Working Attraction Magnet Motor on Youtube!?

[Freezer]

it has been scientifically proven beyond all doubt that it is impossible to gain energy through interaction with a magnet.

[utilitarian]

it has been scientifically proven beyond all doubt that it is impossible to gain energy through interaction with a magnet.

Yes, you have an example to prove me wrong, oh wise one?

[Omnibus]

If it wont sit on my desk and entertain me for more than a few revolutions...it has NO practical application.  OK big deal beats CoE and energy out of nothing (as you claim) BIG WOOP.  If it wont produce enough energy to light a fart...ITS USELESS, Move on to something with more potential.  Build a working perpetual SMOT machine or move on down the road.

In fact, there will never be one revolution.  The SMOT is based on a magnet, and we all know and it has been scientifically proven beyond all doubt that it is impossible to gain energy through interaction with a magnet.  You will always have less by the end of the day.  This has been proven numerous times and there is nothing violating the principle of CoE anywhere to be found.

Not so. It has been proven beyond any doubt through a rigorous scientific analysis that SMOT violates CoE. At the end of the day, that is, when the A-B-C-A loop in SMOT is closed you will always have more energy out than in.

[utilitarian]

If it wont sit on my desk and entertain me for more than a few revolutions...it has NO practical application.  OK big deal beats CoE and energy out of nothing (as you claim) BIG WOOP.  If it wont produce enough energy to light a fart...ITS USELESS, Move on to something with more potential.  Build a working perpetual SMOT machine or move on down the road.

In fact, there will never be one revolution.  The SMOT is based on a magnet, and we all know and it has been scientifically proven beyond all doubt that it is impossible to gain energy through interaction with a magnet.  You will always have less by the end of the day.  This has been proven numerous times and there is nothing violating the principle of CoE anywhere to be found.

Not so. It has been proven beyond any doubt through a rigorous scientific analysis that SMOT violates CoE. At the end of the day, that is, when the A-B-C-A loop in SMOT is closed you will always have more energy out than in.

No, even a simple glance at your so-called proof is enough to see that you are simply fooling yourself.  Sorry to say, in your closed loop, there is always less energy out than in, as proved by the fact that you have to stick you hand in to make the process work.  When you can do it without your hand, we will have something to talk about, but not until then.  You are just too self-confident to see the error in your analysis.  Think, try to make it work without your hand.  When you realize why you can't, you will have seen the truth.

[Omnibus]

If it wont sit on my desk and entertain me for more than a few revolutions...it has NO practical application.  OK big deal beats CoE and energy out of nothing (as you claim) BIG WOOP.  If it wont produce enough energy to light a fart...ITS USELESS, Move on to something with more potential.  Build a working perpetual SMOT machine or move on down the road.

In fact, there will never be one revolution.  The SMOT is based on a magnet, and we all know and it has been scientifically proven beyond all doubt that it is impossible to gain energy through interaction with a magnet.  You will always have less by the end of the day.  This has been proven numerous times and there is nothing violating the principle of CoE anywhere to be found.

Not so. It has been proven beyond any doubt through a rigorous scientific analysis that SMOT violates CoE. At the end of the day, that is, when the A-B-C-A loop in SMOT is closed you will always have more energy out than in.

No, even a simple glance at your so-called proof is enough to see that you are simply fooling yourself.  Sorry to say, in your closed loop, there is always less energy out than in, as proved by the fact that you have to stick you hand in to make the process work.  When you can do it without your hand, we will have something to talk about, but not until then.  You are just too self-confident to see the error in your analysis.  Think, try to make it work without your hand.  When you realize why you can't, you will have seen the truth.

Your simple glance at my analysis is just too simple. Don't fool yourself, you have understood nothing of my analysis and therefore you don't need to push your confusion here.