in that neither magnetism or gravity are fully understood.2-some one who spends more time looking for others errors,and trying to disprove the experimenter. And 3-one who mocks a fellow forum member-experimenter by posting funny pictures,purely because that fellow member can see something they did not.

Here is another fact. You guys are stuck in the here and now,and seem to have no room for exspansion-that is until some one else come's up with the solution to the problem. You base every conclusion on what is known only today,and have no room for change on todays science.

And because you guys like to deal with fact's,here is another fact.
lets look at the yildis magnet motor.Now i also have my doubt's about this-just so as you know. But i (nor anyone else here)can or have proven that his claims are faulse,and that the motor dosnt work. And this fact is based on the reality that magnetism isnt  yet fully understood-right along with gravity.
Our asumptions are base only on what we know today-another fact.
Only when you or some one else has taken the yildis motor apart and found the batteries,then to say that it dosnt work is only based around what we know so far-and we dont know all there is to know-fact.

@TK
As you love browsing post,and looking for peoples error's,lets have a look at some of yours

Quote to Chet: Water is not a fuel. In fact it is an "ash",

Wrong. Water is a fuel in it's raw product,the same as crude oil is the raw product of gasoline.The human body is a machine,and water is one of it's fuel sources in it's raw product.Carbohydrates contain equal parts of hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen,and water is the source of that hydrogen and oxygen.The good thing about burning or useing hydrogen and oxygen as a fuel,is like you stated-the ash is water. So we now once again have our raw fuel.What do you end up with once you have burnt your gasoline?.

Then there was your comment to me about the rock sitting on the ground dosnt get tired. Im guessing that is because it isnt doing any work. We can also say that it has no potential energy either. Well the same could be said for a bucket sitting on the ground. The bucket isnt doing any work,and has no potential energy. But if we combine the two,and place the rock in the bucket,the rock then has the potential to create energy-even though it isnt moving,and is still on the ground via the bucket that is also on the ground,and not moving.This potential energy the rock posses actual comes from the sun,and gravity.

My point is guy's,that what seems impossable,can actualy become a reality-no mater how stupid it sound's.
What you need to do,is to open your mind a little,and start to look at what is actualy possable.
I mean,who ever has heard of a solar/gravity powered rock?.

[MileHigh]

Tinman:

I wasn't trying to offend you with the picture.  I apologize if you took it in a bad way.  It's Halloween and it was a lousy joke.  I thought that you may have grown up seeing the X-Ray Specs ads in the back of the comic books that you read as a kid.

We may not know about the precise mechanism for gravity and magnetism but we know about the effects of gravity and magnetism.  It's just Mother Nature making sense, what you put in is what you get out.

For Yildiz, it's about the burden of proof and the fact that you can't prove a negative.   You can't prove there isn't an alien technology miniature atomic reactor inside the Yildiz motor either.  There is an infinity of possibilities that you can't prove.  So logically the burden of proof falls on Yildiz to prove that he has something.

Your discussion about water as fuel is incorrect.  For starters, there is a limit to poetic license when you talk about science.  There is normally a mutually understood frame of reference for the discussion.  Carbohydrates are outside the frame of discussion.  This comment, "the ash is water. So we now once again have our raw fuel." is off base.  The water is the low chemical potential energy state.  The separate hydrogen and oxygen molecules represent the high chemical potential energy state.  To split water molecules apart, somebody has to pull.  It's almost like pulling two magnets apart one more time.  You have to pull freaking hard to rip the individual water molecules apart.  You have to put energy into that process.  Water is no fuel, it's the much lower energy state you end up in after the hydrogen and oxygen fuel are burnt.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Continuing on...

The potential energy of a rock depends on your relationship to the rock considering that you and the rock are in a gravity field.  If you are above the rock that one thing, if you are below the rock, it's another thing.  How does the sun come into play?  If you say it heats the rock, one more time, we are not talking about that in the context of this discussion.

