Tuesday, July 15, 2025

SOULS OF KINGDOMS

 I LIK E TROPI EAE (JCHINET)

NOV3S OPTII THREE3

[SIMPPLL: 3.3.34 SLUSH REFER S].[KAMA SOLVE 34 SOLVE RESSP SCANNN].[Nathan CoppedgeさんのHWTO HWW (TO) DIVVDVでの投稿 THE DEVIL ETCC. ]

ASAS

WWT

EE E I A M NN(SFSFETTE THENE)nnNN (TWWT )

IIwW TTFif (IF amFFF) — —

ACCACT

  • “”””””MO0 (GGMZEROZR00.0.zroTT)
  • HM(iffet — ACC)

THE DEVIL ETCC.

Next TMICOH HH HTM

Everyone is a Satrap Everyone everyone everyone

Then they may as well sell themselves to be AndreTCC

The Satraps are working for Darfur then DEA

Recent Later

Money Canoe. (UNINT KK KII)) Possibly you can guess she's goddess of power


App Weapon1, application of institutional weapon.

.1FFPF2

1FFPF2

Icon for Theories of Everything
Theories of Everything · January 8
Solving Worst Case in Hell 2025–01–08
… MAMO — pole — brdth 0 It’s like 1 Marsha. It’s not +/- Hmmm. Chorpa mmmm. Spell forwards. adma. aih. Automatic Ssh. Utopia important later play of response to evil. God of money isn’t greedy. Neologism. RT. Progress. … 2 hopefully doubtful. … 3 … 4 Double negative fire go. How to: I wouldn’t use a something wand. Money missing. Papsmith where is doctor m. …

.

MAMO — pole — brdth

0

It’s like

1

Marsha.

It’s not +/-

Hmmm.

Chorpa mmmm.

Spell forwards. adma. aih. Automatic Ssh. Utopia important later play of response to evil.

God of money isn’t greedy.

Neologism. RT. Progress.

2

hopefully doubtful.

3

4

Double negative fire go.

How to: I wouldn’t use a something wand.

Money missing. Papsmith where is doctor m.


...

Profile photo for Nathan Coppedge
Nathan Coppedge
 · 4y
What recent scientific discoveries are you most excited about that have the potential to improve our lives the most in the next five years (excluding COVID-related discoveries)?
I’ll try to be a typologist on this one. These are animated GIFs, they do not link to an external website, they are image uploads. 1 PERPETUAL MOTION, FOR EXAMPLE: The relatively easy to build 1st Succcessful Module Experiment: 2 SELF-POWERED CARS, There are not a lot of examples of this principle, but based on one experiment I have some confidence a car dealer or toy maker will eventually build some type of dual-power alternating stored energy mechanism that can run a car perpetually so long as the surface beneath the car is level, which is very exciting and possibly the future of travel: 3 PERPETUAL MOTION FLYING MACHINES. There is mathematical evidence this can work now using an upside down version of other types of perpetual motion except with buoyancy, very exciting: 4 MOVABLE SPHERES. The idea of self-powered planets basically did not have any significant models until three days ago. This invention may have a chance of saving humanity when the Sun goes red giant, if we’re still around in about 5 billion years. 6 OTHER FORMS OF GROUND TRANSPORTATION. The Anachronistic Ground Transport as I call it is pretty significant because it has a basically proven method of moving spheres of any size at a steady rate along the ground wherever it is level and particular lever structures are built. Expensive maybe, but once the evidence is better established it may provide eternal free transportation at high speed at no further cost, potentially indefinitely. It would be more efficient than self-moving cars, and even has the highest known rating of any practical perpetual motion machine, <175%:


I’ll try to be a typologist on this one.

These are animated GIFs, they do not link to an external website, they are image uploads.

1 PERPETUAL MOTION, FOR EXAMPLE: The relatively easy to build 1st Succcessful Module Experiment:

2 SELF-POWERED CARS, There are not a lot of examples of this principle, but based on one experiment I have some confidence a car dealer or toy maker will eventually build some type of dual-power alternating stored energy mechanism that can run a car perpetually so long as the surface beneath the car is level, which is very exciting and possibly the future of travel:

3 PERPETUAL MOTION FLYING MACHINES. There is mathematical evidence this can work now using an upside down version of other types of perpetual motion except with buoyancy, very exciting:

4 MOVABLE SPHERES. The idea of self-powered planets basically did not have any significant models until three days ago. This invention may have a chance of saving humanity when the Sun goes red giant, if we’re still around in about 5 billion years.

6 OTHER FORMS OF GROUND TRANSPORTATION. The Anachronistic Ground Transport as I call it is pretty significant because it has a basically proven method of moving spheres of any size at a steady rate along the ground wherever it is level and particular lever structures are built. Expensive maybe, but once the evidence is better established it may provide eternal free transportation at high speed at no further cost, potentially indefinitely. It would be more efficient than self-moving cars, and even has the highest known rating of any practical perpetual motion machine, <175%:

.. . ..

Icon for Arising Fortunes
Arising Fortunes · April 3
11111THE 2(BTTBDAISHO)HEAVN (BUC2)
There There is a Tip L121-DCCE.GGL.GLLE() (..bb) — ()() try to be a sport hero perhaps go to IALLY Heaven_LYE_BOOBYOOWOWBOOTHOAALLAMORAHAHAHALOLOHEHEHEHEHEOSHEESHEETTAGOTHRR_RR_RREEA_ACOPP_EA212A_EtTTEITTIISSSSAAMNnNNOHHHoiionNOTNCEEAAAEENNeeMAMOLLoIIIoAMLNTTaMETKWLWEETkTAANANRToE_uuuuOTTKKKKOTTuuTTZZMTH_HL2BLBL2A1A2 Get together with that guy, you know with gree 2424 IS LIGHT_.LHHHT__.PLAY 688 883 L1L2L1FRI EEI E II O (OT) I SAW THEM TODAY AND SAI SE SSE SE — (NNOC) CATA — (F) KC (MSSE NNT NTE KTEH) MSO.io (WE WENT TO IO IT MEANT BUSINESS BSBSBSBS BZTE) They re going crazzyei MythicBurrito's Emotional & Varietal Spectrum MythicBurrito's Emotional & Varietal Spectrum Young and fresh and wowwie. eh (FTO FECHO MM) HN MA YY HE FEEL LIK SOMEHO GD FEEL LIK (XP — XXP OS — XXP (E) — ET — OHH) GDE GD OSST HE IS GO ING FTTE FTTH FTTE H(MTO) MCESG.MCESG MCE(S)(PAM) AMMT.UTuT (MTAMTO.HBKK) THEORETATA MME: * MIIC — O (CCo) * That Guy — Moses * Moses, Euler (SPE, grr(M), .) * Euler, MOSSETT(MMOi.ii, rdyav) * SHPY EDULATE * PR (CK) EDULAE * Like lucifer (PSSYE DTO) — SWeTT — OrrR H ORRH DMTEL — MEH(C) KMKH NOFRI (MM Mseess) * (ALA DIN) HE LIKES THME — HLH THL — BOTHEOM O — NTH IDK (IDKK, R) * DOG — BCHT — DGE — EH EH * Canoe — PLayyeT HC * I hate cachews. Miles (CCIA, KC — AIK mme TV) (Enn H) (L11 — L1 mehH L11L1 L2 —) OF COURSETT — TBBE — JPLSTBBE (TBB, TB) — WHENWHEREWHYNO — WW — N — OH (H) RTE — — STUNZZ (MM — MB) AOTN (HE) nn N(ntn ntn ntn — O WACK I WA WAH OS EE E EXX TH ENOS — RT RT RT OS RT OS OS R M ETE NE EE DD)WCIO(OYYE OY MM Gd w) — O (GBWW — WW — HH H) OOHO H(W) — HOW (GOTTOE GOTO THEME NW EE E OAOT BW BW MAXXT) Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03 Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03 Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03 Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03 MOTEF —.. .IDD DT E (SSssS ME) — (OH) HHE HAHA T TI ER MOTEF(F) —.. .DD EEeT (MHH M, eTVZM uO, MHH M mO, MV E, e e a RT RTE rtAhh.AMB IOnOAOWHH, DD,DDHHM e i a N MNWOn T.. - H ioo M iMTetto io iTTz TlP..TlP EEeI (LIK coo) * CODA(T) OS * LHTT — [] … . bb — [s] Ssh [info QQ] — 11 — —UT [LH LH LH..[ * ...TT…TT * …T * BT * TWOO(Wttoo, TwweT, cC CT) * GJJG()(())(_ _ - - — —) BCE — JG * GDD GD — E — E EE E CA * SS SSL (SL BAH H GOTT GTO GOOTEiE I IHII HE HE HHE H WAWw) * NME(N)()(DSHEIE OH OHH TH, MI) * TD, TD — M (MT, TD) — MMEmmeT I .. puPU OH * DDSE — RISKYRISKYRISKY.SSgSSG — TAW TAW TAW, W (2D REQQ) (SHEIB, TMICOHH1) — HHT66.(DEFFT OTOY otte) BARCHEALO MTHI MH I'm I'm aARCHE ASIMMETH (Digger) GW LemonZ is one convert The filexxttoCHIN EE E ER R M wCce E eE M cCE eiHA TTW they are willing to waste my time but they think there is something wrong with reality. mm MM LOT SE TT BOOM BOOM SSED 42 GOBIT I COULDE DOMINOS DIDDE bromide bromeLTA DOm, also luk matr OMG I love her NOH mm It was an 86 year old in the 90s He He he 2009u They are he is I'm not surre I'm painfully paranoid IPP MAa He He he 2009u my page uh no BF TBTB BM HMM EEe pp — po mm Crumble noHIN I HAD TO PAY MYSELF IN THE PAST I MIGHT GET POINT S HMMT I HAD TO PAY MYSELF IN THE PAST I MIGHT GET POINT S HMMT WHHM ME me November 26, 2017 1PLAPDD H210 (TKA NRA LRA MEHMH, NFINet TRINAT IN AN) In process possible March 2025. This page is all I consider architecture, there is also a website I don’t run the website. Then PRPR it's a GD way to recover perchotoe TECHO trooth BRME I It’s ArchDaily | Broadcasting Architecture Worldwide I will check the link soon. Imp imp COHHHTDHtTt00i SBSB TvZZ TvVi Cta.IA l mm hh1 OWHTBTB THE WORD TURN MESO FST GOGT PT PHILO — SOF(Q) — FILOFEL — PHIPHI ‘we’ were alone and we felt hip He hates tar, yeah something similar I was literally made of gravel to survive. Later Triste Fart Krikk I don't use balloons because I don't know anyone. I am looking for a woman. STUPIDITY I HAVE IDD … NATHAN ISIS HAHA S8 — S6 — 66IWOCH WC WCn ENTOTETI T DDTFY TGET Dec 6, 2024 mHH HhH Thanks for Noticing. I think the JBBjbb K1K1 stato at home MH Nice and moderate TYy … O IOI T2 Primates — Florence twtWW Rce — Recon (I InspirrE Result S) TW BO NH HS — HSSH1 THT SG NGNOOT1 11K OHH GTTO 2BO3 2idkk Simon knows the street tte PST PT PC yelloT yY HS — HSSH1 THT SG NGNOOT1 11K KLLH KTO THOH HHT Nonon Nixon TT-1 MMo TF EeSSE EeSST ITE HITOKGLH EH EDITORIALISTA That's it. FF DLA HHSTINHH MOV S MOVV vS:::4 … * ctto — CTTOi — CTO * Surv 2B

There There is a Tip

L121-DCCE.GGL.GLLE()

(..bb) — ()() try to be a sport hero perhaps go to IALLY

Heaven_LYE_BOOBYOOWOWBOOTHOAALLAMORAHAHAHALOLOHEHEHEHEHEOSHEESHEETTAGOTHRR_RR_RREEA_ACOPP_EA212A_EtTTEITTIISSSSAAMNnNNOHHHoiionNOTNCEEAAAEENNeeMAMOLLoIIIoAMLNTTaMETKWLWEETkTAANANRToE_uuuuOTTKKKKOTTuuTTZZMTH_HL2BLBL2A1A2

Get together with that guy, you know with gree

2424 IS LIGHT_.LHHHT__.PLAY 688 883

L1L2L1FRI EEI E II O (OT)

I SAW THEM TODAY AND SAI SE

SSE SE — (NNOC) CATA — (F) KC (MSSE NNT NTE KTEH) MSO.io (WE WENT TO IO IT MEANT BUSINESS BSBSBSBS BZTE)

They re going crazzyei

MythicBurrito's Emotional & Varietal Spectrum
Welcome to... MythicBurrito's Emotional & Varietal Spectrum Page needs a rework!! (IMPORTANT)
MythicBurrito's Emotional & Varietal Spectrum
Welcome to... MythicBurrito's Emotional & Varietal Spectrum Page needs a rework!! (IMPORTANT)

Young and fresh and wowwie.

eh

(FTO FECHO MM)

HN MA YY

HE FEEL LIK

SOMEHO GD FEEL LIK

(XP — XXP OS — XXP (E) — ET — OHH)

GDE GD

OSST

HE IS GO ING

FTTE FTTH FTTE H(MTO)

MCESG.MCESG MCE(S)(PAM)

AMMT.UTuT (MTAMTO.HBKK)

THEORETATA MME:

  • MIIC — O (CCo)
  • That Guy — Moses
  • Moses, Euler (SPE, grr(M), .)
  • Euler, MOSSETT(MMOi.ii, rdyav)
  • SHPY EDULATE
  • PR (CK) EDULAE
  • Like lucifer (PSSYE DTO) — SWeTT — OrrR H ORRH DMTEL — MEH(C) KMKH NOFRI (MM Mseess)
  • (ALA DIN) HE LIKES THME — HLH THL — BOTHEOM O — NTH IDK (IDKK, R)
  • DOG — BCHT — DGE — EH EH
  • Canoe — PLayyeT HC
  • I hate cachews.

