Posted by Ray Pinot (206.216.93.225) on March 08, 2002 at 15:54:26:
Funny to find SMOT (Simple Magnetic Overunity Toy) on a site about bessler... I've worked very hard exploring the capabilities of curved smot ramps. It is absolute that straight smot ramps can lift and drop steel ball bearings. However, I still question the reliability of roll away. They seem to work 3 out of 5 times (or sumthin’) as far as I can see the only reason is probability. The longer it works the more probable it is to stop, maybe.
The attraction into the magnetic field of the ramp is very important to the SMOT and is in essence the motive force that propels the ball to the end of the magnetic field. This will always happen. If you simply place even just a single magnet and allow a ball bearing to be attracted into the magnetic field without touching the magnet it will transverse the entire magnet before rebounding to the center. The ball bearing will not be pulled to a dead stop at the center of the pole (north or south). It will travel the entire distance of the magnetic field and then turn around and rebound until it stops at the center. However, you cannot build momentum inside the ramp. That is to say that by building a longer ramp you cannot gain momentum. I think the only momentum is the initial force. Hence the multiple magnet design of Greg Watson, there is a greater initial force of pull into the ramp and hence a greater force at the exit of the ramp.
The curved ramps I built do work but they are not strong enough to lift or drop the ball bearings. I used a piece of flexible magnetic strip off my regriderator that unusually had proper magnetic poles to build a curved ramp using a pill bottle I had. By placing the magnet inside the pill bottle I was able to bring the ball from start to end a full ¾ around the circumference. So you can build curved ramps..and that’s where you can achieve Overunity if it is possible.
Now curved ramps may seem like the answer completely, a simple spiral which ends with the ball dropping back at start. But closing the loop is very sketchy. If the end magnet and the beginning magnet are to close there will be no way for the initial pull to happen. The ball must exit and enter the magnetic field completely or the magnetic force will win and stop the machine.
I’ve spent the last 2 years studying this phenomenon and I still am not sure either way. There’s also TOMI and the adsett ramps..but it’s all magnetism and gravity.
I think that Bessler may have been closer with his designs than Greg Watson.
Although this thought may not be employed in the final design, let me mention it while I’m here.
The weight of all free falling objects is the same. Weight does not make things fall faster. Leonardo Davinci proved this by dropping a lead sphere and a wooden sphere from the leaning tower of Pisa. The spheres struck the ground at the same time. The lead ball had a far greater responsive force upon impact with the ground. But, the spheres fall at the same speed. So weight does not change the rate of acceleration due to gravity, size does. Then there’s the second point of interest in gravity, the speed at which all free falling objects fall does not increase, it is instantaneously accelerated to the gravitational constant. So then by having an object fall more than once during one decent a greater gravitational constant force can be created.
Bessler’s wheel I feel uses a property of leverage to maintain itself. The old see-saw trick where an adult can be lifted by a kid by moving toward the center of the see-saw. In Besslers case one ball lifts many. Well anyone out there want help me explore any of these thoughts? :)
Thanks for reading I hope I helped.
Sincerely,
Ray Pinot