Yes indeed what seems impossible can actually become possible.  I guess it all depends on where you want to look.  It also depends on the technological level that the society is at.  Imagine that in 1890 you went to a telephone exchange and saw the operators plugging their wires into their patch panels.  You could show them a thin strand of glass and say that in the future you will be able to pass a million simultaneous telephone conversations through the the glass fiber.  They would think that you were crazy. But note that this is all technically feasible to do if you have the technology.  That example will continue to be repeated over and over by other things that become technically feasible that we are not aware of.  It's a different story when it comes to trying to extract extra energy from magnets.  It's just not technically feasible because of the the way the magnets act.  Observation and theory are in accord here.

I know it's not going to stop people from experimenting.  I suppose one of the challenges is to do X number of experiments and then arrive at a conclusion and have the conviction to accept the conclusion and then move on.  Suppose you do 10 different experiments with SMOTs, and magnet motors and stuff like that.  Suppose that everything that you observe is textbook.  So what then?  Do you accept the established theory and move on or do you do an 11th experiment?

MileHigh

[tinman]

Continuing on...

The potential energy of a rock depends on your relationship to the rock considering that you and the rock are in a gravity field.  If you are above the rock that one thing, if you are below the rock, it's another thing.  How does the sun come into play?  If you say it heats the rock, one more time, we are not talking about that in the context of this discussion.

Yes indeed what seems impossible can actually become possible.  I guess it all depends on where you want to look.  It also depends on the technological level that the society is at.  Imagine that in 1890 you went to a telephone exchange and saw the operators plugging their wires into their patch panels.  You could show them a thin strand of glass and say that in the future you will be able to pass a million simultaneous telephone conversations through the the glass fiber.  They would think that you were crazy. But note that this is all technically feasible to do if you have the technology.  That example will continue to be repeated over and over by other things that become technically feasible that we are not aware of.  It's a different story when it comes to trying to extract extra energy from magnets.  It's just not technically feasible because of the the way the magnets act.  Observation and theory are in accord here.

I know it's not going to stop people from experimenting.  I suppose one of the challenges is to do X number of experiments and then arrive at a conclusion and have the conviction to accept the conclusion and then move on.  Suppose you do 10 different experiments with SMOTs, and magnet motors and stuff like that.  Suppose that everything that you observe is textbook.  So what then?  Do you accept the established theory and move on or do you do an 11th experiment?

MileHigh

The rock in the bucket was just a crazy thought experiment,but just for your amusment,i will tell you my thought.
Sitting on the ground,we have two 20 gallon bucket's. One of these buckets has the rock in it,and the other dose not.Lets say that rock has a displacement volume of 5 gallons. So now,this is where the sun comes into play,in the way of evaporating water from the ocean,and other water bodies. This in turn eventualy becomes water droplet's that form in rain clouds. Then gravity comes into play,and once those droplets become large enough in mass,gravity pulls them back to earth-and we have rain.
So lets say we had enough rain to fill those two buckets with 10 gallons of water each.
So here is the question now-which bucket of water has the most potential energy?.
One bucket of water now has a higher head preasure than the other,but the volume of water that can be used is still the same in each bucket-and the motionless rock(or any other object that can displace a liquid) makes it all possable.
The point of this is to look at the enviroment(system) around the rock,and see how we could use that rock to increase energy that that enviroment already creates.

And in regards to water as a fuel-once again we need to look at the system as a whole,and the individual fuel requirements of that system. Fuel is needed to keep a machine running,and our body is just a machine. If you stop drinking water,i can quite safely say that the machine will stop running within 10 day's. When we say water as fuel,the kneejerk reaction is-oh HHO,explosions= fuel. This is tunnel vision,the inability to stand back,and see things for what they are,other than presented commonly used definitions.

Many great discoveries come from crazy thought's. And what happens when some one find something new?,our scientist go-oh yea,i see how that can work now-we'll just modify the laws of physics a bit to account for that action-it's happened time and time again,as we learn more.

If 10 test were done on a device,and all came back the same,then test 11 would be done on a device with configuration changes.