STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 4VOLITION: 3(3 active u /1 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM:  1(1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 3(3 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:Presumably a good ratio of active to activated units (1/1), but unlike RL2 the lever advantage is partially compromised.
 Questions, comments, or otherinquiries may be directed to:contact@nathancoppedge.com
 An Interesting Link:A toy dating from pre-1905 uses metal balls and ramps in asequential method, imitating perpetual motion.However it has no means to reset the cycle other than loading thefeed chamber by hand.
NATHAN COPPEDGE--Perpetual Motion Concepts
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 3VOLITION: 2(6 active u / 3 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 3(1 mobile u / (1 stem / 3 cycles))EFFICIENCY: 0.666(2 Ve / 3 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:Seems generally to be an improvement on Repeat Lever 1, but multiple subcycles per activating unit remain.
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 2VOLITION: 2(2 active u /1 passive u)EQUILIBRIUM:  1(1 mobile u / 1 stem / 1 cycle)EFFICIENCY: 2(2 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:What effectiveness it has is aproduct of a fairly goodactive-to-passive unit ratio.Eloquent theory if it works.
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 1VOLITION: 2.6(8 active u / 3 passive or dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 8(1 mobile u / (1 stem / 8 cycles))EFFICIENCY: 0.325(2.6 Ve / 8 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:The overall active-to-passive unitratio is burdened by a largenumber of subcycles relative toacting units.
Consideration of simple pivoting objects
encourages an idea of the relationship
between a fulcrum and angularity
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 6VOLITION: 2(2 active u /1 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 2(2 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:Has an unfortunate assumption about leverage, which compromises the principle idea of having such efficiency.
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 7VOLITION: 1.5(3 active u /2 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 1.5(1.5 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:The secret of this device is its partial support fixed half-track, not reflected in any other of my published designs.
 RL Type 10: Secant Lever: A sort of clever seeming  theoretical device that uses a sideways angle to create subtle motion in the lever arrangement, permitting a return slope on a fixed track. I think this one might work, but it is subtle for all its simplicity.RL Type 11: Difference Spiral: Perhaps optimistic about effectiveness of lifting along an automatic spiral. Some variation might work, but this is probably impractical in its current design.RL Type 12: This is a key example of a device that does not work due to entropy forces. I'm not sure why I though it would work, as the forces clearly show motion towards the center, and not away.Repeating Lever / Modular Trough Leverage:This device is the first which I feel certain would work in its fully built form. The partial construction has been tested to work in a video, shown HERE. Essentially, certain distances of counterweight have the strength to lift a similar but slightly less heavy weight vertically, and the slightly less heavy weight has the power to trigger the lifting of the counterweight at greater leverage distance. The modular (repeated) form overcomes the difficulty of rolling the weight to its initial position by extending the linear motion in a circle, which maintains altitude on average.Not-If-But-When Machine 1: This is the first design I have used besides the Trough Coquette to make use of differences between angles of fixed supports. The result is deemed highly effective for perpetual motion, and it has a unique cross shape which does not appear in any of the other designs.Not-If-But-When Machine 2: This is a slightly less effective design I have considered for a number of years. It gets a rating of infinity assuming the ramp arrangement works. Originally I assumed it was feasible because the upper ramp could be triggered downwards, creating a slope. However, if the lower end of the triangle is parallel, this would mean the connectors would be upwards-angled, which would not work. So, this device is uncertain until the problem is solved.Not-If-But-When Machine 3: This device is a likely- effective variation on the differential angle principle. It is the simplest design I have found to make use of differential angles effectively. Surprisingly, the double-lever elements are parallel, which is highly unusual, but seems to work in this design. This has many similarities to Repeat Lever 2, but in some ways is much simpler, because of the parallel lever.Not-If-But-When Machine 4: Since the slope is directed slightly upward as permitted by the imbalance between full-support for the rolling ball on the way out, and no support other than the lever (again) on the way back, a slight slope can be permitted between the outward and inward directions of motion, permitting a return to the same condition through the imbalance created by support vs. unsupport.Not-If-But-When Machine 5: Since there is constant support, this device using four modular units and one rolling ball as usual might make use of a very light counterweight for each module, creating an assisted motion making use of differences in the angle of the track sides upon the ball.Not-If-But-When Machine 6: In this case the counterweight is lifted through a steep drop in the fixed support, acting on a less-steep angle in the mobile wire-frame attached to the lever. The less steep angle of the wire-frame is permitted because the angle of the wire-frame does not have to be steep to create motion in the mobile weight while the mobile weight is supported.Fully-Proven Perpetual Motion: This is what I take to be my only fully-proven  design, based on my best work with the Successful Over-Unity Experiement 1, visible on Youtube. Three or four mostly-horizontal modules may be required to return the mobile weight to the exact same location, using the same proportions as that experiment, with the exception that the mobile weight is much taller, with the effect of overcoming the 'last barrier' to functionality.SEE DIAGRAMSOR UNIQUE FORMULAS BELOW
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 8VOLITION: 2( 2 active u / 1 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 2( 2 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:The compilation of leverage anda supporting slope is maximized, in one possible embodiment.
