Roll on the 20th June

[exxcomm0n]

Yeesh.

It's YEARS after the proposed (and now it seems indefinitely postponed) "release" of proof and there is yet to be built a successful SOG, let alone Egyptian Fulcrum or Mayernik array, self powered machine.

Please quote me in my entirety so the quote is not taken out of context. But still, I stand behind that ENTIRE post.

the original 'toy' device works.

K then bud, which toy? I built a toy, Queue built a toy, you built a toy, etc. Can anyone see one of these working today? I'm not talking about "it turned 3 times and tore itself apart", I'm talking about something like the mythical machine that reportedly powered a radio in the outback and started all this fun.

im confident now that archers first one worked,

Confidence in the existence of something that is often talked, but never seen, is commonly known as religious faith.

just as mine did

<see above>

and the youtube guy.

The youtube guy? Ummmmm...which one? Kinda ambiguous with that descriptor, man.

thats 3 .............................................
personally, im not giving up on this until i have one thats stable enough i can take around and show people.

Godspeed to ya man!

But Archer started all this with the bombastic claims of "death of the oil cartels" and "this is soooo easy. Just build it and you'll see" promises that seemed to be born of the confidence of someone that had the device turning non-stop behind a curtain ready for an unveiling on June 20th.

I gave Archer every benefit of of the doubt I could, but at the promised date (and for some time thereafter that I, and others, gave him to make good on his claims) there was nothing.
It's now years later and there's still nothing from him except a video on the Mayernik array that is far from convincing.

Smoky, I was not lambasting you in this tirade, but since you have taken up the torch for Archer I put the same challenge to you that I did to Archer; that being -

Please show _1_ WORKING self powered machine.

Notice that I didn't even ask specifically for a SOG.

Dude, prove me wrong w/ that request and, again, Godspeed to your efforts!

BTW, absolutely no comment from anyone on frame 6:37 of Archer's latest video?

[sm0ky2]

well, first off, im not in this to prove anyone wrong
ive shared everything i thought to be of value to this project.

those that were here when this started can tell you i thought this whole thing was a crock of $&!%. I've tried to build hundreds of magnetic-vs-gravity type devices and they all seemed to have the same problem - either gravity cant pull it out, or it cant push it back in to be lifted again. This wheel goes right around both of those problems in various adjustable ways because of its design.

i dont blame people for being skeptical, in this line of research you HAVE to be, in order to seperate the truth from all the b.s. and misinterpretation that goes on around here.

It's not about "belief", wether or not I ( or you) believe that archer quinn had a working device doesnt determine wether or not this works.
Its the only explaination i have that cooincides with what i have seen during this long adventure. It seems logical to conclude that the author of the invention, had a working device. I have seen two of mine work, and a 3rd independent replicator whos identity didnt seem important at the time, among the many videos that littered all of the threads.
could the "youtube guy" have been a hoax? thats possible.
could some maniac from Austrailia randomly spout out the precise technical details of a working device, and NOT ever had one actually working? i suppose that could happen... it just doesnt seem likely to me at this point.

i'm not asking anyone to "believe" or "not believe". All i ask is that you take a realistic look at this situation. I have no reason to lead anyone on, i dont stand to gain anything here. Everything ive added to this device has already been given to you freely.

i dont waste my own time, and i certainly wouldnt waste anyone elses by telling you to build one of these.

but if you choose to, i would certainly appreciate the help in advancing the technology, in hopes to take this to the next level.
the main principals of operation have remained intact from the originally proposed machine. and i have documentation along every step of the way taking up 2 folders in my file cabinet.

the design i ended up with 3 years later, is the works of dozens of minds working on the problem. im still bouncing ideas off of the people in this thread to put the final pieces of the puzzle together.

Here's three of the most important adjustable factors that seperate this machine from the "other magnet vs gravity" machines mentioned above.

1) with the rod in repulsion, the leveraged weight imbalance on the entire wheel is much stronger than the back-attractive force of the magnets.

2) the entrance of the field can be adjusted to non-perpendicular angles to a radius of the wheel. This allows you to minimize or even remove the "wall" effect at entrance into the field.

