New video on site of possible OU test fixture

[Humbugger]

I don't know much about SMOT.  My context here is motors which claim overunity operation and use permanent magnets with some electromagnetic means to overcome the sticky spot.  Is SMOT in that category?  Please link me to a primer on SMOT and I'll read up on it and try to comment intelligently.

..."as I have shown conclusively"...

Oh...wait...SMOT...is that the group where a steel ball rolls up a hill, falls off and rolls back to the beginning, all powered by permanent magnets?  I've never seen one of those that worked, even in a video!  I don't think I've even heard anyone claim they had a working SMOT.  Are you saying you have or know of and can prove the existance of a working SMOT device and, better yet, one that you can extract excess energy from?  Love to see your evidence.  Don't believe it!  Show me...conclusively!

[Humbugger]

@Omnibus

Just spent some time perusing your posts.  We have a semantic problem in what the definition of SMOT is.  It appears, to you, it is any system consisting of a stationary permanent magnet or several and an object that is placed by hand near it and is then moved by it but does not end up stuck to it.  Maybe your definition does not even include that last requirement, judging from some of your arguments I read...

My definition, and I think this is generally accepted by the community here at least, goes a bit further and requires that the object remains in motion to form a continuously-cycling process. 

By definition, when you say "a SMOT", it implies, to me, a contrivance, a machine, a device, a system of elements.  It also implies, to me and I think most everyone except you, perhaps, something that does not involve a requirement to pick up the moved object with your fingers and move it around except maybe to initially place the object one time into "the SMOT environment".

If you are saying that any magnet which lifts up an object one time in spite of gravity is, in itself, a SMOT and is incontrovertable proof of overunity, then we also have a problem with sharing in common the definition of overunity.  I don't see the point in arguing science with words when there is no common agreement on what the words mean.

I am not a physicist, not even a pretender.  I'm an electrical engineer and a designer of machines, primarily electrical/electronic in nature.  What we are all seeking here, I think, is some constuctable contrivance which we can engineer to provide generally useful mechanical or electrical or thermal energy without having to feed in more energy than we take out.  That is what I envision when I hear the term overunity and that is the context for my use of the word.

I'm afraid I have to agree with Mr. Simanek on this one, after having read all of your posts and then his article as referenced by Wiki.

[Omnibus]

@Humbugger,

I don?t care about your definition and please don?t involve the community here. Don?t hide behind the community, whatever it means. And, don?t make it appear that it?s a matter of semantics. It is not. There is a common agreement what a SMOT is, what a conservative field is and what the properties of conservative fields are. The problem is in you, not in the semantics. You don?t understand the problem and are trying to present it as a purely engineering and utilitarian one. The problem of whether or not SMOT violates CoE is, however, a scientific problem. I repeat, I have proven beyond doubt that SMOT violates CoE. Implementing this discovery into a useful product is a completely different, purely engineering problem, which will be solved sooner or later. You'd do better to mind this fact in your future writing or if you  feel you don't understand it to restrain yourself from generalizations.

As far as Mr. Simanek goes, his analysis is incorrect and your agreement with him shows your complete misunderstanding of the matters at hand.

[Honk]

@Honk

You know from previous posts that I have a great deal of respect for your EE design and build talents.  Your skills are clearly well-honed in that area.  I guess I'm just not too convinced of the general critical-thinking ability when you suggest popping $100,000 over to the likes of Jack or Paul. 

I didn't mean you to pop $100K whitout any proof or personal demonstration. I just suggested that you should contact them. Perhaps you'll get a nice surprise.

Then there is the serious concern in my mind that, if he doesn't know the difference between power and energy, how can I trust him to properly measure the input voltage and current?  He reports it as if it were strictly a square wave, with current into the electromagnet rising neatly and abruptly (i.e. no inductance) from zero to 1.9A, holding steady for 28ms and then falling neatly back to zero.  Voltage delivered to the coil is reported as constant as well.  It's as if he were delivering power to a resistor!  I'd be surprised if the scope trace were nearly that neat and clean.

There is a 1 hour live feed video on his public demo somewhere at the net and I downloaded it a while ago. Right now I can find the link. Perhaps at home I'll find it.
Anyway, an this video the oscilloscope is showing the voltage and current going into the repelling electromagnet coil of his wankel motor.
It is far from the "square wave" reported. I believe he just simplified the report in order to not complicate it for the average reader.
But if he was to use my Flux Booster Controller it would turn the coil into a resistor like behavior. Immediate rise and fall times of the current through the coil.
My own tests show an efficiency increase up to 15 times depending on the type of coil and frequency used. So, let's see how things turn out in the close future.

[Humbugger]

@Omnibus   What can I say?  Your stubbornness is exceeded only by your hostility and rudeness.  You claim you don't care what others think or about defining terms for discourse...why such rabid passion, then?  Good luck and God speed...chill out!

@Honk    Love to see the video you refer to...haven't found anything like that.  I'm following the Hildenbrandt link re your controller and am anxiously awaiting the demonstration of a self-running system and/or solid evidence of excess energy output.  Good luck to you and to Jack.