Tri-Force Magnets - Finally shown to be OU?

[Rusty_Springs]

Hi All
I still have alot of magnetic experiments to try before I give up on a permanent magnet motor by here is something I know will work and the only added energy comes from compressed air, if you put a bar magnet on a rotor and move a block magnet up and down near that bar magnet the bar magnet will spin, the faster you move it the faster it will spin so if you used compressed air to push the block magnet up and down like a piston you have a working motor or generator to keep it going all you need to do is fill up the air tank.
I know if I had the means I would be biulding this while I still work on my other projects but I don't have the means so I will put it out there for anyone that wants to try it.
Take Care All
Graham

[sm0ky2]

The very same proof used for SMOT can also be employed to "prove beyond any doubt" that the CoE is ?violated? in the following gravitational only (and non-magnetic) setup:

B *  *
            *                               *   * A
               *                      *
                  *           *
                  C *   *

Ein=EpotA-EpotB
But Ec>Ein, thus ? violation of CoE!
I wish.

Cheers,
Tinu

What the hell is this?

That appears to be a very accurate analogy of the pereptual OMNI_SMOT babble that you have been propegating throughout this thread.  It is exactly the same bogus claim of "extra energy" that you attribute to the SMOT, just in his example there are no magnets.  The extra energy out is still the same in both cases. None......

[sm0ky2]

The very same proof used for SMOT can also be employed to "prove beyond any doubt" that the CoE is ?violated? in the following gravitational only (and non-magnetic) setup:

B *  *
            *                               *   * A
               *                      *
                  *           *
                  C *   *

Ein=EpotA-EpotB
But Ec>Ein, thus ? violation of CoE!
I wish.

Cheers,
Tinu

What the hell is this?

It?s a solid proof of CoE violation for a ball gravitationally moving on a B-C-A curve.

You see, the energy I put in is Ein=EpotA-EpotB, which can also be written as Ein=m*g*h(AB) where m is mass of the ball and h(AB)is vertical distance between A and B. And the energy of the ball in C (which is kinetic but it doesn?t matter) is EC=m*g*h(BC). So, because always h(BC)> h(AB) due to the particular setup under study, it indubitably results that Ein<Ec.

Therefore, having proved that EC>Ein, it is clear that the ball in C is having more energy that I put in!!! Eureka!!!
Thanks to your proof for SMOT that greatly inspired me, I definitely proved without any doubt that GOT is also overunity and that CoE is violated. GOT (SGOT also accepted between friends) will stand for (Simple) Gravitational Overunity Toy and I hereby release it to the public domain. I release it with one exception: X-(S)GOT, which is foreseen to be the improved pulsed version of (S)GOT (see Tseung et all); that would be way too OU, hence a real public danger.

Cheers,
Tinu

I think tinu is really on to something!  This is truly brilliant.  Clearly, the ball loses more energy along B->C->A than is imparted by the hand from A->B.  Plainly, this is overunity, as this energy comes from nothing (not even a magnet).  The fact that the ball does not return to B on its own is irrelevant. The fact that there is discontinuous production of excess energy is enough to show a violation of CoE.

I propose that from now on, all discussions regarding free energy start at this very point.  CoE has been proven in a simple gravity setup, now it is up to all the inventors to close the SGOT loop and make a self-sustaining device.  Now, admittedly, this is a difficult engineering problem, but surely a surmountable one.  We have a violation of CoE plainly in sight, so it just a matter of making use of it.

This is not to take anything away from the SMOT, which is also overunity for the exact same reason.  There is no reason inventors cannot work in parallel to develop both the SGOT and SMOT into something that produces useful energy.

Brilliant!! purely brilliant !!  Special Thanks to Omnibus - for showing how to prove beyond any doubt, that CoE can be violated by any device, when examined in this manner.

Perhaps we can apply this same technique to other devices, and prove them to be in violation of CoE as well.

[Omnibus]

@smOky2,

Did you see my question to @tinu or you'll continue with your superficial attitude?

[utilitarian]

@smOky2,

Did you see my question to @tinu or you'll continue with your superficial attitude?

To try to be an advocate against the SGOT's overunity is an effort not even the Devil would partake.  It's proof is irrefutable.  Just like the SMOT's overunity.  Please, you have your SMOT.  Let the unwashed masses who cannot afford magnets have their SGOT!  Its CoE violation is equally valid.  The math supports it perfectly.