Tri-Force Magnets - Finally shown to be OU?

[mscoffman]

GeoMag Tri-Force Wheel (with standard tomi-track like run-down problems)

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=bXY0CKPTMss


GeoMag Tri-Force Track (very promising, some have built-in inclines)

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=KlhA5YECHm4


Clanzer;
Good work so far.

I would like to suggest that the GeoMag runner should be rotating and have friction against
a drive surface below the wheel rotor. Some kind of yoke or harness assembly may be required to
attach the runner to the rotor. Also, it may be desirable not to have the rotor wheel momentum
overrun the runner's motion. Wobble in the runners appears not to self damp, so constricting them
by hard attaching them to the rotor it will probably only waste energy.

---->Theory; Here is how a GeoMag Tri-Force runner functions;

I believe that to couple mechanical energy out of a static energy field, one has to have
a finite 'restricting phase delay' in a cycle (like a time delay).

I think this happens in a standalone GeoMag runner inside the metallic spheres. What happens
is the magnetic-pole-center is separated from the center-of-mass of the runner by Lenz's Law
eddy currents due the forward motion of runner. This offset allows a mechanical lever arm to
be form between the magnetic pole center and the center of mass and it is at end of this
lever arm on which the magnetic field net pulls, while gravity net pulls downward on the runner's
center of mass. This causes a force to form on the lever arm.

The force on the lever arm then operates through the radius of the runners 'wheels' - the radius
of the spheres - to transmit a rotational force to the driving surface, causing the runner to be
able to achieve acceleration.

The phase-delay is in the magnetic remnance of steel spheres which is such that the magnetic
pole always *tries* to play catch-up away from the wheel's rotation constantly forming the lever
arm between the center of gravity of the runner and the magnetic pole center. The attracting
force operates on the lever arm represented by the radius of the wheel.

So...an axial runner really does accelerate.

In the above the 'centers' referred to are the virtual mathematical summation points for mechanical
forces of particular types as well as the Lenz's Law induced electrical currents.

MarkSCoffman

[sm0ky2]

I have a lot of experience in discussing this and you shouldn't wonder why I am so adamant that certain approaches work while others not quite.

Draw a picture and indicate on it what's A and what's B and this may help you understand my point. Notice that statements such as  Ma - Mb is essentially zero are just qualitative statements and, in addition, they may not be true, depending on where A and B are.

the statement was given in the context of the Tri-Force gate - in which the two forces are essentially equivalent* (see note).

also was given that points A and B are both higher than the field of magnetic influence.
B being some value higher than A.

Assuming those 2 things - the statement holds true. the magnetic field does not have an effect on the gravitational potential energy at the start and end of the cycle.
some time after leavig point A,  it may have an effect of the gravitational energy during gate entrance - However this is OPPOSING entrance into the gate, and therefore EXTRACTS from the gravitational energy.
The roller reaches a final position (outside of the magnetic field) with more gravitational potential energy than it started with.



im not concerned with a "dishonest critic". his dishonesty will reveal itself upon examination.
What i am concerned with here is valid reproducable tests that demonstrate CoE.
So far we have seen two of these, to which noone has yet presented valid evidence to the contrary.

hopefully with as many creative minds as we have currently on this project - there will be more tests like these, from different perspectives. I would LOVE to actually measure that repulsion field,
but with what would one compare it to? the exit field? the transitional field?
or more accurately::  a combination of exit field + (transitional gradient * distance)

This is why i am a proponant for tests that use independent energy values - such as the gravitational potential from outside of the field. Thats the closest thing we have to a meter on both ends of the "circuit".
I'm sure there are other types of tests that could be just as applicable here, that we havent thought of yet.




[*note here i am not taking into consideration - the minor varyances from magnet to magnet - as they are not perfectly identicle - and this does alter gate symmetry to some unknown degree.
But for the purpose of this discussion - i am assuming that the average cummulative field of the individual gates are essentiually the same.]

[sm0ky2]

@ Mark

put a center-axle on the roller     , you may then have a different perspective on that

[Omnibus]

@smOky2,

I have a bad feeling that you don't make a distinction between force and energy. This is the sentence that gives me that feeling:

also was given that points A and B are both higher than the field of magnetic influence.

That's one of the most common mistakes around. You think you make this distinction but you actually don't.

[sm0ky2]

@smOky2,

I have a bad feeling that you don't make a distinction between force and energy. This is the sentence that gives me that feeling:

also was given that points A and B are both higher than the field of magnetic influence.

That's one of the most common mistakes around. You think you make this distinction but you actually don't.

the magnetic field decreases with distance - to a point after which its effect is so small that is become negligible. THIS IS THE POINT where the influence field ends. - a point further out than this is not affected by the magnetic influence.

Can you explain how this is a mistake?