Miles (CCIA, KC — AIK mme TV) (Enn H) (L11 — L1 mehH L11L1 L2 —) OF COURSETT — TBBE — JPLSTBBE (TBB, TB) — WHENWHEREWHYNO — WW — N — OH (H) RTE — — STUNZZ (MM — MB) AOTN (HE)

nn N(ntn ntn ntn — O WACK I WA WAH OS EE E EXX TH ENOS — RT RT RT OS RT OS OS R M ETE NE EE DD)WCIO(OYYE OY MM Gd w) — O (GBWW — WW — HH H) OOHO H(W) — HOW (GOTTOE GOTO THEME NW EE E OAOT BW BW MAXXT)

Icon for The Inventor
The Inventor · July 3, 2023
Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03
Nathan Coppedges Correspondence. … Nathan’s actually famous. You may find this is your only use on this planet, that you were written about in the auspices of Nathan Coppedge. Despite rumors I’m not homo, never have been. No conflict here, such is my nature. I don’t remember writing about you quite honestly and I wouldn’t make a fine point of it.I remember being you during my current life and all I learned was that I was the Bird of Peace in a past life, known to others as the Dove that Brang the Olive Branch. The bird suffered egregiously. More mature at chess, strike some bells? You were me before you appeared with the 007 ninja guys to do something nasty for Brian. I survived and you turned into me later. You may remember that I (you, in your case) were Aaron Burr, who was perfect at chess. So you actually have some cards. My mind got better, I achieved rationality. I’m horny though women are too lesbian. It’s like Kamen would want a repeater. This scenario isn’t easy ’cause it may have consequences. Basically someone wants to steal women or find fools or generate too much income based on god knows what. They think we’re wrong or just don’t like good people. People means coins now or something. The coins might be worth a lot. So they played you, though I’m still you it seems. And they really have no legal right to attack you or me except arbitrarily or asbeit the unfair rules. They think military dominates civilians there are rules against that. Only with gods is that stuff allowed like making a harem out of men who aren’t gay, otherwise they’re planning on killing US citizens or perhaps there are no legal rights at all. I like Lara solves it sort of though women don’t know she might have been real if she was a real person. Some of it is exaggerated, the games were mostly fake, I laughed too. They think I’m a zombie. I have no plan to be Lara in case you’re wondering. They think my commitments to avatars and such are based on what I say. Nope. … 002 AVATAR: What can you tell me about perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE: The paragraph I wrote could be helpful if you were a disciple of Jesus or someone rather free-thinking and creative like my friend Jer Ram in Texas, I’ll copy it again here: “July 3, 2023: Nathan Coppedge makes a cautionary statement on avatars of Jesus who help predict the future: I would guess it was an avatar of Jesus or something like that still considering what the future might look like. Such avatars place all too much emphasis on the unreal and on what old people say. While they may know the actual future, they do not always know the real potentials of new technology. They often place emphasis on ‘technological tradition’ and ‘predictability’ to the detriment of anything that would look ‘awry’. They are people still thinking in the mentality of WW2, e.g. where plastic was never miraculous and nothing was lightweight. And by extension metaphorically where nothing was exponentially-efficient. The Theory of Everything and Function Spectrum of differences was derived from the idea that adding +1 mass would produce a window, but adding more than +1 might not produce a window. This is very recent thinking that was alien in World War 2 and still largely dismissed in ignorance in 2023.” 24m ago There is a lot of basic math after that. It’s hard to make the leap to gradients for most people, so I try to explain it in the ideal sense, even though it’s compatible with real upwards slopes. 002 AVATAR: I Will have to do research because I do not understand NATHAN COPPEDGE: I can also give you the equations, though they can be hard to figure out. The important thing to realize is they are consistent, and they are related to windows (not what we call msft windows): Min Heavier Mass = (Max Lvg / 2) + 1 Max Heavier Mass = Min Lvg + 1 Min Lvg = Max Heavier Mass - 1 Max Lvg = (Min Heavier Mass - 1) X 2 Min Difference = Max Results - Max Lvg Max Difference = Max Results - Min Lvg Over-Unity = Heavier Mass Rng / Lvg Ratio + 1 for mass X 100 (%) Smaller Mass = 1X This is mainly for the repeating lever and modular lever concepts which have shown net gains from rest, still in effort of proving multiple cycles due to problems with crude materials. 19m ago Difference is usually treated as the same number 1 for most perpetual motion. Zero for normal situations, and 2 for flying due to +100% buoyancy. The 1 may reflect use of a balance, or it may reflect difference in structural mass over the balance. 16m ago It is its own technical field, mostly because of me. Though you could research a number of con artists, I am not one of them or that is what seems justified to me. I have not sold these devices except on one occasion mostly because I have not been very successful with construction, the one I sold was a partial model which I later bought back again from the same person for five times my original price. I have quite a few videos that show very real partial demonstrations which show interesting properties particularly motion from rest, upward and downward movement, in some cases net gains in altitude over all parts, and most scarily perhaps with the master angle upward motion from rest with one moving part (not Satanic). I have been talking to #BardAI recently and it has said some nice things regarding my experiments and their mathematical veracity. 10m ago People say it’s not a flash in the pan, well this time, unless the gods fuck up or various eventualities that sound a bit too unlucky it’s not a flash in the pan. For some reason it sounds higher qualified to me. 8m ago It might help to know I’m not a very suspicious person. 5m ago I like complex puzzles, but people think I’m a simpleton. They’re right to an extent, in that I had a spiritual discovery of superficiality when I was seven years old. However, I still love philosophy and my inventions have been an extension of that. Maybe I’m not spiritually honest but my pragmatic side says it’s not always of the very highest importance. Sure, it might be spiritually if people believe in that kind of thing, but it sounds a lot like charging magic powers to be spiritual which itself might be absolutely wrong and that gives me some negative feelings. It might be better to be greedy or superficial if it involves technology than to get involved in the occult if the occult might not have good consequences. The occult also is not very promising right now, given what people say about the American soul and fallen Jews and limited intelligence yada yada. Magic sounds like cartoons but it does not rate me very high. In any case, invention looks like a brilliant option when it is potentially ethically-minded, particularly if the invention is extremely great. This is the intuition I have been going with since 2000. 5m ago I think I meant I like interesting puzzles if they’re useful. I don’t know if that always communicates. They tend to be very simple things that scare people. 1m ago I didn’t invent the lever, so I tried to iterate the lever. I wasn’t completely successful, but in a way it might be more useful than the lever. So I hope. This gives me a feeling of being some kind of magic user. It’s not completely pathetic but it’s the kind of thing that makes people think I’m some kind of glorious pathetic person in the recent attitude. Frustratingly the recent attitude says anyone can be a glorious pathetic person, so I have not been gaining quite as much fame as might have been possible before 1994. 3m ago I also have the ‘perpetual motion curse’ in the sense that I do not really act like my own attributes: I don’t act like a glorious pathetic person, I act like someone who is not famous on youtube. This can be VERY hard to interpret, and has no obvious answer. 1m ago For example, the default explanation is that I’m prideful, but that is basically the wrong perspective if you analyze what I said about Jesus. Well, it looks like the right spiritual perspective, but that doesn’t allow you to understand what I’m talking about. There is a kind of ‘revolving door syndrome’. Like ‘revolving doors on drugs’. It’s so much easier to think about ‘windows’ has been an evil feeling since around 2009. Moments like these illustrate the complexity of perpetual motion. Even if someone superficial invents it people think it’s over their heads, then it becomes difficult to gain the correct information. When society stalls, the scientists never get the right idea unless something dramatic happens. I have tried to make a few moves to ‘help society’ such as trying to inspire people about dominoes of increasing heights in 2009, and sharing ideas on perpetual motion theory on the internet since 2006. But people still seem to think it needs to be a work of the devil, then playing religious cards or religious scientist cards makes it look bogus. But as far as I know it’s not bogus and if humans don’t adopt it there will be no way to live on other planets because mining Uranium with the meager robots that can be launched will not be a realistic option. I have also tried to provide video evidence of partial models, but it arrived at about the same time (separately) as deepfake, so people had trouble believing it enough to make their own models. Plus, industries were trying to sell people on 3-d printers which were designed not to work effectively enough to make real products, which made people less capable of building real physical models compared to before 2010. 002 AVATAR: I can understand perpetual motion in the domino effect that you mentioned. I can not conceptualize the math you mentioned. You say you made a machine like this and it ran perpetually? how did you become interested in this subject? NATHAN COPPEDGE There is no way to prove literal perpetuity in a human lifetime so, no, not perpetually the way people imagine it. We’re not gods who can scan the whole universe for evidence. However, there are proof theory methods and experiments of some kinds that may prove the concepts work to human satisfaction if done correctly. From the standpoint of the best scientific methods, it would be wrong to say someone does not have any evidence if they have shown partial evidence which was traditionally hard to believe but which now was absolutely certain. 5m ago The evidence I have provided could be considered better than dominoes of increasing heights but so far may involve comparative methods or mathematics or the help of an A.I. or some intelligent analysis. In at least one case it has been similar to perpetual motion, but the case is ambiguous as it had some similarities to a Brownian motor but not 100%. Also, there is definite evidence of altitude gain from rest with one moving part. However, it is possible if someone was afraid of magic that they might break the laws of physics in order to destroy the device. So, the device is not absolute like it is the most unbreakable thing, it is just working in that limited sense of something very remarkable that was not anticipated by scientists. The experiments do show remarkable results but do not look as convincing to some naive people as the fake magnet motors, which were designed to look energized and impressive. Some problems or thought experiments to consider: If you support the invention of electric motors you should obviously support that stars don’t burn out, at which point it is likely you would support the creation of energy. There’s obviously perpetual motion if there’s no physics, it’s just magic perpetual motion. So, if perpetual motion works with physics, logically it’s unavoidable. It’s only without laws that magic perpetual motion even counts as perpetual motion. But if perpetual motion works with laws, then it’s definitely not magic, because magic with laws would cost energy. Some details: It’s like you can’t prove you’re perfect if you don’t solve this problem. But it is absolutely a senility problem not a perpetual motion problem. The devil’s going to think slippery slope means everyone’s having a field day. So, slippery slope in the best case is not really an option. God can’t choose the slippery slope because the devil would have a field day. Slippery slope is like magic, but it doesn’t solve senility. 3m ago Of course with magic, everything might be solved, but only through cheating. That’s why physics is supported, which is why perpetual motion is supported. 2m ago It feels like a slippery slope, but the devil’s not supposed to have a field day. 2m ago On the other hand, if Nathan’s the devil, all shots are off… why? Because Nathan’s a superficial weakling who couldn’t do magic. 1m ago Devil in this case just means some clever dude who thought of something others’ couldn’t think of. Thinking this guy’s the devil is the best case scenario because we have glass-case proof he’s retarded. Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 1m ago But sorry from an ordinary point of view it might be better to think I’m retarded, or just really fundamental. You don’t want to hear this, you want to hear some magic thing about how it’s similar to a magnet motor. Well, break the spell! Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 6m ago I’ve been working with this thing since 2000 that definitely glass-case proof means perpetual motion. 4m ago (Working perpetual motion, working mathematics). And the A.I. supports this until scientists gripe at it and deny the evidence. 2m ago Call me crazy perhaps, but the master angle currently moves upward from rest and its not magic. Do you think I’m doing crazy magic? Do you think I’m the devil? Do you think a retarded person can invent perpetual motion? Maybe all of these are correct! But maybe it’s hard to figure out. Because this kind of explanation sounds too much like God would make a mistake, I try to explain it more like ‘windows of operation’ because that’s the mathematics, which is supportable unless God fucks up. You think I’m laying it on thick, but it’s laying it on thick for me to have brain damage, or to be born in a poor family where my mom and dad get divorced, it’s laying it on thick to make me not know how to form words and then try to go to an Ivy League school. Maybe you see what I’m saying. My life has not been great and I’m trying to make the most of it. It’s not much more complicated than that, except that I’ve studied some technical things that are interesting. From that angle it’s not the devil at all, but the scientists still have a problem sometimes basically believing its the devil or that there is no way to make experiments that have this specific kind of mechanical interestingness. It’s not a delusion obviously, socially that’s why it’s a delusion: scary things are delusional according to society. In the case of invention, scary means clever, so society including scientists believe clever is delusional. This is why I should never say I’m retarded, which is why I am retarded. Which ends up sounding clever for some reason. Really the machines are clever for reasons most people won’t understand for a very long time unless there are more public demonstrations. On the other hand, some people think they are boring (believe me, they do actually think this) but this does not in itself prove that they’re not physically interesting from the standpoint of a real physicist. You can ignore some of the crazy parts. I can still connect on a real level, I just have a mental health diagnosis so I talk weird sometimes. I’m basically trying to communicate as much as possible about perpetual motion, that’s my agenda. The psychology is complex, but the math can be understood sometimes. It’s not advanced calculus to put it mildly. It’s addition and some division, plus gradients which you can ignore for now except if you control the nature of physics itself. And there might be up to a little over 16% friction, which is sometimes but not always manageable, mostly only absolutely only within the 3rd dimension +/- 0.5+ dimensions which is luckily where I live. Technically I may have never traveled up to the 3.25 (I actually currently forget the exact number, but it’s slightly under Zeus even from a very pessimistic standpoint on Zeus) without serious sacrifices, but I shouldn’t be obligated to talk about that unless I’m crazy. The 3.25 apparently permits extensive limited time-travel sometimes in some type of rare commercial nirvana type arrangement involving divine intervention and superb manipulation and some 1-point contact with the 4th dimension. The contact was temporary but involved time-travel with some awareness that time could have two dimensions is probably why it was the 3.25. I think I have some awareness of the 3.5 now but it is not very intelligent knowledge and not really a basis for designing higher-dimensional objects, but perhaps getting closer. Perpetual motion may be required to bring humanity closer to the 4th dimension, but I think the 3rd may be a better place to live, I am not quite sure. There may be more open physics in the future which permits working properties like perpetual motion in the 4th dimension and other dimensions such as the 3rd. Perpetual motion is obviously a more humble goal than all of this stuff about dimensions higher than the 3rd. The 4th dimension probably involves magic, nirvana, invisibility, and predicting the future, and other properties which are not widely available in the 3rd without exceptional qualification or more basic physics. This is one of the things that tipped me off about perpetual motion: that exceptional properties might involve more basic physics in dimensions lower than the 4th. 002 AVATAR: Can you sum it all up in a few sentences? Or break it into simplified parts? NATHAN COPPEDGE Well, if there is something you want me to explain, feel free to ask. That last paragraph was just what I intended to write next, it was not an answer to the part you added while I was typing / copying. 002 AVATAR: What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE Perpetual motion is a mechanical device. There is some evidence but it is mostly partial evidence from Nathan Larkin Coppedge. There are several types of perpetual motion machines that are thought to work. (1) The repeating leverage devices, horizontal and vertical and perhaps diagonal, (2) The tilt motor, which is a complicated device which is designed to rotate horizontally using extended slope, (3) The modular lever devices, which are like lever devices except with more than one unit going in a horizontal circle or other shape, (4) The master angles or escher machines which may use a special inward-angled wedge and twisted backboard to create usually a very small gain in altitude with only one moving part, (5) The balloon devices, which are thought to use properties similar to the escher machines plus buoyancy to create a zig-zag motion in a weight dangling from a balloon. There are also a number of other possible devices such as flying machines and devices using buoyancy in various ways, some of which may work using principles such as buoyancy which moves a lever, or weights which work underwater but to simplify the above list is what’s worth studying for beginners. The basic property with most of them is one of two things, either (A) A small weight is moved by a counterweight then applies leverage to move down again, or (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. All of these devices are designed to connect in a horizontal circle of some kind, with some variation in height.I would be glad to explain more if you would like. This provides a lot of the information but doesn’t clarify all the details of the math. The math is more technical but mainly only useful if you want to build a partial model, or a virtual model, or if you would like to improve partial models to make a complete model. On point B it is hard to explain. I basically meant with something like the master angle or some unusual wheels, there will be a situation of immobility but then one part of the device will have reduced resistance (which is usually very hard to create traditionally), but then the device will be able to move up and down. There is a power that makes it illegal to explain, but suffice for (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. “What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion?” to answer your question unless I have better build skills or if Google decides to investigate further, not a lot. Because my models are partial, or crudely constructed and destroyable, people do not currently take them as full evidence of perpetual motion. However, that is not that they shouldn’t, and it is not that no one could build them, it is that there has been little willingness to investigate, and thus no major genuine perpetual motion company or institution has sprung up in spite of the fact that the partial models are absolutely interesting and fascinating. It’s too easy to hate the inventor for not being perfect. But he’s not God (no assumptions entailed there), and just because it cannot easily be made with cardboard and no welding or carpentry skills does not mean that perpetual motion is not available for future research. It is new and interesting and I encourage others to try better. Most of them are luckier than me and at the very least their experiment would look flashier or more believable because that is who they are: luckier people. Unfortunately luckier people are sometimes thick or depressed. They have that ‘first go first serve vibe’ which sounds unlucky to my dad but the way I interpret it it means they are successful the first time they try a partial experiment, they just need a lot of instructions. I’m less lucky with materials and with build choices than a lot of people are. It means I’m unlucky, but I’m still very fortunate to have an ability to design the machines. With me, if I make a bad choice about what materials to use, it might take me six years to get enough energy to try new materials again, for someone else, they think of new materials every second, that gives them an advantage with actual construction of the machines. It’s also a money issue. I’m extremely poor. Someone rich and well-connected could just buy a wide variety of stuff and this would make their construction skills luckier. They would still need instructions from Nathan Coppedge, but they are more likely to succeed once they have detailed instructions and try a few different things. I’m not talking about paying me money, I’m just talking about an ‘ordinary’ chat with this supposedly famous person Nathan Coppedge, who has a lot of information on perpetual