SMOT! - (previously about the OC MPMM)

[Low-Q]

@Pirate88179,

Make no mistake, @Low-Q has no point, let alone his confusion about the difference between force and energy (which he denies but he actually has). To understand this analysis always think of the energy of the ball and of nothing else. That's first. Second, always think of the energy that the ball has exactly at A, at B and at C before it gets back exactly at A. If CoE were obeyed the ball would have lost the exact amount |(mgh1 - (Ma - Mb))| of energy, which the ball has acquired when moved from A to B, in spontaneously going back exactly along the same route but in the opposite sense--from B back to A. The ball in the discussed case, however, goes spontaneously along a different route whereby it loses also energy Mb it has at B in moving spontaneously towards C (which it wouldn't have lost if it were to go back spontaneously from B directly back to A thus obeying CoE). I've explained this many, many times and I don't think one needs to repeat it constantly because someone confuses enegy with force or has other gaps in understanding physics.

I talk about energy as a function of force times distance. You on the other hand seems to forget the distance versus force, which is important to understand the whole picture of CoE.
So you think that magnetism is the reason? Don't you forget that magnetism still influence the ball between C and A? The thing is that the ball could likely go directly from A to C as from A to B. If we compare the forces times distance (Wich is energy), between A-B and A-C, you'll find that the required energy to lift the ball from A to C is the same as from A to B, on the understanding that point A is the absolute lowest level in respect to gravity + magnetic forces.

If the ball prefers to go to C via B, just means that point A isn't the point with the absolute neutral starting point. Have you forgot that too?

Br.

Vidar

[Omnibus]

No, that's incorrect.

[Low-Q]

No, that's incorrect.

I can see your explanation, where the route A-B-C is different from A-B. But the energy used in route A-B-C-A equals A-C-A.

Using x and y coordinates, you'll see that the energy you use is to lift the ball upwards in y direction. Moving the ball sideways in the x direction does not require energy. Therefor you are just spending longer time via B to lift the ball from A to C.

Say that A is in both x and y direction 10cm to the right of and 10cm lower than point B. In x direction, point B and C are 20cm apart, in y direction they are 2cm apart, where C is in y direction 2 cm higher than point B. The distance between A and C in x direction is 10cm, and in y direction 12 cm.

To lift the ball 12cm requires energy. If you lift the ball 12cm via B, the required amount of energy is exactly the same as lifting the ball 12 cm directly from A.

So at least two question remains:

- Will the ball, by magnetic attraction, be lifted from A to B? (This is a condition in order to make it from B to C, and back to A)
- And where is the excess energy you talk about? Is the excess energy temporary, or constant?

Vidar

[Omnibus]

@Low-Q,

Stop cluttering the thread with this nonsense.

[shruggedatlas]

Low-Q's claim can be tested easily, so there is no point arguing about it.  Just put a steel ball on a very very slight decline, so it rolls very slowly.  At one end of the decline is a SMOT.  If the ball rolls into the SMOT, never decelerating, then Low-Q is incorrect.  On the other hand, if the ball does not roll into the SMOT, or at least decelerates before entering, then he is correct.