YOUTUBE VIDEO DESERVES ATTENTION: GUY PERFECTED THE SMOT DEVICE

[NathanCoppedge]

This is not a joke. With about 20 years of experience in designing perpetual motion machines, I think the guy who posted the below video is literally a genius:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXs8SYWwklM&list=PLcttXCrYoAgMIcPd7JYdFt8vNSqhSQCfE&index=2

Ah, I see now. It took me up to 7 years to realize it (which is a long time)... If I am not mistaken this design if arranged in a repeated loop would be perpetual motion, the full success of the SMOT design. I hope you keep this video up for historical records. You obviously own the copyright on this particular idea you demonstrated, since that is permitted by youtube, and it may be too late to patent since people already know about the invention. There should be people talking about this.

For other ideas which might compare, see:

https://emporium.quora.com/Exceptional-Perpetual-Motion-Research

AND

https://emporium.quora.com/The-History-of-Perpetual-Motion-Machines

NATHAN COPPEDGE, PERPETUAL MOTION EXPERIMENTER

[NdaClouDzzz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGRL9fqD1XI&lc=UgwjIqbD4Mu2eHN6R4l4AaABAg

[NathanCoppedge]

THIS IS ON THE PERPETUAL MOTION DESIGN BY "CSABA HORVATH" (VIDEO CHANNEL)...

ACTUALLY, THE BENCH HE IS WORKING ON IS PRETTY LEVEL IT LOOKS LIKE. IT SEEMS TO ME AFTER THE MOTION, THE BALL BEGINS DROPPING AT A SLIGHTLY BY PERPETUAL MOTION STANDARDS MUCH HIGHER POINT. THIS IS POSSIBLE DUE TO THE COMBINATION OF MAGNETIC PUSH AND GRAVITY ON THE DECLINE, USED TO OVERCOME RESISTANCE, WHICH THEN ADDS UP TO MORE PUSH ON THE INCLINE. I HAVE NOT WORKED WITH HIM PERSONALLY, BUT CURRENTLY FEEL ENTHUSED ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR DESIGN CONCEPT.

THE SECRET I HAVE NOTICED HAS TO DO WITH FACTORS RELATED TO ENTRY RESISTANCE AND ANGULARITY. 30% distance at close to 22.5 degrees can be 30% ^2 / 2 = 45% X 1 = 0.45 energy X 1X ball = 0.45 energy. The upward motion can be any length, but it is affected by the angle. If we make it 10X longer we get 2.5 degree angle (=>22.5 degrees /10 = >2.25 degrees). However, even if we round up to 5 degrees = 2X height gained, 5 degrees is a miniscule resistance from altitude. If the entry resistance is reduced to a tiny 0.3 of mass, with 0.2 constant afterwards from magnets, we get 0.45 initial energy at a proportion of 1 altitude, the 0.45 is reduced to 0.15 by entry resistance, because the entry resistance is 0.3, then the remaining energy is 0.15 + 0.2 = 0.35 but this continues as long as there are more magnets pushing. If the mass of the magnet is changed to 2X, we get 0.45 X 2 = 0.9 energy. If entry resistance is 0.3 we get 0.6 energy + 0.2 constant = 0.8 energy pushing after resistance, with mass of 2. If the mass is 4, we get 0.45 X 4 = 1.8 energy. If entry resistance is 0.3 we get 1.5 energy remaining, with 0.2 constant going in. In this case unlike the earlier examples, the remaining energy will be at least 1.7 / 2 which is easily enough to lift the mass upwards on an upward grade that is significantly less than 22.5 degrees. The conclusion is, the mass could probably go twice as high, but only when the initial incline is about 22.5 degrees, and when the upward incline afterwards includes a very small entry resistance and fairly slight though potentially very long upwards slope, as seen in Csaba Horvath's design. Still, accounting for losses from use of a wedge and so on the actual gains might seem modest by some standards, but they could be scarily dramatic gains to the honed mind of a perpetual motion hobbyist.

It is a bit suspicious that there is not more press for this design, but some people don't have press, that is possible. He did earn some 9,000 views to his video, which makes a lot of sense. In fact, I think he is a complete genius who deserves fame and fortune.

[NdaClouDzzz]

👍

[rstander7777]

Hi All,

I saw this thread and remembered this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSQYjrLBMG4
and this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqG-TL0WnjE

It seems it is possible. :-)