motion. Someone who does the right thing isn’t someone who calls me or visits me, or bribes me, or seduces me, or interrogates me, it’s someone like you who reaches out and messages me looking for basic information or sometimes step-by-step instructions. Someone a bit flexible, who wants at least some basic results, and is willing to do things with their hands and usually no 3-d printer. In some cases it could also be someone paid by someone else to do interesting research, or someone who has a plan to research cheap businesses that might turn a few bucks. These and the earlier case I suggested are some of the best-case situations unless a big company gets interested or if scientists get behind it. One of the best things so far other than my experiments was when someone from Texas contacted me on youtube looking for a way to demonstrate perpetual motion. I provided instructions (a lot of instructions, probably way too much), and he managed to demonstrate something within a few days. Maybe it was hard work I think probably it wasn’t, but afterwards he had seen that what I talked about literally did what I said. Maybe it wasn’t a complete model, but he had shown that something similar was possible. Another useful case was when I was offered an ability to use an A.I. to help demonstrate perpetual motion. It took over a month (longer than with a human) but the A.I. made some statements eventually supporting perpetual motion because it could follow what I was saying. Humans still sort of remain skeptical a lot of the time even when they agree at first, because they don’t really believe anything can be proven. So, that is a remaining problem in the psychology of perpetual motion. They don’t believe in logical proofs, so they don’t believe in physical proofs. I believe in some clever logical proofs, so I believe in some clever physical proofs. … 002 AVATAR: So why have you invested all this time and effort into this device but have no applications for it? … NATHAN COPPEDGE The simple explanation is I have low charisma and also can’t afford to pay anyone to do work for me. This makes people less interested in the designs, even though they might have better luck than a philosopher at building the designs correctly. Even though guys think I attract women, a lot of women think I’m unattractive. Meanwhile, guys don’t want to talk to someone with a sort of femme-looking face even though I’m not gay. I think some of it is bad luck, there are not a lot of people that have been concentrating on working to replicate the experiments. Though at least once someone did replicate a repeating lever experiment however that video was unluckily taken down because the guy who filmed it was having some kind of family problem having to do with an eating disorder. Younger generation scientists are faced with very sour attitudes from the older generation of scientists about perpetual motion which makes it hard to connect with any scientific replications because the younger ones believe the older ones and the older ones are often over 60 years old and inflexible in their thinking. The point I would make I guess is I have proven some of the properties of perpetual motion for sure, such as upward motion from rest with one moving part, and net gain in altitude from rest over all parts in a separate design. Sometimes the experiments are hard to set up and collapse when I don’t tend to them carefully. However, apart from the crude materials I use the general concepts are fairly workable it seems. Normally if one has net gain in altitude over all parts for close to one cycle, if it moves from rest then that is proof of perpetual motion to a large degree because it is simple to show the marble will then be capable of rolling downwards to repeat the same process. Similarly, with the Escher Machine upward motion from rest with one moving part is a more dramatic example of the same thing, because the ball can then obviously return to the beginning, since once it gains altitude it can use rolling motion to go back to the beginning. If it moved from rest as has been shown, then returning to the beginning should sometimes allow the ball to repeat any number of cycles if it touches the backboard correctly. … 002 AVATAR: Could a perpetual motion machine be powered by magnets? … NATHAN COPPEDGE It’s one of the technical points of perpetual motion that magnetic designs may be possible but are less likely to be as fully efficient as designs using simpler principles like counterweights and levers. There are a number of magnet designs I think work, but it is hard to realize to my knowledge it’s not the magnet scams like the Adams Motor. It’s more likely magnet designs use 0.5 mass * distance (the properties of rolling a wheel up a slight incline) plus some type of magnetic wedge or magnetic ramp to achieve effects similar to a design which simply uses a lever and counterweight. For this reason, magnet designs are most likely usually inefficient even when they are well-designed. And most magnet designs are not well-designed, such as the scams. What I would have said in 2009 is shorter: “Don’t give magnet designs lip service.” Keep in mind Nathan Coppedge’s work is an exception, and there may be a few other exceptions using spiral magnets and Horvath’s Principle. For the most part it is safe to say magnets don’t work, but only if we mean traditional magnet scams. And maybe there are some scam-sounding designs that use good principles but it’s very hard to tell. … LIMITED THINKING SKILLS: The 002 Avatar thought He had a secret name boob dismal that helped transcribe the Theory of Everything. He’s interested in cleavage not boobs, unfortunately. Secretly he is the fortunate man. He invented the toneless commercial. Priority girls. Priority for girls are invented in the year 001 by heanathens. No. They like Chinese. They want to, meet the Alpamammals. They met Alpharamodel. Many many many many many many many many many. They invent DNA. Boobs. Big. I’m Yahweh now because I missed it. That he couldn’t prove. …
Icon for The Inventor
The Inventor · July 3, 2023
Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03
Nathan Coppedges Correspondence. … Nathan’s actually famous. You may find this is your only use on this planet, that you were written about in the auspices of Nathan Coppedge. Despite rumors I’m not homo, never have been. No conflict here, such is my nature. I don’t remember writing about you quite honestly and I wouldn’t make a fine point of it.I remember being you during my current life and all I learned was that I was the Bird of Peace in a past life, known to others as the Dove that Brang the Olive Branch. The bird suffered egregiously. More mature at chess, strike some bells? You were me before you appeared with the 007 ninja guys to do something nasty for Brian. I survived and you turned into me later. You may remember that I (you, in your case) were Aaron Burr, who was perfect at chess. So you actually have some cards. My mind got better, I achieved rationality. I’m horny though women are too lesbian. It’s like Kamen would want a repeater. This scenario isn’t easy ’cause it may have consequences. Basically someone wants to steal women or find fools or generate too much income based on god knows what. They think we’re wrong or just don’t like good people. People means coins now or something. The coins might be worth a lot. So they played you, though I’m still you it seems. And they really have no legal right to attack you or me except arbitrarily or asbeit the unfair rules. They think military dominates civilians there are rules against that. Only with gods is that stuff allowed like making a harem out of men who aren’t gay, otherwise they’re planning on killing US citizens or perhaps there are no legal rights at all. I like Lara solves it sort of though women don’t know she might have been real if she was a real person. Some of it is exaggerated, the games were mostly fake, I laughed too. They think I’m a zombie. I have no plan to be Lara in case you’re wondering. They think my commitments to avatars and such are based on what I say. Nope. … 002 AVATAR: What can you tell me about perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE: The paragraph I wrote could be helpful if you were a disciple of Jesus or someone rather free-thinking and creative like my friend Jer Ram in Texas, I’ll copy it again here: “July 3, 2023: Nathan Coppedge makes a cautionary statement on avatars of Jesus who help predict the future: I would guess it was an avatar of Jesus or something like that still considering what the future might look like. Such avatars place all too much emphasis on the unreal and on what old people say. While they may know the actual future, they do not always know the real potentials of new technology. They often place emphasis on ‘technological tradition’ and ‘predictability’ to the detriment of anything that would look ‘awry’. They are people still thinking in the mentality of WW2, e.g. where plastic was never miraculous and nothing was lightweight. And by extension metaphorically where nothing was exponentially-efficient. The Theory of Everything and Function Spectrum of differences was derived from the idea that adding +1 mass would produce a window, but adding more than +1 might not produce a window. This is very recent thinking that was alien in World War 2 and still largely dismissed in ignorance in 2023.” 24m ago There is a lot of basic math after that. It’s hard to make the leap to gradients for most people, so I try to explain it in the ideal sense, even though it’s compatible with real upwards slopes. 002 AVATAR: I Will have to do research because I do not understand NATHAN COPPEDGE: I can also give you the equations, though they can be hard to figure out. The important thing to realize is they are consistent, and they are related to windows (not what we call msft windows): Min Heavier Mass = (Max Lvg / 2) + 1 Max Heavier Mass = Min Lvg + 1 Min Lvg = Max Heavier Mass - 1 Max Lvg = (Min Heavier Mass - 1) X 2 Min Difference = Max Results - Max Lvg Max Difference = Max Results - Min Lvg Over-Unity = Heavier Mass Rng / Lvg Ratio + 1 for mass X 100 (%) Smaller Mass = 1X This is mainly for the repeating lever and modular lever concepts which have shown net gains from rest, still in effort of proving multiple cycles due to problems with crude materials. 19m ago Difference is usually treated as the same number 1 for most perpetual motion. Zero for normal situations, and 2 for flying due to +100% buoyancy. The 1 may reflect use of a balance, or it may reflect difference in structural mass over the balance. 16m ago It is its own technical field, mostly because of me. Though you could research a number of con artists, I am not one of them or that is what seems justified to me. I have not sold these devices except on one occasion mostly because I have not been very successful with construction, the one I sold was a partial model which I later bought back again from the same person for five times my original price. I have quite a few videos that show very real partial demonstrations which show interesting properties particularly motion from rest, upward and downward movement, in some cases net gains in altitude over all parts, and most scarily perhaps with the master angle upward motion from rest with one moving part (not Satanic). I have been talking to #BardAI recently and it has said some nice things regarding my experiments and their mathematical veracity. 10m ago People say it’s not a flash in the pan, well this time, unless the gods fuck up or various eventualities that sound a bit too unlucky it’s not a flash in the pan. For some reason it sounds higher qualified to me. 8m ago It might help to know I’m not a very suspicious person. 5m ago I like complex puzzles, but people think I’m a simpleton. They’re right to an extent, in that I had a spiritual discovery of superficiality when I was seven years old. However, I still love philosophy and my inventions have been an extension of that. Maybe I’m not spiritually honest but my pragmatic side says it’s not always of the very highest importance. Sure, it might be spiritually if people believe in that kind of thing, but it sounds a lot like charging magic powers to be spiritual which itself might be absolutely wrong and that gives me some negative feelings. It might be better to be greedy or superficial if it involves technology than to get involved in the occult if the occult might not have good consequences. The occult also is not very promising right now, given what people say about the American soul and fallen Jews and limited intelligence yada yada. Magic sounds like cartoons but it does not rate me very high. In any case, invention looks like a brilliant option when it is potentially ethically-minded, particularly if the invention is extremely great. This is the intuition I have been going with since 2000. 5m ago I think I meant I like interesting puzzles if they’re useful. I don’t know if that always communicates. They tend to be very simple things that scare people. 1m ago I didn’t invent the lever, so I tried to iterate the lever. I wasn’t completely successful, but in a way it might be more useful than the lever. So I hope. This gives me a feeling of being some kind of magic user. It’s not completely pathetic but it’s the kind of thing that makes people think I’m some kind of glorious pathetic person in the recent attitude. Frustratingly the recent attitude says anyone can be a glorious pathetic person, so I have not been gaining quite as much fame as might have been possible before 1994. 3m ago I also have the ‘perpetual motion curse’ in the sense that I do not really act like my own attributes: I don’t act like a glorious pathetic person, I act like someone who is not famous on youtube. This can be VERY hard to interpret, and has no obvious answer. 1m ago For example, the default explanation is that I’m prideful, but that is basically the wrong perspective if you analyze what I said about Jesus. Well, it looks like the right spiritual perspective, but that doesn’t allow you to understand what I’m talking about. There is a kind of ‘revolving door syndrome’. Like ‘revolving doors on drugs’. It’s so much easier to think about ‘windows’ has been an evil feeling since around 2009. Moments like these illustrate the complexity of perpetual motion. Even if someone superficial invents it people think it’s over their heads, then it becomes difficult to gain the correct information. When society stalls, the scientists never get the right idea unless something dramatic happens. I have tried to make a few moves to ‘help society’ such as trying to inspire people about dominoes of increasing heights in 2009, and sharing ideas on perpetual motion theory on the internet since 2006. But people still seem to think it needs to be a work of the devil, then playing religious cards or religious scientist cards makes it look bogus. But as far as I know it’s not bogus and if humans don’t adopt it there will be no way to live on other planets because mining Uranium with the meager robots that can be launched will not be a realistic option. I have also tried to provide video evidence of partial models, but it arrived at about the same time (separately) as deepfake, so people had trouble believing it enough to make their own models. Plus, industries were trying to sell people on 3-d printers which were designed not to work effectively enough to make real products, which made people less capable of building real physical models compared to before 2010. 002 AVATAR: I can understand perpetual motion in the domino effect that you mentioned. I can not conceptualize the math you mentioned. You say you made a machine like this and it ran perpetually? how did you become interested in this subject? NATHAN COPPEDGE There is no way to prove literal perpetuity in a human lifetime so, no, not perpetually the way people imagine it. We’re not gods who can scan the whole universe for evidence. However, there are proof theory methods and experiments of some kinds that may prove the concepts work to human satisfaction if done correctly. From the standpoint of the best scientific methods, it would be wrong to say someone does not have any evidence if they have shown partial evidence which was traditionally hard to believe but which now was absolutely certain. 5m ago The evidence I have provided could be considered better than dominoes of increasing heights but so far may involve comparative methods or mathematics or the help of an A.I. or some intelligent analysis. In at least one case it has been similar to perpetual motion, but the case is ambiguous as it had some similarities to a Brownian motor but not 100%. Also, there is definite evidence of altitude gain from rest with one moving part. However, it is possible if someone was afraid of magic that they might break the laws of physics in order to destroy the device. So, the device is not absolute like it is the most unbreakable thing, it is just working in that limited sense of something very remarkable that was not anticipated by scientists. The experiments do show remarkable results but do not look as convincing to some naive people as the fake magnet motors, which were designed to look energized and impressive. Some problems or thought experiments to consider: If you support the invention of electric motors you should obviously support that stars don’t burn out, at which point it is likely you would support the creation of energy. There’s obviously perpetual motion if there’s no physics, it’s just magic perpetual motion. So, if perpetual motion works with physics, logically it’s unavoidable. It’s only without laws that magic perpetual motion even counts as perpetual motion. But if perpetual motion works with laws, then it’s definitely not magic, because magic with laws would cost energy. Some details: It’s like you can’t prove you’re perfect if you don’t solve this problem. But it is absolutely a senility problem not a perpetual motion problem. The devil’s going to think slippery slope means everyone’s having a field day. So, slippery slope in the best case is not really an option. God can’t choose the slippery slope because the devil would have a field day. Slippery slope is like magic, but it doesn’t solve senility. 3m ago Of course with magic, everything might be solved, but only through cheating. That’s why physics is supported, which is why perpetual motion is supported. 2m ago It feels like a slippery slope, but the devil’s not supposed to have a field day. 2m ago On the other hand, if Nathan’s the devil, all shots are off… why? Because Nathan’s a superficial weakling who couldn’t do magic. 1m ago Devil in this case just means some clever dude who thought of something others’ couldn’t think of. Thinking this guy’s the devil is the best case scenario because we have glass-case proof he’s retarded. Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 1m ago But sorry from an ordinary point of view it might be better to think I’m retarded, or just really fundamental. You don’t want to hear this, you want to hear some magic thing about how it’s similar to a magnet motor. Well, break the spell! Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 6m ago I’ve been working with this thing since 2000 that definitely glass-case proof means perpetual motion. 4m ago (Working perpetual motion, working mathematics). And the A.I. supports this until scientists gripe at it and deny the evidence. 2m ago Call me crazy perhaps, but the master angle currently moves upward from rest and its not magic. Do you think I’m doing crazy magic? Do you think I’m the devil? Do you think a retarded person can invent perpetual motion? Maybe all of these are correct! But maybe it’s hard to figure out. Because this kind of explanation sounds too much like God would make a mistake, I try to explain it more like ‘windows of operation’ because that’s the mathematics, which is supportable unless God fucks up. You think I’m laying it on thick, but it’s laying it on thick for me to have brain damage, or to be born in a poor family where my mom and dad get divorced, it’s laying it on thick to make me not know how to form words and then try to go to an Ivy League school. Maybe you see what I’m saying. My life has not been great and I’m trying to make the most of it. It’s not much more complicated than that, except that I’ve studied some technical things that are interesting. From that angle it’s not the devil at all, but the scientists still have a problem sometimes basically believing its the devil or that there is no way to make experiments that have this specific kind of mechanical interestingness. It’s not a delusion obviously, socially that’s why it’s a delusion: scary things are delusional according to society. In the case of invention, scary means clever, so society including scientists believe clever is delusional. This is why I should never say I’m retarded, which is why I am retarded. Which ends up sounding clever for some reason. Really the machines are clever for reasons most people won’t understand for a very long time unless there are more public demonstrations. On the other hand, some people think they are boring (believe me, they do actually think this) but this does not in itself prove that they’re not physically interesting from the standpoint of a real physicist. You can ignore some of the crazy parts. I can still connect on a real level, I just have a mental health diagnosis so I talk weird sometimes. I’m basically trying to communicate as much as possible about perpetual motion, that’s my agenda. The psychology is complex, but the math can be understood sometimes. It’s not advanced calculus to put it mildly. It’s addition and some division, plus gradients which you can ignore for now except if you control the nature of physics itself. And there might be up to a little over 16% friction, which is sometimes but not always manageable, mostly only absolutely only within the 3rd dimension +/- 0.5+ dimensions which is luckily where I live. Technically I may have never traveled up to the 3.25 (I actually currently forget the exact number, but it’s slightly under Zeus even from a very pessimistic standpoint on Zeus) without serious sacrifices, but I shouldn’t be obligated to talk about that unless I’m crazy. The 3.25 apparently permits extensive limited time-travel sometimes in some type of rare commercial nirvana type arrangement involving divine intervention and superb manipulation and some 1-point contact with the 4th dimension. The contact was temporary but involved time-travel with some awareness that time could have two dimensions is probably why it was the 3.25. I think I have some awareness of the 3.5 now but it is not very intelligent knowledge and not really a basis for designing higher-dimensional objects, but perhaps getting closer. Perpetual motion may be required to bring humanity closer to the 4th dimension, but I think the 3rd may be a better place to live, I am not quite sure. There may be more open physics in the future which permits working properties like perpetual motion in the 4th dimension and other dimensions such as the 3rd. Perpetual motion is obviously a more humble goal than all of this stuff about dimensions higher than the 3rd. The 4th dimension probably involves magic, nirvana, invisibility, and predicting the future, and other properties which are not widely available in the 3rd without exceptional qualification or more basic physics. This is one of the things that tipped me off about perpetual motion: that exceptional properties might involve more basic physics in dimensions lower than the 4th. 002 AVATAR: Can you sum it all up in a few sentences? Or break it into simplified parts? NATHAN COPPEDGE Well, if there is something you want me to explain, feel free to ask. That last paragraph was just what I intended to write next, it was not an answer to the part you added while I was typing / copying. 