Howard Johnson Replication Tube Claim

[BEP]

BEP,

Calm down. The most common problem with people using FEMM is they do not understand that it is either a Planar or Axisymmetric problem. A lot of problems cannot be properly entered into FEMM. If you want, email me a problem you believe fails in FEMM.

These are simple issues taught in academic schools.

PL

I appreciate your concern for my calmness. Couldn't be any more calm without falling asleep.

The truth is FEMM is an excellent tool, when you know how to use it properly. While I have several letters I attach to my 'normal world' signature. Folks here are usually not impressed, for good reason, and I don't want to pummel people with them.

Simple issues, yes.

The Trinitron screens simply display the effects of the Lorenzian paths. If you understand the work of Lorenz it is a small matter to visualize magnetic fields without the ferrous materials distorting the fields. And they DO distort them. Why is this a concern for me? Because, when you have two or more fields interacting, without iron filings between them, the results can be wildly different than produced by FEMM. Also, FEMM is 2D. At a minimum I prefer to work in wireframe.

Cheers!

[Grimer]

In a previous post I offered the same thought, but also stated that we cannot know until we know how much friction is involved in his machine. I've seen machines require *less* than a milliwatt to spin at such low rpm's. Also, I provided a very rough guesstimate that his iron stator PM has a few joules of energy. So we know his machine degausses the stator. The big question is does that PM energy loss equal the loss in mechanical friction.

Even if it does we are getting energy out on a continuous basis, energy which can be replaced any number of times with a powerful neo. It the point of principle that's important, surely.

[chrisC]

.... if mylow had a knowledgeable notable scientist do such measurements rather than an anti-academic person.

PL

Paul
Since you're so Gung-Ho on finding a notable scientist, may I suggest you just go "DO IT". Then you get your superbly qualified scientist to do the replication since it looks like you're not capable or unwilling to try?

The rest of us are happy and you will be too? It's not so difficult to understand. is it?

cheers
chrisC

[PaulLowrance]

Why is this a concern for me? Because, when you have two or more fields interacting, without iron filings between them, the results can be wildly different than produced by FEMM.

Only limited 3D problems can be entered in FEMM, in axisymmetric mode. If you try to use FEMM incorrectly, and get false answers, it's not the fault of the FEMM software. Enter the problem correctly, and you'll get the correct answers. So if you find an error, then email it to me and I'll be more than happy to take a look at it.

PL

[dixiepnum]

@omnibus,

I'm curious about the replicators because I don't think mylow will replicate. In fact, I asked Mylow if he would create a second machine to prove he could replicate. Given his brother's talent with aluminium, Mylow would be the best replicator.

In the mean time, we can only hope the replicators achieve something within a month, given the wide variety of factors and sensitivities involved. If not within a month, this thing might die off.

I'm not sure where this project is going, but it's sure going all over the place.