3) the mass-to-flux ratio of the magnetic pair is the key to operation.
   the greater distance the magnet can lift its' partners mass, the less "fine tuned" the components of the system have to be, which makes it easier to achieve an operational state.


you see a lot of people in the videos of non-working machines
they spin the wheel. spin it and watch how long it keeps spinning, tic-tic-tic as each arm thuds against the wall and jumps upwards to push the next arm in. Its obvious these people weren't paying attention to what everyone else was learning about this thing.

i dont spin the wheel..  i gently ease one arm into action, and let the wheel spin itself. Once each arm is adjusted and operates properly with the outer magnets and balanced with the center of mass of the wheel,
it takes itself through each stage, one arm at a time.
you get the arms all balanced with each other, so every one can push its neighbor into the array, and the machine is operational. The little bit of energy you put into it to start it is, by design, less than is required to stop it from perpetuating. i.e. - the entrance into the magnetic array
vs. the momentum of the heavy wheel.

This excess energy is mathematically derrived from the difference in force of the gravitational and magnetic fields over their respective duration of time. The physics is there, the principals of the technology are there, and we have a design that functions.

if its "proof" you're looking for, the very best i could offer your
(and very least i would attempt) would be to finish the build, get it working, and let it run for weeks in the most enclosed/undisturbed enviironment i could construct for the thing, then make a video.
BUT, even then some would ask if there were hidden wires, motors, pulleys, ect.. would that really be "proof" to you?
So if you seek proof, then the best way to obtain that is to do it yourself. Then you can sit there and argue with yourself over wether or not to accept what you have just done.

You can look at any of my videos, or anyone elses and clearly see the functional components of this device. The actual designs have gone from one end of the scale to the other, and each has their own difficulties. But all mechanics and logistics aside, the magnetic and gravitational components of this device function exactly as they were proposed to do. 

im not looking for fame, or recognition. hell i dont even think im IN any of my videos...
im just trying to open everyones eyes to the fact that the crazy s.o.b. was right. 1,300 yr old archemedian knowledge, ressurected by Mr. Archer Quinn

you can take it for what it is, or dont let the door hit you...
 

[mscoffman]

By the way if a SMOT can add gravitational potential energy
to a steel ball by rolling it uphill then this wheel should be able
to do the same when it slides one of it's arms upward against
gravity, as these seem topologically equivalent.

Can it?

:S:MarkSCoffman

[sm0ky2]

By the way if a SMOT can add gravitational potential energy
to a steel ball by rolling it uphill then this wheel should be able
to do the same when it slides one of it's arms upward against
gravity, as these seem topologically equivalent.

Can it?

:S:MarkSCoffman

Omnibus pointed out that similarity a while back.
i have to partially agree with that assesment.
there area couple of differences though.

the SMOT uses opposing fields in a linear fashion, like the Tri-Force, or the Howard Johnson linear track, mayernick, ect.
not straight repulsion
But both approaches attain the same goal,
   i.e. lifting a mass through the gravitational field.

[exxcomm0n]

Please excuse the late reply, I had other things to take care of that had a little more importance when you replied.

well, first off, im not in this to prove anyone wrong
ive shared everything i thought to be of value to this project.

I know. You've been a builder for a while now. I've pestered you w/ stoner pipe dreams when you ask for mechanical solutions to issues you've posted about w/ your build. I've been following this thread since close to it's inception.

<snip>
i dont blame people for being skeptical, in this line of research you HAVE to be, in order to seperate the truth from all the b.s. and misinterpretation that goes on around here.

It's not about "belief", wether or not I ( or you) believe that archer quinn had a working device doesnt determine wether or not this works.

Tricky thing about that belief stuff is it works both ways. Just because you claim to have built a working example doesn't mean I believe that it was. I'm from Missouri. Show me.

You said 3 working examples. Show me.
I've seen your tube channel. None of the vids show even 1 unassisted revolution bud.
I'm not calling into question your devotion to this concept or the evidence you've experienced, I'm talking about the lack of evidence I've experienced with any representation of a working model.

