Howard Johnson Replication Tube Claim

[chrisC]

What I don't understand is these armchair scientists sitting here in the thread who call everything they see a hoax, because it does not match their belief system.

20th Century has seen way too many scribes who love to throw numbers onto the paper or blackboard, but would not get their hands dirty because the numbers did not confirm it. That's worse than Astrology and I do believe Astrology has more merit than most of the quantitative sciences today.

Instead, why don't you all get up (from your armchairs) and build yourselves a similar rig then disprove it hands-on, instead of tossing it out the window without doing any physical testing. Or have you forgotten what the basic premise of science was back when it was created (the fundamentals about experimentation)?

Absolutely right! Because there are these self taught 'scientist' that must have university certified and mathematically proofs before they can believe things they have no clue themselves. Those that post a lot about their own discoveries and cannot see that perhaps an honest truck driver in Chicago happen to discover something they don't understand and therefore it must be hoax!

TK was skeptical at first but he is a good engineer and does an excellent job with his ability to replicating with fine tools at his disposal. I would love to see TK have his own thread on his own TK magnet wheel?

cheers
chrisC

[Rosphere]

I have not logged-on here at OU for weeks, (if not months.)  Today is the first day that I have seen Mylow's device.  With over two-thousand replies so far, I have not had a chance to read every one.  So, I apologize if my following thought has already been mentioned:


If I allow two magnets to naturally attract to one another, with a N-S at one side and a S-N at the other, (not simply a N-S face orientation,) and then I twist the two magnets 90 degrees out of alignment with my fingers, I can feel a torque between them wanting to twist them back into the original attraction configuration.  I think this is the simple key to Mylow's device.

He prevents them from torquing back into position by securing them, one in a fixed position, (the stator,) and many on a flat plane allowed to flow past the stator.  Each magnet glued on the plate wants to twist just a little bit to align with the stator magnet and, as a result, it ends-up moving the plate just a little bit, bringing the next magnet into a position to want to twist.  But none of them can twist because of the orientation of the plate, so each magnet moves the plate just a little bit and then they all add-up to a rotation of the plate.  Simple.


I generally have no faith in permanent magnet motors.  This torque of which I speak is most likely mitigated by the sum total of the approach and departure forces to the stator magnet.  But, I thought I might throw-in my two cents to be buried with another two thousand replies.

Thanks for noticing. 

[nyctuber]

Absolutely right! Because there are these self taught 'scientist' that must have university certified and mathematically proofs before they can believe things they have no clue themselves. Those that post a lot about their own discoveries and cannot see that perhaps an honest truck driver in Chicago happen to discover something they don't understand and therefore it must be hoax!

TK was skeptical at first but he is a good engineer and does an excellent job with his ability to replicating with fine tools at his disposal. I would love to see TK have his own thread on his own TK magnet wheel?

cheers
chrisC

Did you not notice's TK's comment that his 'results' should be taken with a liberal grain of salt? He's publishing it under 'alt.snakeoil' for God's sake. I think the guy just gets off on mocking Mylow. Seems like an utter creep.

[amigo]

Did you not notice's TK's comment that his 'results' should be taken with a liberal grain of salt? He's publishing it under 'alt.snakeoil' for God's sake. I think the guy just gets off on mocking Mylow. Seems like an utter creep.

That's fine, but my point was that it is always so easy to discard something from the comfort of your "armchair", without taking into consideration possible work (thinking and tinkering) that has gone into creating something. Many people have had their dreams shot down by real (and amrchair) scientists because what they dreamt of did not match the dogmatic view the science had (and still has).

Let no one tell you what's real and what's not real; or what's possible and what's not possible. Instead, go find out for yourself...

[nyctuber]

That's fine, but my point was that it is always so easy to discard something from the comfort of your "armchair", without taking into consideration possible work (thinking and tinkering) that has gone into creating something. Many people have had their dreams shot down by real (and amrchair) scientists because what they dreamt of did not match the dogmatic view the science had (and still has).

Let no one tell you what's real and what's not real; or what's possible and what's not possible. Instead, go find out for yourself...

You misunderstood me, I agree with you.