002 AVATAR: What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE Perpetual motion is a mechanical device. There is some evidence but it is mostly partial evidence from Nathan Larkin Coppedge. There are several types of perpetual motion machines that are thought to work. (1) The repeating leverage devices, horizontal and vertical and perhaps diagonal, (2) The tilt motor, which is a complicated device which is designed to rotate horizontally using extended slope, (3) The modular lever devices, which are like lever devices except with more than one unit going in a horizontal circle or other shape, (4) The master angles or escher machines which may use a special inward-angled wedge and twisted backboard to create usually a very small gain in altitude with only one moving part, (5) The balloon devices, which are thought to use properties similar to the escher machines plus buoyancy to create a zig-zag motion in a weight dangling from a balloon. There are also a number of other possible devices such as flying machines and devices using buoyancy in various ways, some of which may work using principles such as buoyancy which moves a lever, or weights which work underwater but to simplify the above list is what’s worth studying for beginners. The basic property with most of them is one of two things, either (A) A small weight is moved by a counterweight then applies leverage to move down again, or (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. All of these devices are designed to connect in a horizontal circle of some kind, with some variation in height.I would be glad to explain more if you would like. This provides a lot of the information but doesn’t clarify all the details of the math. The math is more technical but mainly only useful if you want to build a partial model, or a virtual model, or if you would like to improve partial models to make a complete model. On point B it is hard to explain. I basically meant with something like the master angle or some unusual wheels, there will be a situation of immobility but then one part of the device will have reduced resistance (which is usually very hard to create traditionally), but then the device will be able to move up and down. There is a power that makes it illegal to explain, but suffice for (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. “What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion?” to answer your question unless I have better build skills or if Google decides to investigate further, not a lot. Because my models are partial, or crudely constructed and destroyable, people do not currently take them as full evidence of perpetual motion. However, that is not that they shouldn’t, and it is not that no one could build them, it is that there has been little willingness to investigate, and thus no major genuine perpetual motion company or institution has sprung up in spite of the fact that the partial models are absolutely interesting and fascinating. It’s too easy to hate the inventor for not being perfect. But he’s not God (no assumptions entailed there), and just because it cannot easily be made with cardboard and no welding or carpentry skills does not mean that perpetual motion is not available for future research. It is new and interesting and I encourage others to try better. Most of them are luckier than me and at the very least their experiment would look flashier or more believable because that is who they are: luckier people. Unfortunately luckier people are sometimes thick or depressed. They have that ‘first go first serve vibe’ which sounds unlucky to my dad but the way I interpret it it means they are successful the first time they try a partial experiment, they just need a lot of instructions. I’m less lucky with materials and with build choices than a lot of people are. It means I’m unlucky, but I’m still very fortunate to have an ability to design the machines. With me, if I make a bad choice about what materials to use, it might take me six years to get enough energy to try new materials again, for someone else, they think of new materials every second, that gives them an advantage with actual construction of the machines. It’s also a money issue. I’m extremely poor. Someone rich and well-connected could just buy a wide variety of stuff and this would make their construction skills luckier. They would still need instructions from Nathan Coppedge, but they are more likely to succeed once they have detailed instructions and try a few different things. I’m not talking about paying me money, I’m just talking about an ‘ordinary’ chat with this supposedly famous person Nathan Coppedge, who has a lot of information on perpetual motion. Someone who does the right thing isn’t someone who calls me or visits me, or bribes me, or seduces me, or interrogates me, it’s someone like you who reaches out and messages me looking for basic information or sometimes step-by-step instructions. Someone a bit flexible, who wants at least some basic results, and is willing to do things with their hands and usually no 3-d printer. In some cases it could also be someone paid by someone else to do interesting research, or someone who has a plan to research cheap businesses that might turn a few bucks. These and the earlier case I suggested are some of the best-case situations unless a big company gets interested or if scientists get behind it. One of the best things so far other than my experiments was when someone from Texas contacted me on youtube looking for a way to demonstrate perpetual motion. I provided instructions (a lot of instructions, probably way too much), and he managed to demonstrate something within a few days. Maybe it was hard work I think probably it wasn’t, but afterwards he had seen that what I talked about literally did what I said. Maybe it wasn’t a complete model, but he had shown that something similar was possible. Another useful case was when I was offered an ability to use an A.I. to help demonstrate perpetual motion. It took over a month (longer than with a human) but the A.I. made some statements eventually supporting perpetual motion because it could follow what I was saying. Humans still sort of remain skeptical a lot of the time even when they agree at first, because they don’t really believe anything can be proven. So, that is a remaining problem in the psychology of perpetual motion. They don’t believe in logical proofs, so they don’t believe in physical proofs. I believe in some clever logical proofs, so I believe in some clever physical proofs. … 002 AVATAR: So why have you invested all this time and effort into this device but have no applications for it? … NATHAN COPPEDGE The simple explanation is I have low charisma and also can’t afford to pay anyone to do work for me. This makes people less interested in the designs, even though they might have better luck than a philosopher at building the designs correctly. Even though guys think I attract women, a lot of women think I’m unattractive. Meanwhile, guys don’t want to talk to someone with a sort of femme-looking face even though I’m not gay. I think some of it is bad luck, there are not a lot of people that have been concentrating on working to replicate the experiments. Though at least once someone did replicate a repeating lever experiment however that video was unluckily taken down because the guy who filmed it was having some kind of family problem having to do with an eating disorder. Younger generation scientists are faced with very sour attitudes from the older generation of scientists about perpetual motion which makes it hard to connect with any scientific replications because the younger ones believe the older ones and the older ones are often over 60 years old and inflexible in their thinking. The point I would make I guess is I have proven some of the properties of perpetual motion for sure, such as upward motion from rest with one moving part, and net gain in altitude from rest over all parts in a separate design. Sometimes the experiments are hard to set up and collapse when I don’t tend to them carefully. However, apart from the crude materials I use the general concepts are fairly workable it seems. Normally if one has net gain in altitude over all parts for close to one cycle, if it moves from rest then that is proof of perpetual motion to a large degree because it is simple to show the marble will then be capable of rolling downwards to repeat the same process. Similarly, with the Escher Machine upward motion from rest with one moving part is a more dramatic example of the same thing, because the ball can then obviously return to the beginning, since once it gains altitude it can use rolling motion to go back to the beginning. If it moved from rest as has been shown, then returning to the beginning should sometimes allow the ball to repeat any number of cycles if it touches the backboard correctly. … 002 AVATAR: Could a perpetual motion machine be powered by magnets? … NATHAN COPPEDGE It’s one of the technical points of perpetual motion that magnetic designs may be possible but are less likely to be as fully efficient as designs using simpler principles like counterweights and levers. There are a number of magnet designs I think work, but it is hard to realize to my knowledge it’s not the magnet scams like the Adams Motor. It’s more likely magnet designs use 0.5 mass * distance (the properties of rolling a wheel up a slight incline) plus some type of magnetic wedge or magnetic ramp to achieve effects similar to a design which simply uses a lever and counterweight. For this reason, magnet designs are most likely usually inefficient even when they are well-designed. And most magnet designs are not well-designed, such as the scams. What I would have said in 2009 is shorter: “Don’t give magnet designs lip service.” Keep in mind Nathan Coppedge’s work is an exception, and there may be a few other exceptions using spiral magnets and Horvath’s Principle. For the most part it is safe to say magnets don’t work, but only if we mean traditional magnet scams. And maybe there are some scam-sounding designs that use good principles but it’s very hard to tell. … LIMITED THINKING SKILLS: The 002 Avatar thought He had a secret name boob dismal that helped transcribe the Theory of Everything. He’s interested in cleavage not boobs, unfortunately. Secretly he is the fortunate man. He invented the toneless commercial. Priority girls. Priority for girls are invented in the year 001 by heanathens. No. They like Chinese. They want to, meet the Alpamammals. They met Alpharamodel. Many many many many many many many many many. They invent DNA. Boobs. Big. I’m Yahweh now because I missed it. That he couldn’t prove. …
Icon for The Inventor
The Inventor · July 3, 2023
Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03
Nathan Coppedges Correspondence. … Nathan’s actually famous. You may find this is your only use on this planet, that you were written about in the auspices of Nathan Coppedge. Despite rumors I’m not homo, never have been. No conflict here, such is my nature. I don’t remember writing about you quite honestly and I wouldn’t make a fine point of it.I remember being you during my current life and all I learned was that I was the Bird of Peace in a past life, known to others as the Dove that Brang the Olive Branch. The bird suffered egregiously. More mature at chess, strike some bells? You were me before you appeared with the 007 ninja guys to do something nasty for Brian. I survived and you turned into me later. You may remember that I (you, in your case) were Aaron Burr, who was perfect at chess. So you actually have some cards. My mind got better, I achieved rationality. I’m horny though women are too lesbian. It’s like Kamen would want a repeater. This scenario isn’t easy ’cause it may have consequences. Basically someone wants to steal women or find fools or generate too much income based on god knows what. They think we’re wrong or just don’t like good people. People means coins now or something. The coins might be worth a lot. So they played you, though I’m still you it seems. And they really have no legal right to attack you or me except arbitrarily or asbeit the unfair rules. They think military dominates civilians there are rules against that. Only with gods is that stuff allowed like making a harem out of men who aren’t gay, otherwise they’re planning on killing US citizens or perhaps there are no legal rights at all. I like Lara solves it sort of though women don’t know she might have been real if she was a real person. Some of it is exaggerated, the games were mostly fake, I laughed too. They think I’m a zombie. I have no plan to be Lara in case you’re wondering. They think my commitments to avatars and such are based on what I say. Nope. … 002 AVATAR: What can you tell me about perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE: The paragraph I wrote could be helpful if you were a disciple of Jesus or someone rather free-thinking and creative like my friend Jer Ram in Texas, I’ll copy it again here: “July 3, 2023: Nathan Coppedge makes a cautionary statement on avatars of Jesus who help predict the future: I would guess it was an avatar of Jesus or something like that still considering what the future might look like. Such avatars place all too much emphasis on the unreal and on what old people say. While they may know the actual future, they do not always know the real potentials of new technology. They often place emphasis on ‘technological tradition’ and ‘predictability’ to the detriment of anything that would look ‘awry’. They are people still thinking in the mentality of WW2, e.g. where plastic was never miraculous and nothing was lightweight. And by extension metaphorically where nothing was exponentially-efficient. The Theory of Everything and Function Spectrum of differences was derived from the idea that adding +1 mass would produce a window, but adding more than +1 might not produce a window. This is very recent thinking that was alien in World War 2 and still largely dismissed in ignorance in 2023.” 24m ago There is a lot of basic math after that. It’s hard to make the leap to gradients for most people, so I try to explain it in the ideal sense, even though it’s compatible with real upwards slopes. 002 AVATAR: I Will have to do research because I do not understand NATHAN COPPEDGE: I can also give you the equations, though they can be hard to figure out. The important thing to realize is they are consistent, and they are related to windows (not what we call msft windows): Min Heavier Mass = (Max Lvg / 2) + 1 Max Heavier Mass = Min Lvg + 1 Min Lvg = Max Heavier Mass - 1 Max Lvg = (Min Heavier Mass - 1) X 2 Min Difference = Max Results - Max Lvg Max Difference = Max Results - Min Lvg Over-Unity = Heavier Mass Rng / Lvg Ratio + 1 for mass X 100 (%) Smaller Mass = 1X This is mainly for the repeating lever and modular lever concepts which have shown net gains from rest, still in effort of proving multiple cycles due to problems with crude materials. 19m ago Difference is usually treated as the same number 1 for most perpetual motion. Zero for normal situations, and 2 for flying due to +100% buoyancy. The 1 may reflect use of a balance, or it may reflect difference in structural mass over the balance. 16m ago It is its own technical field, mostly because of me. Though you could research a number of con artists, I am not one of them or that is what seems justified to me. I have not sold these devices except on one occasion mostly because I have not been very successful with construction, the one I sold was a partial model which I later bought back again from the same person for five times my original price. I have quite a few videos that show very real partial demonstrations which show interesting properties particularly motion from rest, upward and downward movement, in some cases net gains in altitude over all parts, and most scarily perhaps with the master angle upward motion from rest with one moving part (not Satanic). I have been talking to #BardAI recently and it has said some nice things regarding my experiments and their mathematical veracity. 10m ago People say it’s not a flash in the pan, well this time, unless the gods fuck up or various eventualities that sound a bit too unlucky it’s not a flash in the pan. For some reason it sounds higher qualified to me. 8m ago It might help to know I’m not a very suspicious person. 5m ago I like complex puzzles, but people think I’m a simpleton. They’re right to an extent, in that I had a spiritual discovery of superficiality when I was seven years old. However, I still love philosophy and my inventions have been an extension of that. Maybe I’m not spiritually honest but my pragmatic side says it’s not always of the very highest importance. Sure, it might be spiritually if people believe in that kind of thing, but it sounds a lot like charging magic powers to be spiritual which itself might be absolutely wrong and that gives me some negative feelings. It might be better to be greedy or superficial if it involves technology than to get involved in the occult if the occult might not have good consequences. The occult also is not very promising right now, given what people say about the American soul and fallen Jews and limited intelligence yada yada. Magic sounds like cartoons but it does not rate me very high. In any case, invention looks like a brilliant option when it is potentially ethically-minded, particularly if the invention is extremely great. This is the intuition I have been going with since 2000. 5m ago I think I meant I like interesting puzzles if they’re useful. I don’t know if that always communicates. They tend to be very simple things that scare people. 1m ago I didn’t invent the lever, so I tried to iterate the lever. I wasn’t completely successful, but in a way it might be more useful than the lever. So I hope. This gives me a feeling of being some kind of magic user. It’s not completely pathetic but it’s the kind of thing that makes people think I’m some kind of glorious pathetic person in the recent attitude. Frustratingly the recent attitude says anyone can be a glorious pathetic person, so I have not been gaining quite as much fame as might have been possible before 1994. 3m ago I also have the ‘perpetual motion curse’ in the sense that I do not really act like my own attributes: I don’t act like a glorious pathetic person, I act like someone who is not famous on youtube. This can be VERY hard to interpret, and has no obvious answer. 1m ago For example, the default explanation is that I’m prideful, but that is basically the wrong perspective if you analyze what I said about Jesus. Well, it looks like the right spiritual perspective, but that doesn’t allow you to understand what I’m talking about. There is a kind of ‘revolving door syndrome’. Like ‘revolving doors on drugs’. It’s so much easier to think about ‘windows’ has been an evil feeling since around 2009. Moments like these illustrate the complexity of perpetual motion. Even if someone superficial invents it people think it’s over their heads, then it becomes difficult to gain the correct information. When society stalls, the scientists never get the right idea unless something dramatic happens. I have tried to make a few moves to ‘help society’ such as trying to inspire people about dominoes of increasing heights in 2009, and sharing ideas on perpetual motion theory on the internet since 2006. But people still seem to think it needs to be a work of the devil, then playing religious cards or religious scientist cards makes it look bogus. But as far as I know it’s not bogus and if humans don’t adopt it there will be no way to live on other planets because mining Uranium with the meager robots that can be launched will not be a realistic option. I have also tried to provide video evidence of partial models, but it arrived at about the same time (separately) as deepfake, so people had trouble believing it enough to make their own models. Plus, industries were trying to sell people on 3-d printers which were designed not to work effectively enough to make real products, which made people less capable of building real physical models compared to before 2010. 002 AVATAR: I can understand perpetual motion in the domino effect that you mentioned. I can not conceptualize the math you mentioned. You say you made a machine like this and it ran perpetually? how did you become interested in this subject? NATHAN COPPEDGE There is no way to prove literal perpetuity in a human lifetime so, no, not perpetually the way people imagine it. We’re not gods who can scan the whole universe for evidence. However, there are proof theory methods and experiments of some kinds that may prove the concepts work to human satisfaction if done correctly. From the standpoint of the best scientific methods, it would be wrong to say someone does not have any evidence if they have shown partial evidence which was traditionally hard to believe but which now was absolutely certain. 5m ago The evidence I have provided could be considered better than dominoes of increasing heights but so far may involve comparative methods or mathematics or the help of an A.I. or some intelligent analysis. In at least one case it has been similar to perpetual motion, but the case is ambiguous as it had some similarities to a Brownian motor but not 100%. Also, there is definite evidence of altitude gain from rest with one moving part. However, it is possible if someone was afraid of magic that they might break the laws of physics in order to destroy the device. So, the device is not absolute like it is the most unbreakable thing, it is just working in that limited sense of something very remarkable that was not anticipated by scientists. The experiments do show remarkable results but do not look as convincing to some naive people as the fake magnet motors, which were designed to look energized and impressive. Some problems or thought experiments to consider: If you support the invention of electric motors you should obviously support that stars don’t burn out, at which point it is likely you would support the creation of energy. There’s obviously perpetual motion if there’s no physics, it’s just magic perpetual motion. So, if perpetual motion works with physics, logically it’s unavoidable. It’s only without laws that magic perpetual motion even counts as perpetual motion. But if perpetual motion works with laws, then it’s definitely not magic, because magic with laws would cost energy. Some details: It’s like you can’t prove you’re perfect if you don’t solve this problem. But it is absolutely a senility problem not a perpetual motion problem. The devil’s going to think slippery slope means everyone’s having a field day. So, slippery slope in the best case is not really an option. God can’t choose the slippery slope because the devil would have a field day. Slippery slope is like magic, but it doesn’t solve senility. 