Howard Johnson Replication Tube Claim

[carbonc_cc]

When you mention resonance, are you feeling an initial vibration as the rotor starts moving.

If so,  this could account for the sound that is heard in Mylow's videos where as the aluminum rotor maybe resonant with the vibration occurring at startup.

-Duff

Not really a vibration, more of a seesaw effect that stabalizes and feels less seesaw and more fluid (seesaw is still felt).  Except at the end rotors.
Maybe metal on metal at a certian speed would generate a sound, but not sure.

[carbonc_cc]

Not really a vibration, more of a seesaw effect that stabalizes and feels less seesaw and more fluid (seesaw is still felt).  Except at the end rotors.
Maybe metal on metal at a certian speed would generate a sound, but not sure.

Note: The seesaw effect is felt at the pass of every inside magnet.  Probably because I had so many large gaps.

[sirinewton]

@sirinewton,

Welcome to the forum and please don’t get discouraged that the first reply to your first post will be negative. I don’t want to start a theoretical discussion but I will only note that physics101 doesn’t fail to call work the displacement under the action of a conservative force. If an opportunity is created for a conservative force to induce such displacement infinitely then work will be done infinitely. This doesn’t go against physics101, although it is a different situation from the one you correctly describe whereby “it takes the same amount of energy to pull the magnets apart as it takes for them to come together in the first instance excluding frictional losses of course”.

G'day omnibus and others, Thanks for the greetings. 

Okay, Like you I don't wish to get too theoretical either. I agree. Basic physics 101 says F=ma and W=Fd =mad.  Ignoring the conservation law for a closed isolated system for the moment, work is definitely done when two magnets attract or repel one another. For example, if two magnets are attracting each other, the work done has a vector component in a direction which in this case is towards each other.  Where you say "if an opportunity is created for a conservative force to induce such displacement infinitely then work will be done infinitely" would be nice, but in the real world the displacement or distance or work done is finite, or has a start point Vi and a finish pointVf, so it's impossible.  Now to get the two magnets apart, the work done will be in the opposite but equal direction as to the initial attraction.  Therefore as we know, the conservation of energy laws state P.E = K.E where P.E=mgh =K.E= 1/2mv^2. 

So I'm afraid it's conserved. Let's face it, magnets have have fascinated man for a long time, and when he or she sees one move and stick to the wall they'll say look it's doing work and the bug bites them. Yes it is doing work, but only in one direction.  To remove that stuck magnet will require the same amount of work but in the opposite direction. Net gain =O KJ/Nm and that's not including real world frictional losses. 
In Mylows wheel or the HJ motor, the moving rotor magnets are coming in sideways to the stator or stationary magnet.  I sincerely don't want to sound rude but "so what?"  The same COE law must also apply. The energy in must = the energy out.  In fact it will be less out because of  magnetic drag, air resistance, bearing friction.  Now some are going to say what about subatomic particle spins, domain alignments, de broglies theorem (quantum physics), natural de-magnetisation, some special shape etc...., but so far nothing has presented itself as providing some kind special or mysterious subatomic force that will lead to a continous free energy machine. The only thing I saw once was a doco where they were demonstrating a plasma space propulsion engine, where they had a electromagnetically contained plasma gas, and they brought a magnet near it and the gas began to spin. That was very interesting.

Finally, most people with an ounce of intelligence know the COE law are tried and true, that's why in my last post I said I'd shake hands with whoever proved Newton wrong and I'll eat my words.  At the same time, It's not my place to say or stop anyone from experimenting and having a go too.  So good on you Mylow and others. I think this type of research and tinkering is a great hobby, as long as you don't let it consume you. I had a mate who was addicted to this quest to solve the world's energy problems with a 'free energy' machine of some sort and it became like a sickness where he would have bouts of depression whenever he had a failure.   So take it easy everyone the world will be around for a loooong time after we're all gone.

[carbonc_cc]

Ha! fixed the stupid youtube bug.  Pulled the plug so the browser couldn't send any packets back to youtube calling for a cancel upload.

I have updated the video's information...

[PaulLowrance]

@paulLowrance,

We're talking here of CoE being violated which makes violation of the 2LoT a moot point. It needn't even be addressed because its violation goes without saying.

Huh?  Just because you are not discussing 2LoT for the moment somehow makes 2LoT a moot point?  That's some strange logic you adhere to. You continually make huge claims here without a shred of math or references to such math. Violating 2LoT is far more realistic than violating CoE. I have already provided to mathematical proof of a 2LoT violation.

PL