Howard Johnson Replication Tube Claim

[nyctuber]

Look Closely at the 27 second video as he pans
The Stator assembly is just sitting on the blocks
of wood.But even with the blocks of wood, the
stator assembly doesn't weigh near as much
as the rotor.. the arm appears to be 3/4 inch
aluminum channel approx 16" long, and about 6"
high with 6" feet with rubber pads.
Believe me, it would flex trying to turn the rotor.

But we will never know for sure until it is verified
one way or another.

Sorry but that doesn't make any sense. The 'weight' of the rotor would be entirely unrelated to the stator assembly flexing. Perhaps you meant bearing resistance/ friction. The only relevant forces are magnetic. The stator assembly weighs plenty with the magnets and adjustment device attached. Aluminum is extremely stiff btw, you'd know this if you've ever ridden an aluminum frame bicycle.

P.S. How did you figure he got the blocks on the adjustment device to flex as the disk gained speed?

[Chase212327]

Way to go Mylow!

Very exciting to see your new bar magnet motor running.  Please do not disassemble it.  Please, please, please let your good friend Sterling come and see it in person.  Sterling has had so very much faith in you, and supported you this entire time.  PLEASE be kind enough to return the favor to Sterling -- I think he's truely earned it!

Congratulation!!!

Chase212327

[Digjam]

Sorry but that doesn't make any sense. The 'weight' of the rotor would be entirely unrelated to the stator assembly flexing. Perhaps you meant bearing resistance/ friction. The only relevant forces are magnetic. The stator assembly weighs plenty with the magnets and adjustment device attached. Aluminum is extremely stiff btw, you'd know this if you've ever ridden an aluminum frame bicycle.

P.S. How did you figure he got the blocks on the adjustment device to flex as the disk gained speed?

A Stator assembly pushes a rotor to achieve rotation.
Therefore the same force required to
rotate the rotor is applied to the stator.

A 20" piece of 3/4" alum channel is very flexible,
even with the legs.( and the channel appears to
be approx 1/16" thick)

The up down motion of the stator mags/slider
is due to the repulsion of the magnets when
the rotor magnets are under the stator magnets.
They move up when over the mags and down
when they are over the wide gap.

[CLaNZeR]

You know me I try to stay open minded on all claims I see and try to replicate most designs I come across, not because I believe every claim I see, but because I want to see proof for myself and the only way in my mind is to try it.

The Mylow Saga, has been one of those claims that has followed a weird path to say the least and I really do hope this last video is real.

What worries me at the moment is that we were shown a couple of days ago in one of Mylows videos was a small battery operated motor and I still do not see why?

Mylow did everything right in the last video, apart from at the end to simply move the Cross bar out the way and lift the Rotor off the bearing mount. If this had happened I would be also shouting from the roof tops and be straight back into the workshop.

As usual staying open minded and all good fun

Cheers

Sean.

[nyctuber]

A Stator assembly pushes a rotor to achieve rotation.
Therefore the same force required to
rotate the rotor is applied to the stator.

A 20" piece of 3/4" alum channel is very flexible,
even with the legs.( and the channel appears to
be approx 1/16" thick)

The up down motion of the stator mags/slider
is due to the repulsion of the magnets when
the rotor magnets are under the stator magnets.
They move up when over the mags and down
when they are over the wide gap.

Are you completely unaware that the rotor is spinning on a bearing assembly? Do you have the slightest clue as to how that differs from trying to move a stationary object on a non-bearing surface? Do you know what the flywheel effect is?

The stators are mounted on the adjustment device. It flexes. As it is  NOT CONNECTED on it's sides to the stator support bar, do you get why the support bar would have essentially no relevant flex torsion?

Of all the times to be dealing with a silly argument this really isn't one I'd prefer.