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 9VOLITION: 2( 2 active u / 1 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 2( 2 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:Potentially a minor improvement on Type 8, but it gets the same rating, since it is just an extension of the principle.
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 10VOLITION: 2( 2 active u / 1 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 2( 2 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:One of the better designs making use of an upwards-sloping trackstructure. Potentially simple proof/disproof
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 11VOLITION: 1.5( 3 active u / 2 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 1.5( 1.5 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:Inspired concept, if the spiral concept would only contribute to movement.
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 12VOLITION: 1.5( 3 active u / 2 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY:1.5(  1.5 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:In spite of the low-to-adequate rating, this concept has a lot of conventional proof going for it.
 STATISTICS: Repeat Lever 5VOLITION: 2(2 active u /1 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM:  1(1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 cycle))EFFICIENCY: 2(2 Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:The best trough lever design, with partial alternatives in types8 and 9.
OVER-UNITY VIDEO
Based on the
trough-leverage concept
Also listed under
'videos' on the left-hand
bar.
 STATISTICS: Modular Trough LeverageVOLITION: 9 Infinity( 9 active u / 0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 8  (1 mobile u / (1 stem / 8 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 9/8 Infinity(9 Infinite Ve / 8 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:My first genuine over-unity device, which I think proves perpetual motion is possible. See the Video.
 STATISTICS: Beaver DeviceVOLITION: 2 Infinity( 2 active u / 0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 1(1 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 2 Infinity(2 Infinite Ve / 1 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:Deceptively simple device making use of an effective 'cheating' method. Occurred late in my process, and might work.
 More on my concept ofVolitional math atIMPOSSIBLEMACHINE.COM
 STATISTICS: Not-If-But-When Machine #1VOLITION: 5 Infinity(5 active u / 0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 5(5 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 1 Infinity( 5 Infinity Ve / 5 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT:This is a very promising design using a differential between angled support and non-support 4X.
 STATISTICS: Not-If-But-When Machine #2VOLITION: 2 Infinity(2 active u / 0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 2   (2 mobile u / (1 stem /1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 1 Infinity( 2 Infinite Ve / 2 VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: This device is made possible by using upwards-directed slope for both the far and near end of the triangle, with no support or angled wall support on the upper end, and downwards slope on the connector.
 STATISTICS: Not-If-But-When Machine #3VOLITION: 2 Infinity(2 active u /  0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 2(2 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 1 Infinity(2 Infinite Ve / 2  VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: Perhaps the cleverest use of angularity to achieve perpetual motion.
 STATISTICS: Not-If-But-When Machine #4VOLITION: 2 Infinity(2 active u /  0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 2(2 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 1 Infinity(2 Infinite Ve / 2  VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: A method proven to be duo-directional from rest.
 STATISTICS: Not-If-But-When Machine #5VOLITION: 5 Infinity(5 active u / 0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 5(5 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 1 Infinity(5 Infinite Ve / 5  VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: Angles of the sides of the track are used to create an imbalance. The lever angle this time compensates.
 STATISTICS: Not-If-But-When Machine #6VOLITION: 2 Infinity(2 active u /  0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 2(2 mobile u / (1 stem / 1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 1 Infinity(2 Infinite Ve / 2  VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: The radical difference between free-fall and slight upwards slope is used to create an active slope-lever.
 STATISTICS: Fully-Proven Perpetual Motion 1VOLITION: 3+ Infinity(3+ active u /  0 dual-axial u)EQUILIBRIUM: 3(3+ mobile u / (1 stem / 1 sub cycles))EFFICIENCY: 1 Infinity(3 Infinite Ve / 3  VE)VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: Fully-proven because the last barrier of how to begin successive cycles was overcome.