Magnets, motion and measurement

[Floor]

                              CHALLANGE
In the method which I demonstrate, the output (by falling) work  is undone during each cycle, but, the input (by lifting) work is also undone during each cycle.  The output "work" is more than twice the input "work".

The operation you present, must be indefinitely cyclically repeatable. The use of levers and springs is permissible.  In short, demonstrate the cyclical lifting of a greater weight upon the long side of a lever by using a lesser weight upon the short side of that same lever or...... some other mechanically equivalent device which uses mechanical springs.

Mechanical output must exceed mechanical input in each cycle, even if that mechanical output may be undone during each cycle (sums to zero). A mechanical spring or springs may be used in the device.  Remember however, the input mechanical "work" in each cycle, must always be less that the output mechanical "work" during that cycle.

            Meet or exceed the below, or at least exceed 1 to 1.
Cause 115 grams to be lifted 40 units of distance against gravity, by the lowering lowering of 100.75 grams 22 units of distance by gravity.
          In the exemplary demonstration I provide.......
The force ratio is 100.75 grams input to 115 grams output.
The mechanical displacement ratio is 22 units input to 40 units output.
                        The work in to work out ratio is....
      100.75g x 22 = 2216.5 input.   115g x 40 = 4600 output.
As I said (in my exemplary device), the work done both as the lifting and the falling is undone in each cycle.

And what else ?

During the the lifting of the sliding unit weight, 101 grams of finger force, is only required at the initial point of lifting (while the sliding unit scale dial reads 22 degrees and the rotating scale dial reads 40 degrees).  The force that needs to be applied to cause the lifting of the sliding unit weight drops to ZERO GRAMS, once the rotating magnet is 90 degrees off from the sliding magnet and the sliding magnet is at zero distance from the rotating magnet. 

It requires no force (no weight upon the sliding unit pulley) to hold the 115 grams weight when the rotating magnet weight object is at its full height (zero degrees on the rotating scale dial), while the sliding magnet is at its nearest proximity to the rotating magnet (zero degrees upon the sliding unit scale dial).  Actually, it requires LESS THAN ZERO GRAMS of force (as the sliding unit weight), because there is a slight attraction of the sliding magnet to the rotating magnet along the line of its travel (at very near distance) and when at 90 degrees to the rotating magnet.

also......

The sliding unit input finger force curve (from 101 grams to 0 grams) results in an average applied finger force, in lifting the sliding unit weight during the course of the sliding magnet's travel away from the rotating magnet which, I estimate as between 70 and 80 grams average applied finger force over the 22 degrees of sliding magnet travel (curve based on 5, 20 gram weight decrease increments over the 22 degree travel).

This is at most, 80 x 22 = 1760 to the rotating magnet's 4600.   
2.6136...  x 1700 = 4600
4600 - 1700 =  2900

[Floor]

Hey Norman

I think you might be correct, in that before the full cycle is done
the work is about 5 to 1 or 500%.
....   .....  ..... .....
I have a VCR spindle and rotor that I have been contemplateing using
as a spindle for a replication of your pendulum deign. But the more i think about it
the more it seem that that design will sum to zero.  Although If well built, It might coast for a deceptively / tantalizingly long time.  But then again, one doesn't know some times till one tries.

  best wishes
       floor

[ayeaye]

https://youtu.be/4LgEvwpmuwM
Is it right?

No. There is only one way to show overunity in such case without measurement. It is when there is no initial force to the magnet, and it is brought to the field by speed. If the speed is then increased after leaving the field, then there is a gain of energy. And on an even surface, making the surface uneven only makes calculations more complicated, and shouldn't be done at all if we want to do it without calculations.

In that case, the magnet was released when it had a force to it, somewhat further from the beginning of the magnets chain. Thus the condition of no initial force was not satisfied.

A chain of magnets against each other pole to pole, should make one long magnet, when all magnets are oriented in the direction of the chain. Then the moving magnet also accelerates when moving towards the end of the chain, but decelerates after reaching the end of the chain. Or when the magnets are at a greater distance from each other, then all propulsion comes from the first magnet of the chain, in the field of which the moving magnet was initially put.

Not certain whether the chain of magnets was such, different strength of magnets and their different orientation in some configuration may cause different effects, then also overunity may be possible. But this doesn't matter, as the experiment was not correctly done, and was not valid.

[kolbacict]

https://youtu.be/7pxm3Edi8nM
https://youtu.be/uvutLTdtaWY
Yes, you are all right.

[norman6538]

Since my health is better and my wife has less nursing requirements from me I have been able to make 4 other devices and each has taught me a lot.  I have to clean up some of my quick and dirty rapid prototype crap to refine my measurements and I have applied the Butch Lafonte attract ballanced with repel to compensate for the attraction when the magnet has twisted and lifted. I can unset that twist with a tiny unit of work when Butch Lafonte balanced well. I finally got that idea last night about dark and cobbled it together quickly.

More in a few days if all goes well.
Get on it guys its great fun.

Norman