Howard Johnson Replication Tube Claim

[TinselKoala]

@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

So you're saying that if we read and absorb that stuff, we Will get "this machine to work"?? So Mylow's now a scholar of esoteric physics? If he didn't need to read it why should we???

You have no idea whether any of the things you say are really important or not. Because there aren't ANY working magnet motors, and every variation on those items anybody has tried has yielded zippo. So you really have no idea what will work, you only know what won't, and what won't work includes every damn thing everybody has tried so far.
Sorry to be so blunt. But it's the truth.

Send Mylow a pizza pan, I'll bet he gets it working.

(And yes, I've read empireofmotion's stuff, and she (I think!!) has got a lot right, but also a lot wrong.)

[nyctuber]

I doubt the aluminum matters at all.

[joe_1001101]

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?

That is exactly what I meant, thanks, and "Scientific Method" sounds o.k. to me

Joe

[nyctuber]

With the 'stomehenge model,' the stator interacted with a single pole, ~ an inch off the platter Then he says it's important to have solid contact w/ the platter. I don't see how this would matter at all, the reality is the interaction took place above the platter. I know... 'eddy currents.' Whatever, HJ's thing was built on wood, so much for the eddy current idea.

[Pirate88179]

I doubt the aluminum matters at all.

I agree with you.  Remember way back when Mylow said his brother made, or had his rotor assembly made, and he had NO IDEA what type of Al it was?  He thought it was an aircraft "type" Al but didn't know. (Gee that really narrows it down) 

So, now we have Bob make an "exact" replica of Mylow's right down to the Al he used even though neither Mylow, or his brother remember what type it was.  I know you can do tests on the metal that might match it pretty close but, how could Bob, or Sterling, do those tests when no one has even seen Mylow's motor in person. (Meaning neither Sterling or Bob or anyone that could perform such a test)

So, I doubt that the Al matters much at all.

Bill