Its the only explaination i have that cooincides with what i have seen during this long adventure. It seems logical to conclude that the author of the invention, had a working device. I have seen two of mine work, and a 3rd independent replicator whos identity didnt seem important at the time, among the many videos that littered all of the threads.
could the "youtube guy" have been a hoax? thats possible.
could some maniac from Austrailia randomly spout out the precise technical details of a working device, and NOT ever had one actually working? i suppose that could happen... it just doesnt seem likely to me at this point.

This concept has been around a looooooong time.
Long enough that there are examples of it in the "Museum of Unworkable Devices"
Click that and scroll down 2/3rds of the page for a device, while not being exact, is quite similar to the concept introduced here.

The quote, "could some maniac from Austrailia randomly spout out the precise technical details of a working device" is the crux of the issue. It gives me a lot to work with.

That's because few, if any here, have experienced the working device.

I have no evidence or experience of a "working model", and unfortunately, you and Archer seem to be in the minority.

When the deal was, "Wait until this date and I'll prove it!" I was willing to suspend my disbelief as that date would prove things one way or the other.
That date came and went, and my disbelief's suspension sagged and collapsed.

i'm not asking anyone to "believe" or "not believe". All i ask is that you take a realistic look at this situation.

That's been the aim of the last few posts, finally. I understand that you're working on a model that works AND can not tear itself apart. I've offered suggestions for situations you've encountered. 
I want it to work.
I look forward to your build that works.
But I'll be damned if I'm going to believe the “original” author of the concept had a working machine when he's had all this time to produce one.
HE's the one that really has to prove that he wasn't taking an idea he had and reporting it as fiat accompli.

I have no reason to lead anyone on, i dont stand to gain anything here. Everything ive added to this device has already been given to you freely.
i dont waste my own time, and i certainly wouldnt waste anyone elses ........

Never claimed you did EXCEPT for claiming there are 3 working examples in existence.

you see a lot of people in the videos of non-working machines
they spin the wheel. spin it and watch how long it keeps spinning, tic-tic-tic as each arm thuds against the wall and jumps upwards to push the next arm in. Its obvious these people weren't paying attention to what everyone else was learning about this thing.

i dont spin the wheel..  i gently ease one arm into action, and let the wheel spin itself. Once each arm is adjusted and operates properly with the outer magnets and balanced with the center of mass of the wheel,
it takes itself through each stage, one arm at a time.
you get the arms all balanced with each other, so every one can push its neighbor into the array, and the machine is operational. The little bit of energy you put into it to start it is, by design, less than is required to stop it from perpetuating. i.e. - the entrance into the magnetic array
vs. the momentum of the heavy wheel.

This is the part that is not addressed by your videos, or anyone else's. The last paragraph above, that's the video of a working device that I request.

<snip>

if its "proof" you're looking for, the very best i could offer your
(and very least i would attempt) would be to finish the build, get it working, and let it run for weeks in the most enclosed/undisturbed enviironment i could construct for the thing, then make a video.
BUT, even then some would ask if there were hidden wires, motors, pulleys, ect.. would that really be "proof" to you?

If it came from you, I'd give it a lot more credence than most others, but it would be a place to start.

So if you seek proof, then the best way to obtain that is to do it yourself. Then you can sit there and argue with yourself over wether or not to accept what you have just done.

You can look at any of my videos, or anyone elses and clearly see the functional components of this device. The actual designs have gone from one end of the scale to the other, and each has their own difficulties. But all mechanics and logistics aside, the magnetic and gravitational components of this device function exactly as they were proposed to do.

Not exactly, it's supposed to keep spinning by itself. I have yet to see anything like that.

im not looking for fame, or recognition. hell i dont even think im IN any of my videos...
im just trying to open everyones eyes to the fact that the crazy s.o.b. was right. 1,300 yr old archemedian knowledge, ressurected by Mr. Archer Quinn

you can take it for what it is, or dont let the door hit you...

I'm not going to slink away about this. I supported the guy up to the bitter end, but had no reason to really as he failed to produce a machine. Hell I even PAID for it w/ my “donation” and got bupkiss.


So I'm not slinking away, you should know better. 


Keep up w/ your build and prove me wrong (PLEASE!), or just treat me like another thread troll, but don't say you know of 3 working examples when there just ain't, man.
I'm not gonna let that go by unchallenged.