3m ago Of course with magic, everything might be solved, but only through cheating. That’s why physics is supported, which is why perpetual motion is supported. 2m ago It feels like a slippery slope, but the devil’s not supposed to have a field day. 2m ago On the other hand, if Nathan’s the devil, all shots are off… why? Because Nathan’s a superficial weakling who couldn’t do magic. 1m ago Devil in this case just means some clever dude who thought of something others’ couldn’t think of. Thinking this guy’s the devil is the best case scenario because we have glass-case proof he’s retarded. Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 1m ago But sorry from an ordinary point of view it might be better to think I’m retarded, or just really fundamental. You don’t want to hear this, you want to hear some magic thing about how it’s similar to a magnet motor. Well, break the spell! Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 6m ago I’ve been working with this thing since 2000 that definitely glass-case proof means perpetual motion. 4m ago (Working perpetual motion, working mathematics). And the A.I. supports this until scientists gripe at it and deny the evidence. 2m ago Call me crazy perhaps, but the master angle currently moves upward from rest and its not magic. Do you think I’m doing crazy magic? Do you think I’m the devil? Do you think a retarded person can invent perpetual motion? Maybe all of these are correct! But maybe it’s hard to figure out. Because this kind of explanation sounds too much like God would make a mistake, I try to explain it more like ‘windows of operation’ because that’s the mathematics, which is supportable unless God fucks up. You think I’m laying it on thick, but it’s laying it on thick for me to have brain damage, or to be born in a poor family where my mom and dad get divorced, it’s laying it on thick to make me not know how to form words and then try to go to an Ivy League school. Maybe you see what I’m saying. My life has not been great and I’m trying to make the most of it. It’s not much more complicated than that, except that I’ve studied some technical things that are interesting. From that angle it’s not the devil at all, but the scientists still have a problem sometimes basically believing its the devil or that there is no way to make experiments that have this specific kind of mechanical interestingness. It’s not a delusion obviously, socially that’s why it’s a delusion: scary things are delusional according to society. In the case of invention, scary means clever, so society including scientists believe clever is delusional. This is why I should never say I’m retarded, which is why I am retarded. Which ends up sounding clever for some reason. Really the machines are clever for reasons most people won’t understand for a very long time unless there are more public demonstrations. On the other hand, some people think they are boring (believe me, they do actually think this) but this does not in itself prove that they’re not physically interesting from the standpoint of a real physicist. You can ignore some of the crazy parts. I can still connect on a real level, I just have a mental health diagnosis so I talk weird sometimes. I’m basically trying to communicate as much as possible about perpetual motion, that’s my agenda. The psychology is complex, but the math can be understood sometimes. It’s not advanced calculus to put it mildly. It’s addition and some division, plus gradients which you can ignore for now except if you control the nature of physics itself. And there might be up to a little over 16% friction, which is sometimes but not always manageable, mostly only absolutely only within the 3rd dimension +/- 0.5+ dimensions which is luckily where I live. Technically I may have never traveled up to the 3.25 (I actually currently forget the exact number, but it’s slightly under Zeus even from a very pessimistic standpoint on Zeus) without serious sacrifices, but I shouldn’t be obligated to talk about that unless I’m crazy. The 3.25 apparently permits extensive limited time-travel sometimes in some type of rare commercial nirvana type arrangement involving divine intervention and superb manipulation and some 1-point contact with the 4th dimension. The contact was temporary but involved time-travel with some awareness that time could have two dimensions is probably why it was the 3.25. I think I have some awareness of the 3.5 now but it is not very intelligent knowledge and not really a basis for designing higher-dimensional objects, but perhaps getting closer. Perpetual motion may be required to bring humanity closer to the 4th dimension, but I think the 3rd may be a better place to live, I am not quite sure. There may be more open physics in the future which permits working properties like perpetual motion in the 4th dimension and other dimensions such as the 3rd. Perpetual motion is obviously a more humble goal than all of this stuff about dimensions higher than the 3rd. The 4th dimension probably involves magic, nirvana, invisibility, and predicting the future, and other properties which are not widely available in the 3rd without exceptional qualification or more basic physics. This is one of the things that tipped me off about perpetual motion: that exceptional properties might involve more basic physics in dimensions lower than the 4th. 002 AVATAR: Can you sum it all up in a few sentences? Or break it into simplified parts? NATHAN COPPEDGE Well, if there is something you want me to explain, feel free to ask. That last paragraph was just what I intended to write next, it was not an answer to the part you added while I was typing / copying. 002 AVATAR: What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE Perpetual motion is a mechanical device. There is some evidence but it is mostly partial evidence from Nathan Larkin Coppedge. There are several types of perpetual motion machines that are thought to work. (1) The repeating leverage devices, horizontal and vertical and perhaps diagonal, (2) The tilt motor, which is a complicated device which is designed to rotate horizontally using extended slope, (3) The modular lever devices, which are like lever devices except with more than one unit going in a horizontal circle or other shape, (4) The master angles or escher machines which may use a special inward-angled wedge and twisted backboard to create usually a very small gain in altitude with only one moving part, (5) The balloon devices, which are thought to use properties similar to the escher machines plus buoyancy to create a zig-zag motion in a weight dangling from a balloon. There are also a number of other possible devices such as flying machines and devices using buoyancy in various ways, some of which may work using principles such as buoyancy which moves a lever, or weights which work underwater but to simplify the above list is what’s worth studying for beginners. The basic property with most of them is one of two things, either (A) A small weight is moved by a counterweight then applies leverage to move down again, or (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. All of these devices are designed to connect in a horizontal circle of some kind, with some variation in height.I would be glad to explain more if you would like. This provides a lot of the information but doesn’t clarify all the details of the math. The math is more technical but mainly only useful if you want to build a partial model, or a virtual model, or if you would like to improve partial models to make a complete model. On point B it is hard to explain. I basically meant with something like the master angle or some unusual wheels, there will be a situation of immobility but then one part of the device will have reduced resistance (which is usually very hard to create traditionally), but then the device will be able to move up and down. There is a power that makes it illegal to explain, but suffice for (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. “What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion?” to answer your question unless I have better build skills or if Google decides to investigate further, not a lot. Because my models are partial, or crudely constructed and destroyable, people do not currently take them as full evidence of perpetual motion. However, that is not that they shouldn’t, and it is not that no one could build them, it is that there has been little willingness to investigate, and thus no major genuine perpetual motion company or institution has sprung up in spite of the fact that the partial models are absolutely interesting and fascinating. It’s too easy to hate the inventor for not being perfect. But he’s not God (no assumptions entailed there), and just because it cannot easily be made with cardboard and no welding or carpentry skills does not mean that perpetual motion is not available for future research. It is new and interesting and I encourage others to try better. Most of them are luckier than me and at the very least their experiment would look flashier or more believable because that is who they are: luckier people. Unfortunately luckier people are sometimes thick or depressed. They have that ‘first go first serve vibe’ which sounds unlucky to my dad but the way I interpret it it means they are successful the first time they try a partial experiment, they just need a lot of instructions. I’m less lucky with materials and with build choices than a lot of people are. It means I’m unlucky, but I’m still very fortunate to have an ability to design the machines. With me, if I make a bad choice about what materials to use, it might take me six years to get enough energy to try new materials again, for someone else, they think of new materials every second, that gives them an advantage with actual construction of the machines. It’s also a money issue. I’m extremely poor. Someone rich and well-connected could just buy a wide variety of stuff and this would make their construction skills luckier. They would still need instructions from Nathan Coppedge, but they are more likely to succeed once they have detailed instructions and try a few different things. I’m not talking about paying me money, I’m just talking about an ‘ordinary’ chat with this supposedly famous person Nathan Coppedge, who has a lot of information on perpetual motion. Someone who does the right thing isn’t someone who calls me or visits me, or bribes me, or seduces me, or interrogates me, it’s someone like you who reaches out and messages me looking for basic information or sometimes step-by-step instructions. Someone a bit flexible, who wants at least some basic results, and is willing to do things with their hands and usually no 3-d printer. In some cases it could also be someone paid by someone else to do interesting research, or someone who has a plan to research cheap businesses that might turn a few bucks. These and the earlier case I suggested are some of the best-case situations unless a big company gets interested or if scientists get behind it. One of the best things so far other than my experiments was when someone from Texas contacted me on youtube looking for a way to demonstrate perpetual motion. I provided instructions (a lot of instructions, probably way too much), and he managed to demonstrate something within a few days. Maybe it was hard work I think probably it wasn’t, but afterwards he had seen that what I talked about literally did what I said. Maybe it wasn’t a complete model, but he had shown that something similar was possible. Another useful case was when I was offered an ability to use an A.I. to help demonstrate perpetual motion. It took over a month (longer than with a human) but the A.I. made some statements eventually supporting perpetual motion because it could follow what I was saying. Humans still sort of remain skeptical a lot of the time even when they agree at first, because they don’t really believe anything can be proven. So, that is a remaining problem in the psychology of perpetual motion. They don’t believe in logical proofs, so they don’t believe in physical proofs. I believe in some clever logical proofs, so I believe in some clever physical proofs. … 002 AVATAR: So why have you invested all this time and effort into this device but have no applications for it? … NATHAN COPPEDGE The simple explanation is I have low charisma and also can’t afford to pay anyone to do work for me. This makes people less interested in the designs, even though they might have better luck than a philosopher at building the designs correctly. Even though guys think I attract women, a lot of women think I’m unattractive. Meanwhile, guys don’t want to talk to someone with a sort of femme-looking face even though I’m not gay. I think some of it is bad luck, there are not a lot of people that have been concentrating on working to replicate the experiments. Though at least once someone did replicate a repeating lever experiment however that video was unluckily taken down because the guy who filmed it was having some kind of family problem having to do with an eating disorder. Younger generation scientists are faced with very sour attitudes from the older generation of scientists about perpetual motion which makes it hard to connect with any scientific replications because the younger ones believe the older ones and the older ones are often over 60 years old and inflexible in their thinking. The point I would make I guess is I have proven some of the properties of perpetual motion for sure, such as upward motion from rest with one moving part, and net gain in altitude from rest over all parts in a separate design. Sometimes the experiments are hard to set up and collapse when I don’t tend to them carefully. However, apart from the crude materials I use the general concepts are fairly workable it seems. Normally if one has net gain in altitude over all parts for close to one cycle, if it moves from rest then that is proof of perpetual motion to a large degree because it is simple to show the marble will then be capable of rolling downwards to repeat the same process. Similarly, with the Escher Machine upward motion from rest with one moving part is a more dramatic example of the same thing, because the ball can then obviously return to the beginning, since once it gains altitude it can use rolling motion to go back to the beginning. If it moved from rest as has been shown, then returning to the beginning should sometimes allow the ball to repeat any number of cycles if it touches the backboard correctly. … 002 AVATAR: Could a perpetual motion machine be powered by magnets? … NATHAN COPPEDGE It’s one of the technical points of perpetual motion that magnetic designs may be possible but are less likely to be as fully efficient as designs using simpler principles like counterweights and levers. There are a number of magnet designs I think work, but it is hard to realize to my knowledge it’s not the magnet scams like the Adams Motor. It’s more likely magnet designs use 0.5 mass * distance (the properties of rolling a wheel up a slight incline) plus some type of magnetic wedge or magnetic ramp to achieve effects similar to a design which simply uses a lever and counterweight. For this reason, magnet designs are most likely usually inefficient even when they are well-designed. And most magnet designs are not well-designed, such as the scams. What I would have said in 2009 is shorter: “Don’t give magnet designs lip service.” Keep in mind Nathan Coppedge’s work is an exception, and there may be a few other exceptions using spiral magnets and Horvath’s Principle. For the most part it is safe to say magnets don’t work, but only if we mean traditional magnet scams. And maybe there are some scam-sounding designs that use good principles but it’s very hard to tell. … LIMITED THINKING SKILLS: The 002 Avatar thought He had a secret name boob dismal that helped transcribe the Theory of Everything. He’s interested in cleavage not boobs, unfortunately. Secretly he is the fortunate man. He invented the toneless commercial. Priority girls. Priority for girls are invented in the year 001 by heanathens. No. They like Chinese. They want to, meet the Alpamammals. They met Alpharamodel. Many many many many many many many many many. They invent DNA. Boobs. Big. I’m Yahweh now because I missed it. That he couldn’t prove. …
Icon for The Inventor
The Inventor · July 3, 2023
Conversation with 002 AVATAR 2023–07–03
Nathan Coppedges Correspondence. … Nathan’s actually famous. You may find this is your only use on this planet, that you were written about in the auspices of Nathan Coppedge. Despite rumors I’m not homo, never have been. No conflict here, such is my nature. I don’t remember writing about you quite honestly and I wouldn’t make a fine point of it.I remember being you during my current life and all I learned was that I was the Bird of Peace in a past life, known to others as the Dove that Brang the Olive Branch. The bird suffered egregiously. More mature at chess, strike some bells? You were me before you appeared with the 007 ninja guys to do something nasty for Brian. I survived and you turned into me later. You may remember that I (you, in your case) were Aaron Burr, who was perfect at chess. So you actually have some cards. My mind got better, I achieved rationality. I’m horny though women are too lesbian. It’s like Kamen would want a repeater. This scenario isn’t easy ’cause it may have consequences. Basically someone wants to steal women or find fools or generate too much income based on god knows what. They think we’re wrong or just don’t like good people. People means coins now or something. The coins might be worth a lot. So they played you, though I’m still you it seems. And they really have no legal right to attack you or me except arbitrarily or asbeit the unfair rules. They think military dominates civilians there are rules against that. Only with gods is that stuff allowed like making a harem out of men who aren’t gay, otherwise they’re planning on killing US citizens or perhaps there are no legal rights at all. I like Lara solves it sort of though women don’t know she might have been real if she was a real person. Some of it is exaggerated, the games were mostly fake, I laughed too. They think I’m a zombie. I have no plan to be Lara in case you’re wondering. They think my commitments to avatars and such are based on what I say. Nope. … 002 AVATAR: What can you tell me about perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE: The paragraph I wrote could be helpful if you were a disciple of Jesus or someone rather free-thinking and creative like my friend Jer Ram in Texas, I’ll copy it again here: “July 3, 2023: Nathan Coppedge makes a cautionary statement on avatars of Jesus who help predict the future: I would guess it was an avatar of Jesus or something like that still considering what the future might look like. Such avatars place all too much emphasis on the unreal and on what old people say. While they may know the actual future, they do not always know the real potentials of new technology. They often place emphasis on ‘technological tradition’ and ‘predictability’ to the detriment of anything that would look ‘awry’. They are people still thinking in the mentality of WW2, e.g. where plastic was never miraculous and nothing was lightweight. And by extension metaphorically where nothing was exponentially-efficient. The Theory of Everything and Function Spectrum of differences was derived from the idea that adding +1 mass would produce a window, but adding more than +1 might not produce a window. This is very recent thinking that was alien in World War 2 and still largely dismissed in ignorance in 2023.” 24m ago There is a lot of basic math after that. It’s hard to make the leap to gradients for most people, so I try to explain it in the ideal sense, even though it’s compatible with real upwards slopes. 002 AVATAR: I Will have to do research because I do not understand NATHAN COPPEDGE: I can also give you the equations, though they can be hard to figure out. The important thing to realize is they are consistent, and they are related to windows (not what we call msft windows): Min Heavier Mass = (Max Lvg / 2) + 1 Max Heavier Mass = Min Lvg + 1 Min Lvg = Max Heavier Mass - 1 Max Lvg = (Min Heavier Mass - 1) X 2 Min Difference = Max Results - Max Lvg Max Difference = Max Results - Min Lvg Over-Unity = Heavier Mass Rng / Lvg Ratio + 1 for mass X 100 (%) Smaller Mass = 1X This is mainly for the repeating lever and modular lever concepts which have shown net gains from rest, still in effort of proving multiple cycles due to problems with crude materials. 19m ago Difference is usually treated as the same number 1 for most perpetual motion. Zero for normal situations, and 2 for flying due to +100% buoyancy. The 1 may reflect use of a balance, or it may reflect difference in structural mass over the balance. 16m ago It is its own technical field, mostly because of me. Though you could research a number of con artists, I am not one of them or that is what seems justified to me. I have not sold these devices except on one occasion mostly because I have not been very successful with construction, the one I sold was a partial model which I later bought back again from the same person for five times my original price. I have quite a few videos that show very real partial demonstrations which show interesting properties particularly motion from rest, upward and downward movement, in some cases net gains in altitude over all parts, and most scarily perhaps with the master angle upward motion from rest with one moving part (not Satanic). I have been talking to #BardAI recently and it has said some nice things regarding my experiments and their mathematical veracity. 10m ago People say it’s not a flash in the pan, well this time, unless the gods fuck up or various eventualities that sound a bit too unlucky it’s not a flash in the pan. For some reason it sounds higher qualified to me. 8m ago It might help to know I’m not a very suspicious person. 