How this was done in 1821.....

[Dingus Mungus]

Simanek's analysis is incorrect. Analysis of the closed-loop device http://data.image.zabim.com/o-wa51V9glc9.jpg confirms that. Indeed, since the ball (+mgh1 +Mb) - (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb)) = +Ma (CoE obeyed)

As experiment shows, the ball returns along C->A, therefore, the ball loses in addition to (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb)) also the energy portion (+Mb ? 0) = mgh2 + [kinetic + rotational + energy losses] which the ball had stored at B but was realized at C. Therefore, the ball returns at A with the energy

(+mgh1 +Mb) - (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb) - Mb) = +Ma + Mb = +Ma +mgh2 + [kinetic ...+]

As a result, in SMOT, the initial +Ma is restored and in addition an excess of +mgh2 + [kinetic ...+] is produced.

Harnessing the excess energy produced is an engineering problem beyond the scope of this analysis.

Ok lets just pretend basic physics is nonsence...
Help me understand your equation better then.

You state:
(+mgh1 +Mb) - (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb)) = +Ma
Where:
+MGh = Potential energy of the mass
What's Ma and Mb?
Its not a form of resistance as it lacks velocity squared and is ADDED to the input.
I understand MGh, h1 and h2, but I need a clear definition of what a and b are.

~Dingus Mungus

P.S. Then I can use your equation to re-crunch Naudins numbers!
Should be interesting to see how it works in refrence to real life.

[Omnibus]

No, basics Physics isn?t nonsense. You don?t understand basic Physics. Don?t present your misunderstanding as basic Physics.

Ma and Mb are integrals which are the magnetic potential energy of the ball at A and B and which are equal to the work necessary to do in moving the ball from C to A, respectively, from C to B in the magnetic field.

[Dingus Mungus]

Yeah your right, wiki's definition of PE aka GMh is way off!!!
You make my head hurt sometimes. Nothing gets through.
Can someone with experience with physics tell me if my calculations
regarding the potential energy of the mass were accurate?

Ok so its own Mass times its own magnetic potential... (attraction)
Whats "a" and "b" measured in?

Help me apply your theory to a real world example now...
You have all of JL Naudins numbers show me how you plug them in.
Like I tryed to do for you... Explain it all.
We should see your equation line up with his real world results.

~Dingus Mungus

P.S. While I can understand the use of a integral to graph magnetic moment, it in no way has made up for the loss of gravitational potential in the fall to a lower track.

[Omnibus]

Never mind. Don't bother.

[Dingus Mungus]

Never mind. Don't bother.

I've noticed you are not even willing to push past the theoretical in any term.

Well unfortunately thats not an option, I handed off your equation and JLNLabs physical numbers this morning. An associate of mine who majored in theoretical mathamatics is now reviewing you equation. If his analysis is inconclusive I have other people who would be willing to look at it with even shinier credentials. Either way, if I'm wrong I want to know what is right and how it is right. You don't need to post anything more if you don't want to, but I'll be posting the review once I get it back. You probably blindly assume I'm trying to discredit you or the SMOT, but in reality the bottom line is: If I can't get full answers from you about that equation I have to ask someone else.

~Dingus Mungus