Talk:Simple Magnetic Overunity Toy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Who put up this request? You free energy people need to get a life, or better yet, an education. It only costs maybe $1500 at most to sign up for and take a basic thermodynamics course at a university, but I'll go ahead and save you the trouble: thermodynamics.
Ta ta.
Contents |
[edit] VfD result
Lag time is way over, results were:
| 3 | delete |
| 8 | keep |
Consensus achieved.
Here's the archived VfD tag:
IceKarma 11:58, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)
[edit] Naudin
Come on Reddi, please don't overdo it with linking to Naudin's site. There is lot of fun stuff there, but citing as evidence of actually operating at over-unity? Nah. If someone is coming up with a real working perpetuum mobile, an experiment repeatable also by non-believers, we would hear loudly about it - without the need to consult Naudin's site. --Pjacobi 18:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Factual Accuracy
This article seems to be advertising a toy as the single known violation of the first law of thermodynamics. This is badly in need of revision to emphasize more strongly that Simple Magnetic Overunity Toy is a misnomer, and that perpetual motion is considered impossible by the entire scientific community. This article should probably be deleted, which I would like to reopen for consideration. However, if the toy itself is noteworthy enough to justify an article, the article should at least stop using misleading language and citing very questionable research in order to imply that the SMOT somehow obsoletes all of thermodynamics by magic. --jermor 4:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, please. True believers will slowly undo it, but it needs to be done. - DavidWBrooks 20:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Quick comment for DWB version: Naudin is a fringe scientist at best; in particular, he promotes "over-unity" which his peers feel would be a violation of thermodynamics, so he can probably be characterized as a clear-cut example of a pseudophysicist. ---CH 00:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Surely this article should mention that these toys don't actually work. If the ball did drop once it reached the top of the ramp then you could close the loop and have perpetual motion. The magnet can't be strong enough that it can raise the ball and weak enough that gravity can reclaim the ball. The ball will just stop at the top of the ramp. --MrFlit 15:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Better Example of how it works
Everyone agrees that it's not an over unity device. However, it is a good demonstration of the laws of physics as are other supposed perpetual motion machines so it should be left. However, someone should give a better explaination and remove that 113% efficiency figure. The SMOT works the same way as a spring. While the ball's gravitational potenial energy increases as it goes up the hill, it's magnetic PE decreases as it gets closer to the magnets. By the first law of thermodynamics, these two PEs + the KE are equal. The SMOT would work as a perpetual motion machine in a frictionless environment (SMOTs in a loop) because the net energy moves between KE gravitational PE and magnetic PE. However, to calculate the efficiency, the formula should be E_final/E_initial = KE/(PE_gravitic+PE_magnetic)
Note please: Naudin is NOT a scientific or in any way scientifically working site. The errors in most conclusions are laymans errors and the interpretation of incorrectly collected data leads to vast misinterpretations. If you want to know what it is NOT, look to this site, but do not quote it in wiki articles please. This website deserves better references. A wikiauthor from another language, best regards 149.217.40.222 07:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
This thing is funny as heck. I would like to point out several things:
- I've seen dozens of videos of this thing 'working', but not one where the ball actually goes around and starts over. If someone can get a .gif of it 'working' in a closed track that would be nifty.
- JLNaudin has done about a million Free Energy/Over Unity experiments and roughly 99% have been successful, as opposed 0% for everyone else. You make your own conclusions. ;)
- The device could also work by gradually weakening the magnets, so it might work for a bit, then stop, and producting fresh magnets would use up more energy than it made.
- The patent cited at the bottom is misleading. Often FE/OU inventors will get patents for thier devices by not making clear to the patent office that it is a perpetual motion device. Then use the patent to 'prove' to investors that it is a legitimate (working) device.
I do have to admit that saying something doesn't work just because it violates all known laws of physics (without testing) is a little annoying. Someday you just might be wrong, but probably not today.
-
-
- Tiki God 15:26, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Stating that something doesn't work because it violates a basic law of physics is perfectly reasonable. I can run faster than the speed of light, and I have a video tape and some crayon drawings to prove it. But no one takes me seriously, so I'm forced to conclude that I'm a persecuted visionary with ideas ahead of my time, right? --Jermor 00:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Well I am happy to see that this diskussion is really done factually here,I tried to install an SMOT article on the german wikipedia and it was deleted very fast.Now I send the link of the english side to the admin.I heard nozhing then on the editing talk side from him.Paul Horn