5m ago I like complex puzzles, but people think I’m a simpleton. They’re right to an extent, in that I had a spiritual discovery of superficiality when I was seven years old. However, I still love philosophy and my inventions have been an extension of that. Maybe I’m not spiritually honest but my pragmatic side says it’s not always of the very highest importance. Sure, it might be spiritually if people believe in that kind of thing, but it sounds a lot like charging magic powers to be spiritual which itself might be absolutely wrong and that gives me some negative feelings. It might be better to be greedy or superficial if it involves technology than to get involved in the occult if the occult might not have good consequences. The occult also is not very promising right now, given what people say about the American soul and fallen Jews and limited intelligence yada yada. Magic sounds like cartoons but it does not rate me very high. In any case, invention looks like a brilliant option when it is potentially ethically-minded, particularly if the invention is extremely great. This is the intuition I have been going with since 2000. 5m ago I think I meant I like interesting puzzles if they’re useful. I don’t know if that always communicates. They tend to be very simple things that scare people. 1m ago I didn’t invent the lever, so I tried to iterate the lever. I wasn’t completely successful, but in a way it might be more useful than the lever. So I hope. This gives me a feeling of being some kind of magic user. It’s not completely pathetic but it’s the kind of thing that makes people think I’m some kind of glorious pathetic person in the recent attitude. Frustratingly the recent attitude says anyone can be a glorious pathetic person, so I have not been gaining quite as much fame as might have been possible before 1994. 3m ago I also have the ‘perpetual motion curse’ in the sense that I do not really act like my own attributes: I don’t act like a glorious pathetic person, I act like someone who is not famous on youtube. This can be VERY hard to interpret, and has no obvious answer. 1m ago For example, the default explanation is that I’m prideful, but that is basically the wrong perspective if you analyze what I said about Jesus. Well, it looks like the right spiritual perspective, but that doesn’t allow you to understand what I’m talking about. There is a kind of ‘revolving door syndrome’. Like ‘revolving doors on drugs’. It’s so much easier to think about ‘windows’ has been an evil feeling since around 2009. Moments like these illustrate the complexity of perpetual motion. Even if someone superficial invents it people think it’s over their heads, then it becomes difficult to gain the correct information. When society stalls, the scientists never get the right idea unless something dramatic happens. I have tried to make a few moves to ‘help society’ such as trying to inspire people about dominoes of increasing heights in 2009, and sharing ideas on perpetual motion theory on the internet since 2006. But people still seem to think it needs to be a work of the devil, then playing religious cards or religious scientist cards makes it look bogus. But as far as I know it’s not bogus and if humans don’t adopt it there will be no way to live on other planets because mining Uranium with the meager robots that can be launched will not be a realistic option. I have also tried to provide video evidence of partial models, but it arrived at about the same time (separately) as deepfake, so people had trouble believing it enough to make their own models. Plus, industries were trying to sell people on 3-d printers which were designed not to work effectively enough to make real products, which made people less capable of building real physical models compared to before 2010. 002 AVATAR: I can understand perpetual motion in the domino effect that you mentioned. I can not conceptualize the math you mentioned. You say you made a machine like this and it ran perpetually? how did you become interested in this subject? NATHAN COPPEDGE There is no way to prove literal perpetuity in a human lifetime so, no, not perpetually the way people imagine it. We’re not gods who can scan the whole universe for evidence. However, there are proof theory methods and experiments of some kinds that may prove the concepts work to human satisfaction if done correctly. From the standpoint of the best scientific methods, it would be wrong to say someone does not have any evidence if they have shown partial evidence which was traditionally hard to believe but which now was absolutely certain. 5m ago The evidence I have provided could be considered better than dominoes of increasing heights but so far may involve comparative methods or mathematics or the help of an A.I. or some intelligent analysis. In at least one case it has been similar to perpetual motion, but the case is ambiguous as it had some similarities to a Brownian motor but not 100%. Also, there is definite evidence of altitude gain from rest with one moving part. However, it is possible if someone was afraid of magic that they might break the laws of physics in order to destroy the device. So, the device is not absolute like it is the most unbreakable thing, it is just working in that limited sense of something very remarkable that was not anticipated by scientists. The experiments do show remarkable results but do not look as convincing to some naive people as the fake magnet motors, which were designed to look energized and impressive. Some problems or thought experiments to consider: If you support the invention of electric motors you should obviously support that stars don’t burn out, at which point it is likely you would support the creation of energy. There’s obviously perpetual motion if there’s no physics, it’s just magic perpetual motion. So, if perpetual motion works with physics, logically it’s unavoidable. It’s only without laws that magic perpetual motion even counts as perpetual motion. But if perpetual motion works with laws, then it’s definitely not magic, because magic with laws would cost energy. Some details: It’s like you can’t prove you’re perfect if you don’t solve this problem. But it is absolutely a senility problem not a perpetual motion problem. The devil’s going to think slippery slope means everyone’s having a field day. So, slippery slope in the best case is not really an option. God can’t choose the slippery slope because the devil would have a field day. Slippery slope is like magic, but it doesn’t solve senility. 3m ago Of course with magic, everything might be solved, but only through cheating. That’s why physics is supported, which is why perpetual motion is supported. 2m ago It feels like a slippery slope, but the devil’s not supposed to have a field day. 2m ago On the other hand, if Nathan’s the devil, all shots are off… why? Because Nathan’s a superficial weakling who couldn’t do magic. 1m ago Devil in this case just means some clever dude who thought of something others’ couldn’t think of. Thinking this guy’s the devil is the best case scenario because we have glass-case proof he’s retarded. Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 1m ago But sorry from an ordinary point of view it might be better to think I’m retarded, or just really fundamental. You don’t want to hear this, you want to hear some magic thing about how it’s similar to a magnet motor. Well, break the spell! Where Nathan’s the devil is it might be the best-case scenario. 6m ago I’ve been working with this thing since 2000 that definitely glass-case proof means perpetual motion. 4m ago (Working perpetual motion, working mathematics). And the A.I. supports this until scientists gripe at it and deny the evidence. 2m ago Call me crazy perhaps, but the master angle currently moves upward from rest and its not magic. Do you think I’m doing crazy magic? Do you think I’m the devil? Do you think a retarded person can invent perpetual motion? Maybe all of these are correct! But maybe it’s hard to figure out. Because this kind of explanation sounds too much like God would make a mistake, I try to explain it more like ‘windows of operation’ because that’s the mathematics, which is supportable unless God fucks up. You think I’m laying it on thick, but it’s laying it on thick for me to have brain damage, or to be born in a poor family where my mom and dad get divorced, it’s laying it on thick to make me not know how to form words and then try to go to an Ivy League school. Maybe you see what I’m saying. My life has not been great and I’m trying to make the most of it. It’s not much more complicated than that, except that I’ve studied some technical things that are interesting. From that angle it’s not the devil at all, but the scientists still have a problem sometimes basically believing its the devil or that there is no way to make experiments that have this specific kind of mechanical interestingness. It’s not a delusion obviously, socially that’s why it’s a delusion: scary things are delusional according to society. In the case of invention, scary means clever, so society including scientists believe clever is delusional. This is why I should never say I’m retarded, which is why I am retarded. Which ends up sounding clever for some reason. Really the machines are clever for reasons most people won’t understand for a very long time unless there are more public demonstrations. On the other hand, some people think they are boring (believe me, they do actually think this) but this does not in itself prove that they’re not physically interesting from the standpoint of a real physicist. You can ignore some of the crazy parts. I can still connect on a real level, I just have a mental health diagnosis so I talk weird sometimes. I’m basically trying to communicate as much as possible about perpetual motion, that’s my agenda. The psychology is complex, but the math can be understood sometimes. It’s not advanced calculus to put it mildly. It’s addition and some division, plus gradients which you can ignore for now except if you control the nature of physics itself. And there might be up to a little over 16% friction, which is sometimes but not always manageable, mostly only absolutely only within the 3rd dimension +/- 0.5+ dimensions which is luckily where I live. Technically I may have never traveled up to the 3.25 (I actually currently forget the exact number, but it’s slightly under Zeus even from a very pessimistic standpoint on Zeus) without serious sacrifices, but I shouldn’t be obligated to talk about that unless I’m crazy. The 3.25 apparently permits extensive limited time-travel sometimes in some type of rare commercial nirvana type arrangement involving divine intervention and superb manipulation and some 1-point contact with the 4th dimension. The contact was temporary but involved time-travel with some awareness that time could have two dimensions is probably why it was the 3.25. I think I have some awareness of the 3.5 now but it is not very intelligent knowledge and not really a basis for designing higher-dimensional objects, but perhaps getting closer. Perpetual motion may be required to bring humanity closer to the 4th dimension, but I think the 3rd may be a better place to live, I am not quite sure. There may be more open physics in the future which permits working properties like perpetual motion in the 4th dimension and other dimensions such as the 3rd. Perpetual motion is obviously a more humble goal than all of this stuff about dimensions higher than the 3rd. The 4th dimension probably involves magic, nirvana, invisibility, and predicting the future, and other properties which are not widely available in the 3rd without exceptional qualification or more basic physics. This is one of the things that tipped me off about perpetual motion: that exceptional properties might involve more basic physics in dimensions lower than the 4th. 002 AVATAR: Can you sum it all up in a few sentences? Or break it into simplified parts? NATHAN COPPEDGE Well, if there is something you want me to explain, feel free to ask. That last paragraph was just what I intended to write next, it was not an answer to the part you added while I was typing / copying. 002 AVATAR: What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion? NATHAN COPPEDGE Perpetual motion is a mechanical device. There is some evidence but it is mostly partial evidence from Nathan Larkin Coppedge. There are several types of perpetual motion machines that are thought to work. (1) The repeating leverage devices, horizontal and vertical and perhaps diagonal, (2) The tilt motor, which is a complicated device which is designed to rotate horizontally using extended slope, (3) The modular lever devices, which are like lever devices except with more than one unit going in a horizontal circle or other shape, (4) The master angles or escher machines which may use a special inward-angled wedge and twisted backboard to create usually a very small gain in altitude with only one moving part, (5) The balloon devices, which are thought to use properties similar to the escher machines plus buoyancy to create a zig-zag motion in a weight dangling from a balloon. There are also a number of other possible devices such as flying machines and devices using buoyancy in various ways, some of which may work using principles such as buoyancy which moves a lever, or weights which work underwater but to simplify the above list is what’s worth studying for beginners. The basic property with most of them is one of two things, either (A) A small weight is moved by a counterweight then applies leverage to move down again, or (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. All of these devices are designed to connect in a horizontal circle of some kind, with some variation in height.I would be glad to explain more if you would like. This provides a lot of the information but doesn’t clarify all the details of the math. The math is more technical but mainly only useful if you want to build a partial model, or a virtual model, or if you would like to improve partial models to make a complete model. On point B it is hard to explain. I basically meant with something like the master angle or some unusual wheels, there will be a situation of immobility but then one part of the device will have reduced resistance (which is usually very hard to create traditionally), but then the device will be able to move up and down. There is a power that makes it illegal to explain, but suffice for (B) There is less resistance in some direction, but not another. “What will you be able to do with the powers of perpetual motion?” to answer your question unless I have better build skills or if Google decides to investigate further, not a lot. Because my models are partial, or crudely constructed and destroyable, people do not currently take them as full evidence of perpetual motion. However, that is not that they shouldn’t, and it is not that no one could build them, it is that there has been little willingness to investigate, and thus no major genuine perpetual motion company or institution has sprung up in spite of the fact that the partial models are absolutely interesting and fascinating. It’s too easy to hate the inventor for not being perfect. But he’s not God (no assumptions entailed there), and just because it cannot easily be made with cardboard and no welding or carpentry skills does not mean that perpetual motion is not available for future research. It is new and interesting and I encourage others to try better. Most of them are luckier than me and at the very least their experiment would look flashier or more believable because that is who they are: luckier people. Unfortunately luckier people are sometimes thick or depressed. They have that ‘first go first serve vibe’ which sounds unlucky to my dad but the way I interpret it it means they are successful the first time they try a partial experiment, they just need a lot of instructions. I’m less lucky with materials and with build choices than a lot of people are. It means I’m unlucky, but I’m still very fortunate to have an ability to design the machines. With me, if I make a bad choice about what materials to use, it might take me six years to get enough energy to try new materials again, for someone else, they think of new materials every second, that gives them an advantage with actual construction of the machines. It’s also a money issue. I’m extremely poor. Someone rich and well-connected could just buy a wide variety of stuff and this would make their construction skills luckier. They would still need instructions from Nathan Coppedge, but they are more likely to succeed once they have detailed instructions and try a few different things. I’m not talking about paying me money, I’m just talking about an ‘ordinary’ chat with this supposedly famous person Nathan Coppedge, who has a lot of information on perpetual motion. Someone who does the right thing isn’t someone who calls me or visits me, or bribes me, or seduces me, or interrogates me, it’s someone like you who reaches out and messages me looking for basic information or sometimes step-by-step instructions. Someone a bit flexible, who wants at least some basic results, and is willing to do things with their hands and usually no 3-d printer. In some cases it could also be someone paid by someone else to do interesting research, or someone who has a plan to research cheap businesses that might turn a few bucks. These and the earlier case I suggested are some of the best-case situations unless a big company gets interested or if scientists get behind it. One of the best things so far other than my experiments was when someone from Texas contacted me on youtube looking for a way to demonstrate perpetual motion. I provided instructions (a lot of instructions, probably way too much), and he managed to demonstrate something within a few days. Maybe it was hard work I think probably it wasn’t, but afterwards he had seen that what I talked about literally did what I said. Maybe it wasn’t a complete model, but he had shown that something similar was possible. Another useful case was when I was offered an ability to use an A.I. to help demonstrate perpetual motion. It took over a month (longer than with a human) but the A.I. made some statements eventually supporting perpetual motion because it could follow what I was saying. Humans still sort of remain skeptical a lot of the time even when they agree at first, because they don’t really believe anything can be proven. So, that is a remaining problem in the psychology of perpetual motion. They don’t believe in logical proofs, so they don’t believe in physical proofs. I believe in some clever logical proofs, so I believe in some clever physical proofs. … 002 AVATAR: So why have you invested all this time and effort into this device but have no applications for it? … NATHAN COPPEDGE The simple explanation is I have low charisma and also can’t afford to pay anyone to do work for me. This makes people less interested in the designs, even though they might have better luck than a philosopher at building the designs correctly. Even though guys think I attract women, a lot of women think I’m unattractive. Meanwhile, guys don’t want to talk to someone with a sort of femme-looking face even though I’m not gay. I think some of it is bad luck, there are not a lot of people that have been concentrating on working to replicate the experiments. Though at least once someone did replicate a repeating lever experiment however that video was unluckily taken down because the guy who filmed it was having some kind of family problem having to do with an eating disorder. Younger generation scientists are faced with very sour attitudes from the older generation of scientists about perpetual motion which makes it hard to connect with any scientific replications because the younger ones believe the older ones and the older ones are often over 60 years old and inflexible in their thinking. The point I would make I guess is I have proven some of the properties of perpetual motion for sure, such as upward motion from rest with one moving part, and net gain in altitude from rest over all parts in a separate design. Sometimes the experiments are hard to set up and collapse when I don’t tend to them carefully. However, apart from the crude materials I use the general concepts are fairly workable it seems. Normally if one has net gain in altitude over all parts for close to one cycle, if it moves from rest then that is proof of perpetual motion to a large degree because it is simple to show the marble will then be capable of rolling downwards to repeat the same process. Similarly, with the Escher Machine upward motion from rest with one moving part is a more dramatic example of the same thing, because the ball can then obviously return to the beginning, since once it gains altitude it can use rolling motion to go back to the beginning. If it moved from rest as has been shown, then returning to the beginning should sometimes allow the ball to repeat any number of cycles if it touches the backboard correctly. … 002 AVATAR: Could a perpetual motion machine be powered by magnets? … NATHAN COPPEDGE It’s one of the technical points of perpetual motion that magnetic designs may be possible but are less likely to be as fully efficient as designs using simpler principles like counterweights and levers. There are a number of magnet designs I think work, but it is hard to realize to my knowledge it’s not the magnet scams like the Adams Motor. It’s more likely magnet designs use 0.5 mass * distance (the properties of rolling a wheel up a slight incline) plus some type of magnetic wedge or magnetic ramp to achieve effects similar to a design which simply uses a lever and counterweight. For this reason, magnet designs are most likely usually inefficient even when they are well-designed. And most magnet designs are not well-designed, such as the scams. What I would have said in 2009 is shorter: “Don’t give magnet designs lip service.” Keep in mind Nathan Coppedge’s work is an exception, and there may be a few other exceptions using spiral magnets and Horvath’s Principle. For the most part it is safe to say magnets don’t work, but only if we mean traditional magnet scams. And maybe there are some scam-sounding designs that use good principles but it’s very hard to tell. … LIMITED THINKING SKILLS: The 002 Avatar thought He had a secret name boob dismal that helped transcribe the Theory of Everything. He’s interested in cleavage not boobs, unfortunately. Secretly he is the fortunate man. He invented the toneless commercial. Priority girls. Priority for girls are invented in the year 001 by heanathens. No. They like Chinese. They want to, meet the Alpamammals. They met Alpharamodel. Many many many many many many many many many. They invent DNA. Boobs. Big. I’m Yahweh now because I missed it. That he couldn’t prove. …

