Howard Johnson Replication Tube Claim

[TinselKoala]

@Yucca: Exactly. But I went ahead and took the seals and grease out of mine, it works even better that way.

EDIT to add This system is kind of quiet and noisy at the same time. The motor and drive components can be very quiet; the controller may emit a high-pitched soft whine; the ball cage in the bearing can be heard spinning, until the inner (motor-driven) race and the outer (wheel ) race equalize speed. An audio spectrographic analysis of the soundtracks might reveal some power in characteristic freq. bands that could reveal this kind of drive mechanism.

[joe_1001101]

Haha, he´s a cheeky prankster, bravo to a damn fine show I say!

If that is the case, maybe he did it for us all, in a good way (except for the replicators that have spent $$$).  Maybe this will end up being a lesson to Sterling and everyone, that shows how important it really is to have verifiable replications before things go to far, and a lesson to not put any trust in youtube video's for proof.

That's one angle anyway


The video analysis seems to be the way to finally prove this!

Joe

EDIT,  I know I just said we shouldn't use youtube video's for proof, and also that the video analysis is a way to prove this.  I'm sure everyone understands what I mean 

[dixiepnum]

@clanzer
@mylow
@queue
@replicators
@alfparts

please read justalabrat/empireofmotion before you proceed any further....

otherwise you will never get this machine to work

component weights*spin quality*degree of magnetism across magnets will dictate success

you're going to go through years of trial and error unless you can figure this issue out first

i'd add that all components need to be made of the same aluminium as mylow's as well

i'm predicting the death of these trials from replicator fatigue unless this baby is figured out...

thks...dixie

[hansvonlieven]

This is Howard Johnson with his "Motor" in ca 2005 !!! ( 25 years after the patent )

Sjack Abeling, eat your heart out.

nuff said???

Hans von Lieven

[TinselKoala]

(snip)
I know I just said we shouldn't use youtube video's for proof, and also that the video analysis is a way to prove this.  I'm sure everyone understands what I mean 

You are quite right, I know what you mean, anyway. At least I know what I think you mean...
If I could be so bold as to paraphrase:
You can't use YT videos to PROVE anything. But you certainly can use them or any other source of data to DISPROVE an hypothesis. If the data coming at you is good data (that is, a correct representation of reality) then you can determine whether or not the data is consistent with the hypothesis under test. If it is, it proves nothing, because lots of different explanations could generate the same data.

BUT: If it's not consistent, out goes the hypothesis. In this case, the "hypothesis" is that Mylow's motor is driven by the interactions between the rotor and stator magnets. But the data coming at us from YT and other sources is inconsistent with that hypothesis. And it seems to be good data. So, pfft! Out goes the hypothesis, and another one, better and consistent with the data, must be found. And in its turn, tested by attempts at falsification.

Joe, you've hit upon the crux of a radical new way of looking at the world. I think we should call it the "Scientific Method". It has a nice ring to it, don't you think?