Howard Johnson Replication Tube Claim

[lostcauses10x]

Ah the fun of this.
Using one pole to the item induction is being generated in creates a simple problem. The field bends and goes in both directions due to this.  Going with the rule of induced currents both directions are formed.  This using the single pole in method produces a bit more than the simple single pole game. It even sets up a canceling effect of the currents due to the directions it travels in.   

Using a single pole into the material does not create just one pole. 

There is a good reason to used dual poles to show such induction effects. It makes it much easier to show the single pole effect of induction. The field just becomes in one direction to the travel.

If you are so inclined do the math and graphs of this mess.

I still will not discount the poles variation being the cause, yet such may denote a domain variation to poles of the magnet being used.

This all of course does not even cover the tendency for material to have a spin on the electrons in one direction over the other, etc,,,

  Think of it this way   up  down pole down  up. Or reverse for the other pole.

Please before you post do some reasearch. Tha magnet is not slowed because of attraction it is slowed because of repell below it.             en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddy_current_brake

[Psyclone]

@ Psyclone:

Thanks for your response.  Yes, My post would have had the same meaning (from my standpoint of what I was trying to say) had I left out the Newbie thing in parenthesis.  Also, even though you didn't mention it, it occurred to me later that a fellow could be reading all the posts since the beginning while not having joined as a member, I had not considered that possibility either.

I agree 100% that the number of posts a fellow has in no way reflects upon his, or her, intelligence or level of understanding.  But, also, as TK said, sometimes you will see someone enter a topic without having read any of the previous posts and tell everyone why something won't work, etc. (I am speaking generally now, not about the aforementioned individual)  We used to see this all the time in the earth battery topic.

I am still appalled at the lack of recognition given these folks here that solved this Mylow motor deal.  This is a true testament of what can be done working together using open source software and some very good minds.  I would have thought that Sterling could have at least given the Overunity forum the credit it deserves for that.  He could have said while he didn't like some of the things said about mylow here, that it was the hard work and great expertise of these guys over here that broke this story wide open.  Yet, he has yet to do so.

Thanks again for your civil response.

Bill

Agreed - on all counts - and... ditto.

[AquariuZ]

I thought a bit more about X00013's sliding magnet experiment described in his video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqL3Byy9mDA

Also please consider AbbaRue's posting
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7039.msg180594#msg180594

I suggest the following conclusion: In case a piece of aluminium and a magnet are moved relative to each other, such as with a piece of aluminium and a sliding magnet or as with a static magnet (= stator magnet) and a moving piece of alu (rotor disc), the movement creates eddy currents in the aluminium. These eddy currents in turn create/possess a magnetic field, as electrical currents do.
This magnetic field of the eddy currents is emanating from the aluminium disc as long as there is movement.

And this magnetic field will interact with the pole pieces of the stator magnet.
Depending on how the two fields are angled or positioned relative to each other, one pole of the stator magnet will attract the disc and the other pole of the stator magnet will repel it.

I think that someone with a deeper understanding or feel for these interactions, may be able to build a continuously rotating device.

While such a device powers ones house, one could - in one's free time - go fishing. So I suggest people hold on to their fishing lines.

What an excellent post. Thanks

[AquariuZ]

Welcome jfhoss.

This is perhaps not the best time to come i'm afraid. But it will likely calm down again soon.

Don't be discouraged, there is much to learn here despite the current situation!

To briefly summarize what happened and what the fuss is all about...

Back in early March "Mylow" posted You-Tube videos of a supposedly working Howard R. Johnson motor... Almost exactly 30 years after the April, 1979 awarding of the major and first HJ Patent for the design.

... But the "current" or "latest" (and presumably "last") version of the mylow motor was found to be operated by fishing line attached to a DC motor: A clear and obvious fake (once it was pointed out to everyone, anyway).

There is still some remaining controversy regarding the earliest "Stonehenge" model from March (which had "U"-shaped channel magnets on the rotor instead of flat bar magnets as the later ones did), which some are saying was actually "valid" ; and was then suppressed by the government who then supposedly forced mylow to deliberately falsify the later versions under their orders and threats. This also appears to be his story now (or at least his twin brother's).

This of course is highly speculative, as there is nothing to back it (and the 2 or 3 known serious replications of that first rotor channel magnet design done by people here did not work either; over a period of about 3 weeks of trying), and there is of course the conclusive proof of later fraud which frankly makes it rather hard for people to accept anything having to do with Mylow now. And of course no one was ever allowed to see the device working in person: Despite dozens here and other places calling loudly and repeatedly for independent verifications to happen.

... And BTW, this fakery would also makes it hard to accept any of the technical information disseminated; such as "magnetizing orientations" (in other words in the original design, how were the stator mags actually supposed to be magnetized, "front to back", or "side to side"?). None of that information is "trustworthy" now, and anyone who was attempting a channel mag "Stonehenge" replication in the future would need to try both to be sure, i suppose.

Unfortunately, there appear to be no "High Res" vids available for the early Stonehenge design videos, making it apparently impossible to determine if string was used there too, since they are too low in resolution to pick out very thin and translucent fishing line (...thus the continued controversy in the face of proofs of later fraud). Only after the "obviously faked" motor came out, did the High-Resolution videos become available. Many people are saying he faked those early ones too, perhaps using different methods, but that appears inconclusive as well at least so far (but it is the prevailing opinion at this point, as you may have noticed).

So again, like this entire exercise, we are left with "belief" lol... Could the government have "forced" the later fakes to discredit and suppress, or not? If it was all "fake", were mylow and his brother working alone... Or was it all an elaborate plan somehow, done by "agents unknown", possibly to discredit the Open Source community, or for some other, yet unseen reason?

Hopefully the lesson of independent verifications being ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED before moving ahead will remain as the legacy for this episode.

A voice of reason in this sea of madness, imagine that.

Channel magnets:
Outside S pointing away from disc center
Inside N pointing towards disc center

Stator (BLACK)
Horseshoe which had initial N-N legs and was later remagnitized S-N
Stator almost touching disc with legs pointing towards channel magnets, as close as you can without touching

All aluminum Stand, disc & non magnetic screws.
Ball bearing.

High res video #6 on LRCan1´s channel: (Stator N-S towards rim)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpQA5c9guvE&fmt=18

Good luck to all replicating (including me)

No I am not stubborn, I know a PsyOP when I see one.

Thats all.

[AquariuZ]

A test was done on 90 degree copper and the effect was apparent. I haven't yet seen a 90 degree Al test, perhaps you'd like to do one. The effect on copper is probably not a good guage as to whether gravity comes into play, due to simple magnetic attraction.  I'd like to see a 90 degree test on Al.

90 degrees on Au, enjoy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak23j76e2yQ&NR=1