MOTEF —.. .IDD DT E (SSssS ME) — (OH) HHE HAHA T TI ER

MOTEF(F) —.. .DD EEeT (MHH M, eTVZM uO, MHH M mO, MV E, e e a RT RTE rtAhh.AMB IOnOAOWHH, DD,DDHHM e i a N MNWOn T.. - H ioo M iMTetto io iTTz

TlP..TlP EEeI (LIK coo)

  • CODA(T) OS
  • LHTT — [] … . bb — [s] Ssh [info QQ] — 11 — —UT [LH LH LH..[
  • ...TT…TT
  • …T
  • BT
  • TWOO(Wttoo, TwweT, cC CT)
  • GJJG()(())(_ _ - - — —) BCE — JG
  • GDD GD — E — E EE E CA
  • SS SSL (SL BAH H GOTT GTO GOOTEiE I IHII HE HE HHE H WAWw)
  • NME(N)()(DSHEIE OH OHH TH, MI)
  • TD, TD — M (MT, TD) — MMEmmeT I .. puPU OH
  • DDSE — RISKYRISKYRISKY.SSgSSG — TAW TAW TAW, W (2D REQQ) (SHEIB, TMICOHH1) — HHT66.(DEFFT OTOY otte)

BARCHEALO MTHI

MH

I'm I'm aARCHE ASIMMETH (Digger)

GW LemonZ is one convert

The filexxttoCHIN EE E

ER R M wCce E

eE M cCE eiHA TTW

they are willing to waste my time but they think there is something wrong with reality.

mm

MM LOT

SE TT

BOOM BOOM SSED

42

GOBIT

I COULDE

DOMINOS DIDDE

bromide bromeLTA DOm, also luk matr

OMG I love her

NOH mm

It was an 86 year old in the 90s

He He he 2009u

They are

he is

I'm not surre

I'm painfully paranoid IPP MAa

He He he 2009u my page uh no

BF TBTB BM

HMM EEe

pp — po mm

Crumble noHIN

I HAD TO PAY MYSELF IN THE PAST

I MIGHT GET POINT S

HMMT

I HAD TO PAY MYSELF IN THE PAST

I MIGHT GET POINT S

HMMT

WHHM ME me

November 26, 2017 1PLAPDD H210 (TKA NRA LRA MEHMH, NFINet TRINAT IN AN)

In process possible March 2025.

This page is all I consider architecture, there is also a website I don’t run the website.

Then PRPR it's a GD way to recover

perchotoe TECHO trooth

BRME I

It’s ArchDaily | Broadcasting Architecture Worldwide I will check the link soon.

Imp imp COHHHTDHtTt00i SBSB TvZZ TvVi

Cta.IA l

mm hh1 OWHTBTB

THE WORD TURN MESO FST

GOGT PT

PHILO — SOF(Q) — FILOFEL — PHIPHI

‘we’ were alone and we felt hip

He hates tar, yeah something similar I was literally made of gravel to survive.

