The Mylow story: what can be learned!

[lostcauses10x]

The Mylow story: what can be learned!
Here is a man who posted a video and made the claim of a working magnet motor based on the presentation and ideas of a known individual in the magnet motor saga.

Here is a classic example of folks believing some thing with out any proof.

Can I say he lied, and or faked such. NO. That is his problem to deal with.  Even with all the proof  of it can be faked and most likely was, I can not say it was.

What the point here I need to make is this:
It is not the claims, presentation of honesty and so on that could provide me with belief or disbelief.

  What always works for me in such, is the how and why such can, or can not work.  He and others can claim it is real all they want to. Such does not mater in the real world with out verification such is real.   In Mylows case there is no verification at all. So noting to say it is real, other than his say so. 

From this situation one must ask the following:

Simple questions can be asked.
1: What is being shown in relation to what is claimed?
2: Is there a realistic idea of how it works?
3: If an unknown of how it works : is there enough information to try and replicate what is shown.  Always refer back to number 1 on this. If you do not have a idea of what is shown to what is claimed, what are you trying to build, or do. 
4:What is the information from other replications?  If such does show a pattern of the same negative or positive results, one can expect the same results with there attempts at replication.
This is where measurement and data need to be shared.
5: If other replications are in the negative results, what are you going to do different, and why.
Again refer back to number 1. Also refer to any data that others have done to see if your ideas may have a valid variation upon what has already been done.

When to decide that such is not a feasible application: Note I did not say fake. I have seen to much to go that route even though it is the normal method of such with the human mind, and is such that most are done in some form of deception.  Such again goes back to verification of "Is it real".  Such also goes for is it deception.

Regrettably in this case the evidence from replication says it is not reproducible. There is now reasonable evidence of fake.

The evidence of possibly being fake does not even need to be examined in this one. The situation of the replications show the un feasible realty of replication.

Such as of this point should have shown folks that to try, unless ideas or other evidence was given, to avoid  replication, unless they had a new idea or information to try that others had not.

The Mylow story: even before  replication was tried; I could find no reason such as shown and claimed could work. I from such information and thought; never attempted a replication.   The reputable replications have shown what I expected. It does not work and the why of such.

Again the idea of is it fake, should not even have gotten into this at this point. Replication is not feasible. So what would be the next step??

Well this was done from the beginning. Folks trying to get verification of the claim and device.
Again this was and has not been able to be archived.

At this point it would not mater what the claims are,  It becomes a simple problem of non verified claims and non verified reputable reproduction of said claims.

It would not mater if it was real or not. Not reproducible or verifiable. Game over. Some thing to place in the back of the pile that some day an observation might show some truth of the claims.  To be honest such by non reproducible or verifiable becomes a high probability of NOT REAL.

Such as of now does not mater if it can be faked or not. Simply put the method I have described can and will save a great deal of time and money in the OU free energy game. It will also save a lot of disappointment and anger with pain.

Notes: Reputable replication again must be verifiable of the claims by peer review would have to be done, or it simply is not reputable. 

Fake or not, the methods above will work for any claims and or story lines.

It is a simple method of looking and dealing with what happens in the real world.

If noting else folks should learn from the mess of the Mylow story, if believing it is fake or real,such does not mater: it is the simple methods of dealing with such claims.

[lostcauses10x]

So folks at what point of
No verifiable proof of claims: or no verifiable reproduction: Or no practical ideas different from reproductions already done do you say stop??

This could get to be an interesting question if folks will respond.

[hansvonlieven]

These are questions that have been dogging this forum for a long time.

There have been a number of proposals here lately that have generated a lot of controversy when it should have been clear from the beginning that these projects had no chance of working ever!

The Knitel infinity pump comes to mind, so does the Sjack Abeling device The Milkovic double oscillator and the Mylow motor.

In none of these projects anything was proposed that had not been tried over and over again and proved to be not feasible for very solid reasons.

Those who have said so and gave their reasons were shouted down and called all sorts of names and accused of working with suppressive forces and being in the pay of oil companies and such.

Physics as we know it is pretty good. We have an amazing technology going for us that would not be possible if it were bullshit.

That does not mean to say that there is nothing new to discover. Far from it. There is still much to be learned.

Let us be clear about one thing, saying that scientists have it all wrong and that the real workings of physics and chemistry are being suppressed is complete and utter crap. Sadly though, the attitude of some people here is exactly that.

That is not helpful.

There is no point in chasing down well worn avenues of pursuit that have never paid off just because it fits some mindset that does not believe they have to study science because it is all shit anyway and that the ideas of some uneducated idiot are somehow superior.

I know I will get flamed for this but I am saying it anyway.

Hans von Lieven

[AquariuZ]

Hans, please...

Physics as we know it is pretty good. Sure, based on laws which are now centuries old...

Basically you are saying that there will be no advancement at all in this field because it is impossible because the current laws are the end all.

Reminds me of someone who was called a genius but was really only a patent clerk.

Talk about propaganda....

What really gets me going is the fact that anyone who tries is covered with a bucket of thin excrement in the form of ridicule, this goes for actual researchers too. The "field" is filled with examples. In this forum it is just the usual day-to-day as expected.

I like you Hans, but I wish you would try to think out of the box more. I saw your website and your classical education is no help.

AZ

[WilbyInebriated]

hans, you forgot the 'pop keenie' wheel and anything keely...