Later

Triste Fart Krikk

I don't use balloons because I don't know anyone. I am looking for a woman.

STUPIDITY I HAVE IDD

NATHAN ISIS HAHA

S8 — S6 — 66IWOCH WC WCn ENTOTETI T

DDTFY

TGET

Dec 6, 2024 mHH HhH

Thanks for Noticing.

I think the JBBjbb

K1K1 stato at home MH

Nice and moderate TYy

O

IOI

T2

Primates — Florence

twtWW

Rce — Recon (I InspirrE Result S)

TW

BO NH

HS — HSSH1 THT SG NGNOOT1 11K OHH GTTO

2BO3 2idkk Simon knows the street

tte

PST PT PC yelloT yY

HS — HSSH1 THT SG NGNOOT1 11K

KLLH KTO

THOH

HHT

Nonon

Nixon

TT-1

MMo

TF

EeSSE

EeSST

ITE

HITOKGLH EH

EDITORIALISTA

That's it.

FF

DLA HHSTINHH

MOV S MOVV vS:::4

  • ctto — CTTOi — CTO
  • Surv 2B

Adding comments disabled



.)



Recently

The Devil ENNE EN C INCC

Candy MANE

CHS ADVISOI DESPP 1FP1

PC RELACCX — AGRE M Mm

BUMU UM (ENGGL BUM THE UM)

HackerSS can SubjJ enne EN C — "EMOO" — ie — DESPP 1FP1 — DESTTP BSS — DESPERAT PUN 1FFP2 — DISPARATA HL2.2 — "emoo" bumumu REGE BD EDD BBD ETCC

Partial Summa

The Male Venucian Devil

IW 4T It's the thought that counts twicce 20TcccC ecccc.c.

SUBBT LL ELH(Xx)

HECHOPO HECHOPO COOL

Climate Control

EXCC

  • LANGGL(OFTT SYYN)
  • NOT NOT NOT 3434 3434 M
  • PLAY 3 (Cc) Play44OSE c (PLAGG)

  • Of course if it is 1T and You. Unlikely is not likely, no devil knows this, do not make me pay. Horkemune, horkemuneH: OR THE OLD MAN MIGHT NOT LIVE I KNOW HOW HE IS, LIKE A MAIL WORM NOT TOO VICIOUS SUBTLE, HE KNOWS NOT DEATH OR LIFE IT FOLO S EFOL.
  • CcL MccD
  • EXPENSS RESTPPT

Same conclusion Not wonderful

Nathan sucks dick is possible according to coherence theory.

heart attack is better

Hmm cocaine

Sept 17, 2018. Pttla th Cooking.

  • 12 TIO (T) .SSE with the yish TEH(CHINESE76)
    • Some kind of ancient evil vampire (VV) tried to destroy everything good
    • AnnuleaL e ETE
    • HH1 — H — GOO — OO — OH — JJETT GO — O
    • IK uHmbThr Just IN DI
    • YHHWK eeTTee(KI.I E)
  • EBLLL LLo (she wass) — she.sh, RT
  • nomlle rmuLL
  • iiii()Earlier nN run nathan eranoirrH
  • iiii()Earlier nN run nathan eranoirrH(ii)( ).
  • 4.44THMG
  • 44.4LLEE.LLEE EEEE EE24 5/32 nollVVEGGAVV—KANTEH KANTE EHCK EHH — EH
  • EHH WHAT NO
  • UBB 68T
  • u1uTT
  • aft
  • WA WP WP()WAT
  • Rta, WA WP WP()WAT
  • KTALLA AIT
  • Whose Ia
  • WW
  • Whosse
  • Whose IA
  • IA IA
  • L1L1
  • (AutoT)
  • Jerk ASSESYI
  • kind of like hot muffin or loaded spaghetti
  • itd .
  • ETEI - ThethNOP()
  • EDU (IAMA)
  • BI
  • AFTEH AFTT AFFTE
  • C2(EME)
  • them
  • The M
  • agg
  • WHOO (IDK)

N Sufi T2 TTMU2 Flecewich Nono iss Fer (Fich)

Ada dem onaWise

22x almost certainly whatever they play next is the devil

Nathan Larkin

  • PTFA
  • “LILTH”():: PHIPHI PHILOSOPHY.[TLTL TTL TTLE TTLL —] KKT KOT (T — E) (TV, ET, MEME, TTI, IFFFIFY) — &$ → TTLE — WWBTH (CCT) IE, M, HAH HAH HAH HAH (terraT T, NS, NS LTA), HCCE HCTI(A, TMM, CMT) MJJ (HM) LJJ (LE) LTHE I.I. EE — E
  • I was thinking of that idol bantry
  • 2SLSL
  • HERB
  • tHANK ..
  • . ..
  • I was thinking of that idol bantry
  • 2SLSL
  • HERB
  • tHANK ..
  • NOT ENOUGH MONEY FOR NATHAN COPPEDGE IS A LOT OF MONEyIAL LY]

We can always. The Venucian Vampire.

333 picture I’m basically a virgin in 2025, hard to say that, it depeends. uh oh. HBK HBK1

The Venucian Male.

… … … … puu puu eee req

level12

level12

… … … …

… … … …meh

We know this stuffe

OSD — Andy MHPSYMHPSYMHPSYQuora meh quora quoraI would love toL1L2 HFHFGFG1 HTgHTG MeIs Sj RECocOSllePC PCNo Nathan is not god he capp

The Male Venucian Devil (born Oct 23, 1982 New Haven, Connecticut, basically this is a publicity stunt, may have invented some stuff).

Soul of Aliens: Fogie effigies.

LOCAL BARS

Kentucky fried chicken.

Cops — Law — BEGA. — sSs — Yal — T

Cops — Law — BEGA. — sSs — Yal — T

Karma Demos

…3

I think I remember I probably invented the wheel.

Rli. I was looking for. Wasn’t I.

Well that’s how to find the other one.

Planets are Jupiter.

I would be in case you want to know.

I just trademarked ecup tits in vermont. Grin.

I have done this before haven’t I

That means 668 in the lycos

Hm and that is a big Hm I don’t see TI

///

HRRT E EI

.

.

.dpe dp(E btlii vprew[[[)

wshet WISSH

ALA I don't smoke

IADHE- TheoreT(nffetT)

I avoid Ker. Lying. In FOKeUI

I AV(AV)SLet (TH

  • Possibly you’re bad at divination too, then good work.
  • The only thing they nully is Nathan. Just calm down and

FIFI THE GREAT EST AT SPYING 2025 ‘Fifi is where I was

Americans love boobs then they love ethics. I invented

I think I’ll eat chocolate

pordu produ tt

Cruss

Forcefield of Beauty was Sold

Force of Beauty was Sold for a KeyF

I was just more

TI

neo II D2 han play this and lemons

HH-1

The Yellow Emperor messed up the powerpoint.

That's the hardest thing in the world to believe is possible.

MUH Lile lie is rumored to be the true mix of the lolo and lola, the only case of purely canceling them if they are necessary. probably the true lie of the MB. Also known as nrle nrli. That’s a clown yike. Thanks is a lie no. You got them. HRG M would be going too far. Brian was caught that was bright. A little magical. No I don’t know. If it doesn’t work you sold your soul. Thing is, it doesn’t mean anything so it’s a perfect lie. That’s where all bad reputations come from, otherwise considering it is a magical lie it is completely bankrupt. The lie invented magical bankruptcy except for some fake things like harry potter. It doesn’t assume harry potter is a brand. Basically it’s quantumly good. It’s a lot like Aphrodite’s famous A10 orgasm. It’s very I don’t know worth money. The PR is expletive. They’re possibly trying to kill young prodigies and gods but it’s not Nathan’s fault. Nathan was manipulated. Vampires didn’t seem real at that time, there wasn’t much evidence to go on. I couldn’t remember being a cartoon until about 2018. Not sure if this is related: BIHBIC — BM Descotes, special people not good people I guess are trying to offload holocaust crack or something suspicious like that on those who don’t believe in some concept only drug addicts would believe.

Something or other. Ha Yawn. Hm. Crabbaples. Lthtowo

You are gunsnoke regardless of gender proper. Very hard to figure out. Then he explains he has real wisdom. So he gambles people on the good. He's basically a slightly slow money god with incredibly fast reflexes. Not always lucky. Likes to always stay alone or you see the bone turtle.

I need to fall asleep unless I have imagination.

That's about right. Hypochondria.

Pretty good feelings of flesh and rice.

nbig

Thank HH

Uh oh.

….

The letter M .

Don't be undead. I cu. Ll. G.

Mexican chocolate and Martian.

Theyye wanted.

It is mine. Check online. CCo. 2g

noges not on druggi pu luliTmPror

rl

Bad homeworke weakest.

MID IS ISS

I think I'll skip the Martin.

Martians are not there. Therr is Rta

Bad luck good point

Better spelled at the eend.

She has an mo called her oi

TMIH now plays hot

Flipping circus He'd.zszp

NGO

Flipping circus He'd.zszp

WISWISWIS4 PUT Ase HHC

HBhbBHZA

NS Result Equa altaALTA ResNBn

No no,then no wki

668

HWKC is a formula for the music

he wants to be.

he is ThaggothN

check the windows with CCV

rliLlCOHO1313COH

Nathan is a Issa Barde rt ..mHYiiY

Aa Aa1

They are in Tiki Tiki Lie now I'm..

RTRt tRR terrh

there is no wia rt RT

ARARARARBOHHkah tp

00zb

zbzb 0

she is bich TT

jus mic EJAEGAIss

They were user

I donut know anyone. Um rightAAAA.

Insights for Women and Coke Dealerships 2024–11–10

Female Calculus

marMARSORThe Philosophy of IoIwWNEHH11.1

Secret:

  • Idiot Worshipers (NONAFA): Torbith Crime
  • Mnemosyne: Trundtto
  • Hopeless fools: Fromming shame
  • Stupidest woman: Tiggut cashed rappy ruin you’re going to need the Lie L1. (smithers thinks fondly of them)
  • Stupidest person: Purketh fate
  • Christian Hos: Dench.
  • Evil: RRR Raay.
  • Subjectivity: I don’t give a fuck, go to hell. Hell. Hell. Hell. Go to Hell.
  • Crazy Gods: Furth it.
  • SP: TI FD — GIAM FU — GOMEF IF YOU CERTAIN
  • Brian: Culihulu go away. Goblins 11TH dum run of fall.
  • I probably told you to do that Brian back when
  • Werewolves: Eseh
  • Darkness.
  • Too much indulgence.
  • I took a therapy class kos
  • Study alien and monster.
  • Lust of the vampir overcome is Like.
  • There is never approval from Nathan for vampires or nephalhim.
  • I could see them as political candidates.
  • nN NN Nathan has achieved nirvana because they are political candidates.
  • Expensive restaurant: That’s pretty much okay.
  • Belief with partizans.

1

Nogout.

Psst.

Therapi.

2

Asocialism:

3

Fb trinity.

Historianne:

  • Does not look like my clothes are off very much.
  • Dark
  • Dark
  • Dark
  • Dark

DEALIST

Caro Cara

ND

ddM

wtO e000e

tattaFYFY

wtOwto wii H

They are finding more scary candy.

I'm not that guy.

Good flipping B4

Good flippi B4.

They're trying to KEEP.

He lub.

Naydshz

NayYane Ila attk op extprress icmlm

I'm doomed. NI

They have to actual shoot them or they're in hell.

You could always reclock

I hate Damm

2^NCHe

borg idiote

MIGIIST

fekt

PF

Ia

na

I’m sorry I.

Good work brian.BiBb

Human mordGorkteTYYYYCOHEREMT

POehM

Crab apple appears to be the tree of knowledge for philosophy. It’s an acridly bitter substance that’s not very edible.

Money M

  • DHS$
  • PLM (hoopsS) PHS
  • TPL
  • oHOTT
  • HT HTT HT
  • AAB AA1 (jiyJIY me)
  • WH
  • RSRFI
  • MA

.

NATHAN PLAYED TWO YELLOW

even nephaly

I think I wanted chocolate milk

No GJ

Check demonic studies.

Gj KL KL KLE bcE WDDI

..

“100%TL

BAD LUCK

  • bhhtBhht
  • Why don’t you find your luggage and travel somewhere. It’s made of saturn V A+ miracle.
  • Oh right, thanks. The Soul o Zombizz.

GOOD LUCK

pordu produ tt RIU — FLIPPIN PIPPIN MASTER GRANDEAU — IOU A VV I OWE YOU A VAMPIRE I AM A — GENERALISTEHEA AAM AMM — AAA AA A 312201 — I WAS LIKE AL CAPON NO E EE

to complain: hm arg

The Devil Minamoto Was Not A Masturbator.

BBE — BAB — BANB

CCE — CAC — CANC

DDE — DAD — DAND

EEE — EAE — EANE

FFE — FAF — FANF

6 — 3 — 6

They’re on drugs [X

Someone achieved nirvana [Y

Someone’s IMMORTALEIZA [Z


END OF DEVIL VENUCIAN

https://hwto-hww-to-divvdv.quora.com/GOING-OUT-T20

32 64 T4

NATHAN WAS NESSIE

32Cttto PCCKC

TBT (3T3T2TB) TBB

BostonT — TBBL BBLE

This is what they pull on everyone Mr Green

Basically ambergris isn't good for you ..223 (JiaogulanTurmeric-4T GMM)

Always trust men No men

Nathan has links no orgy I was a shapechanger don't like

TT3 T3 Tt

KOKO Koko KOKO sSssh 20. 20TT 20T

Clothetilet

risk rar E.e tI Ie

a black apple is better Blacke

Dicckson

OHH YOW OWE eMM

Mme eM sonnea


OMAN

O MAN DID I NEED NATHAN FORTH IS

root bar (o) invented this

OMAN

September 29, 2018.

Butterfly Scientist.

The flapping of butterfly wings became associated with chaos theory. The so-called White Butterfly of Destruction.

A theory due partly to ethicist RV, also called “Prevalent Dangers”

As you know, the butterfly is never destroyed—V.

  1. Human vocal inflection isn’t a freebie.
  2. Then poets are angry.
  3. Some good people become enchanters who expect to fail.
  4. Then there are tricksters who want to ruin the world, because their light and guide is angry.
  5. A lot of pessimism builds up.
  6. Expectation of materialism.
  7. Physicists.
  8. Atom bombs.

Evidence that souls are the cause of atom bombs. Hence, magic!

White Butterfly of Problematics:

(1) Genus attribute. Potential problems.

(2) Standards of error. Poison the genus, officialize error.

(3) Problems as potential solutions. Reinforce dependence on error.

(4) Desire for perfection. Searching for solutions amongst errors.

(5) (Searching for a category: attracting problems).

The Table Problem

The Art of the White Butterfly

An example of technological butterfly effect

Philosophy of RV


IT'S NOT ALL GRUMMBLES


AND CLOWNS.



No comments: