MyLOW's Magnet Wheel Replication 7: Critical Thinking Supplement

[muddymuddymuddmann]

nice toys mr koala

mudd

[empireofmotion]

Tinsel, this is a good video. It is important to question the obvious! I look forward to your input on my replication. If I get mine to work you can come and see it for yourself. I promise :-) EOM

[heinzji]

This is no proof. Mylar's motor was starting only when the rotor magnets were close to the stator magnets. It didn't start in the gaps in between. Watch carefully! But there is a danger in watching Mylar's videos carefully. You may have to change your worldview. Are you afraid of that?

[TinselKoala]

I have watched Mylow's videos carefully. I clearly see that the rotor wants to keep turning in places where it should NOT. Like in the Glass Table video where he has to restrain it even with the stator mount removed, and in the Tony video, where Tony clearly is holding it back, and has clearly been briefed to not let it go until Mylow turns off the motor (clickclick) and even then he's reluctant to release it.

You won't be changing your worldview, I am confident of that.

[dancol2008]

Criticaly speaking, Im am truely not convinced with this demonstration. Have you seen your contraption, its got wires, things hanging off it, bells and whistles, you can hear the motor running...Mylows motor is very simple and very beleivable. Yours isnt. If it is SO easy to falsify why are you demonstrating it so poorly. You r sounding quite bitter in your arguments and your efforts are clearly to disprove and not to prove. Thats a shame because you seem an inteligent person, dont waste it

[TinselKoala]

Critically speaking...

Most of what you see are sensors and mounts. They are irrelevant to the functioning of the device. Certainly I could show the motor running without all that stuff--even without the entire stator mount. Even off in a meadow with cows and grass. Don't be distracted by my scientific instruments...

Do you think that you would hear or see the motor if I didn't want you to?

And you should read up on your philosophy of science: attempts at disproof ARE the scientific method.

[dancol2008]

Critcally Speaking... you are have done a good job in debunking. I admit I have been fooled. I do believe those insi wincy taps are tappable though and magnetic fields are the ideal candidates to tap. Speed is relative. If you are working on Eugine Podkletnov anit-gravity supconducting spinning cermaic ring experiment, (for 1, have you seen any gravity effects, it's been 12 years since I first read about this and I am keen to know).Eu Sci have rep that they have effected the london moment

[dancol2008]

Have you? Also you may be familiar with Eugine Podkletnov HFGW experiments. I do believe that HFGW have been scientifically proven, Do you believe that ripples time/space of such HFGW could harnesed?. If your spining cermaic disc can effect the london montment and thefore time and space, can this be organinsied to gain out of this quasi-thermodynamic system of the universe. eg low presure system, high presure system interaction. Ive had a couple of beers so I most likely speeking bumkum?

[TinselKoala]

Yes, I am familiar with the Podkletnov antigravity disk and gravity beam experiments. I can tell you this much: the experiments are so technically difficult that we believe that Pod may not have actually performed them as claimed. The SC material is real, it works as a good levitator, but spinning it in a big dewar of LHe while pumping 3 kW of RF and another kW of DC into the region of the disk, that's pretty damn difficult, and we were never able to actually levitate and spin the 300 mm disk.

[ghostofhowardjohnson]

The disk doesn't remain stationary long, as Mylow's does. Good demonstration though.

[TinselKoala]

I can let it remain stationary as long as you like. Because in the stationary position the drive wheel isn't even in contact with the disk at all. The only friction is bearing friction and the only drive is what I give it with my hand. It can stay still like that with the motor running indefinitely. Only when I rotate the disk to a certain sector does the motor drive engage, and it only drives the disk for about 1/4 or 1/5 a turn on each turn.

But I see that MYlow has to restrain his disk.

[ghostofhowardjohnson]

I see, it's somewhat complex. Perhaps he does seem to restrain it at certain points, but it does remain stationary for extended periods of time. Whatever the case, I don't see how he could be using a motor.

[TinselKoala]

Still feel that way, even after the Twins video, where Tony has to hold the motor from turning at the end, even when it's nowhere near the starting position? It's pretty clear to me that that one is being driven---until Mylow turns it off at the end ("clickclick..OK Tony you can let it go now...")

[prototype9000]

dj's have a similar motor to play vinyls at any speed set by there hand and can be sped up with an external controller like a simple magnetic switch on there turntables

[Pirate88179]

TK:

Thanks for this demonstration. I pointed this same thing out in the OU forum and some folks thought otherwise. One guy even said Mylow was not smart enough to fake this, yet, he was smart enough to make something no one else in the world ever has. this is not logical to me. Thanks for what you do.

Bill

[TinselKoala]

Thanks again, Bill.

I see that you've pointed out that MyLOW seems to have the "Midas Touch" with magnet motors. Just about every configuration that he tries, with every kind of magnet, works as a self-runner.

Too bad queue, CLaNZeR, me, and a bunch of others don't seem to have the magic touch.

Now he's claiming 300 rpm. I don't even think his wheel will stay on the table at 300 RPM. The fastest I've gotten my MOTOR DRIVEN disk is 240 RPM and that's f'**n SCARY, and mine's well-balanced.

[nonesounique]

TK: Thank you. I guess the ball is in Mylow's court to come out with real proofs instead of displaying 'succesful magnet types' (again)!

On a more serious note, what are your impressions on Tommey Reed's overunity back emf solution? Just curious.

[TinselKoala]

Tommey Reed's story is one of improper measurement and misunderstanding of power factor, reactive power, etc.

I find it extremely interesting how many reasons these people can come up with, for NOT closing the loop on their "600 percent" OU devices like Reed's, or the recent "LTSpice confirms OU of a factor of 4.9438473635576 times" as posted on OU today--yet, strangely, these devices STILL require an input power source in order to "work"...That should tell you something.

[TinselKoala]

Oh, and of course Duty Cycle (or waveform). You need to take into account the waveform of the input and output instantaneous power and integrate it over time, in order to get the energy input during a run, to compare it with the energy output during the run. Comparing poorly-measured instantaneous power only, is a good way to come up with outrageous OU numbers. Unfortunately this point seems to be missed by a lot of folks. A good oscilloscope used well can cure a lot of misconceptions.

[TinselKoala]

I wonder: In all MyLOW's videos, he shows the stator support as a free-standing bracket assembly, that is separate from and not attached to the rotor bearing support. And yet he has recently claimed that he has a working version that creates so much torque it is difficult to stop by hand. Yet it is supposed to be powered by magnet interactions. So not only is 2LoT violated by MyLOW's motor, but also Newton's laws and Conservation of Momentum.

Cool! No wonder the MiB are interested.

[janne808]

Newton's laws of motion have already been shown not to work.

[TinselKoala]

Tell that to JPL.

Then explain how they hit Titan, using Newton's laws of motion.

[janne808]

They figured out the margin of error and took a well calculated risk.

[TinselKoala]

That's actually the funniest thing I've heard all day. Do you know how asymmetric solar wind thrust is corrected for, on interplanetary probes? The solar wind pushes on the PV collector arrays, and if they are asymmetricly deployed this produces a torque that interferes with aiming the cameras and antennae. Do you know how this torque is corrected for? You should check it out. The precision with which Newton's laws and Conservation of (angular) Momentum are vindicated is astounding.

[janne808]

Sounds like the thrust is corrected with measurements instead of Newton's laws.

[TinselKoala]

Look it up.

[TinselKoala]

For example you may be interested in reading the document called "loss.html" at James Oberg's website which explains what happened when a correction went wrong. It will give you some idea of the difficulties and precision of spacecraft navigation--and the extent to which it depends on understanding and applying Newtonian dynamics during months-long periods of what is essentially dead-reckoning navigation--as the x-y position of the probe cannot be measured, only the distance and velocity.

[janne808]

I'm sure it is tricky. I haven't had the time and focus to read it yet but I will.

My point was that Newton's laws aren't infallible truths, they're good approximations. They're still very useful but have their limits. Microscopic reality isn't explained by this model. This is important to realize since classical models can't fully explain magnetism

(proved by Niels Bohr in early 1900s.)

[TinselKoala]

And of course at relativistic velocities Newton suffers some corrections. But in the macroscopic, lazy realm we encounter daily, Newton gives accuracy greater than measurement precision, so is OK to use. And you can be sure that classical analysis is quite sufficient to show that a MyLOW or HJ motor cannot possibly function.

And then there's that several hundred years of experimentation...

But MyLOW, in just a few weeks, has come up with SEVEN different "running" configurations.

I say PROVE IT!

[janne808]

Hmm, how can classical analysis prove or disprove magnet motors if it has been shown that classical analysis can't accurately model magnets? Anyway quantum spin (which is the best current 'explanation') is still a subject of fundamental study today.

Actually there are some large discrepencies between newtonian mechanics and reality. Good example is the moon, it's supposedly 10 meters off (with 2m accuracy in measurement) where classical mechanics tells it should be.

[janne808]

This was on some BBC documentary. Unfortunately they didn't go too deep into this, and I couldn't find anything on the internet with a quick google. Something to look into for sure.

[TinselKoala]

I thot that had to do with a discrepancy in the measured value of G, rather than a problem with Newton per se. There is also a difference between Newtonian dynamics, and Newtonian gravitation.

Interestingly, there are several modified Newtonian dynamical (MOND) theories being tested in labs around the world. They use incredibly sensitive instrumentation because the theorized deviations between MOND and traditional Newtonian gravitation are so verrry small and short-range.

[janne808]

I don't think they went into it that deep. I'd like to learn more about what exactly that was about.

Maybe it doesn't seem like a big deal at first, but think about that 10 meters in the context of the masses involved. That corresponds to 48MJ of potential energy if the difference is in the distance of the moon from earth.

[janne808]

Oops it's 48 terajoules not megajoules actually.

[janne808]

Nevermind.. that's a gross miscalculation done half asleep. The correct value is lot larger than that (G*m1*m2*(1/h2-1/h1)). I think you get the idea anyway.

[lost10x]

Been thinking a bit on this one. By using the smaller c mags he used, with the two poles of the H magnet in his original videos, one should be able to get a really low resistance on the set up by a slight tilt of the H magnet.

(Slight tilt of the arm across holding it); and of course the height. I am sorry to say, I see no way to make this work as shown by Mylow.

Maybe allowing it to bounce up and down, LOL

Did not like the problems with the story from the beginning.

[janne808]

There's no way you can prove or disprove magnetic motors with a video on youtube.

[TinselKoala]

Really? Darn. And here I was, thinking that I was advancing science. Oh well.

You're right, I admit it--"5-fingered Mary" is clearly the way to prove magnetic motors. Instrumental methods are just way too much trouble, and whassup with all those numbers, anyway? Aren't you just supposed to measure voltages with an oscilloscope?

Remember, we live in a world where posters like "DIDIT" can generate 15 pages of comments without _even_ posting a YT video or any description of a device.

[janne808]

Just as long as you recognize that the same behaviour works both ways. I like this video though.

What's a "5-fingered Mary" anyway? Maybe I don't want to know.

[TinselKoala]

I'm glad you like the video. You're a good sport.

Let me put it to you this way: If you aren't already acquainted with "5-fingered Mary", I won't be the one to introduce you. But I'll bet you've met her before.

[janne808]

Ah, you're talking about masturbation. I get it now. The connection with magnet motors seem a little vague though.

[TinselKoala]

Vague? Really?

Look at all the videos of magnet motors. You will see "5-fingered Mary" carefully positioning the motor in its high-PE position, then releasing it, to orgasmic cries of "It works! It works!" with nary any real data or control experiment. This, you must realize, is akin to mental masturbation. It makes him feel good, but it keeps him from doing anything really productive, and it keeps him from having meaningful interactions with apparatus that might actually teach him something.

[janne808]

I'm sorry you feel that way.

[TinselKoala]

Want to make me feel a lot better? Show me just one magnet motor, or gravity wheel, or buoyancy drive, or SEC/RF system, that is really a self-runner, overunity, tapping the ZPE, or whatever. Show me just one antigravity device, or torsion field generator, or Bedini motor, or compound pendulum device, or Searle effect generator, that ACTUALLY WORKS. Show me a cold fusion paradigm, or a self-electrolyzing car, or a Schumann resonance extractor, or someone who can talk with dead aliens...

[janne808]

How about one of these:

"Scientists at the US National Center for Atmospheric Research estimate that a tropical cyclone releases heat energy at the rate of 50 to 200 exajoules (1018 J) per day,[17] equivalent to about 1 PW (1015 watt). This rate of energy release is equivalent to 70 times the world energy consumption of humans and 200 times the worldwide electrical generating capacity,[17] or to exploding a 10-megaton nuclear bomb every 20 minutes.[23]"

[TinselKoala]

Nice. That energy comes from the sun and is stored in hydrogen bonds between water molecules. I understand that an OU poster has actually patented (or at least officially applied for a patent on) a giant eye-wall surfer kind of craft to extract and convert some of this astounding kinetic energy into useful form.

I wish him good luck.

Oh, BTW, what does this have to do with what we usually understand as "free energy" or OU?

[janne808]

It's a system that converges free energy from the environment into it's non-conservative field.

[TinselKoala]

Yup, and that's about the only kind of "free energy" there is. By the way, you do understand that hurricanes dissipate energy, and that the overall entropy still increases, right? And that the energy that powers hurricanes comes from the sun, right?

So, since there's a concentrated low-entropy source, and a dissipated high-entropy sink, with the hurricane sitting in the middle churning away, it isn't really "free energy" in the way we usually mean with magnet motors.

[janne808]

Yes. But the interesting thing is that they truly are positive feedback self-running systems. That arise spontaneusly in nature.

[TinselKoala]

"Spontaneously" is a science code-word for "we haven't figured out exactly how it does it". Systems like those self-organizing positive-feedback spontaneously arising ones you mention, are always found to be hanging out in energetic fluxes, sort of surfing on the entropy gradient.

[WhipMag]

You say you are available to go test MyLow's device. Would you be willing to do the same for another device, something closer to my heart? I believe it is located right there in your neighborhood. I'm pretty sure you know what device I'm talking about.

BTW: Thanks for sharing some of your construction and testing techniques.

[TinselKoala]

You're welcome. But as to that other thing, there's no way that anything I could do, at this point, would be helpful. I do what I can, with what is available to me, and it's the outrageous claims of free energy and perpetual motion for profit that really get my hackles up. As far as I am aware, the device to which you refer has never been claimed to be OU or perpetual, and all offers of fame and fortune have been refused. So I'm not really interested. My advice is to forget about it.

[WhipMag]

>As far as I am aware, the device to which you refer has never been claimed to be OU or perpetual

Maybe you're satisfied knowing what it is NOT. I still want to know what it IS.

[lost10x]

damn,

I will do so (forget about it).

Yet how the hell was it driven?

[Manitobah]

Those that have been watching know that TinselKoala has a tiny motor to bring the motor up to speed.

IF someone had a large "working" magnetic motor trying to stop it, it would take your hand off. I'd like to see more test, you have the gear to get some good data.

MichelleNye claimed that his rotor worked, Dietmarhohl has had great succes with liear drives, but his rotors have failed, the difference was size. I think when you make a circle the fields cancle and your done.

[TinselKoala]

Claims are one thing, facts are another.

IF wishes were horses, beggars would ride. The difference between success and failure with magnet motors, linear SMOT tracks or otherwise, has nothing whatever to do with size or "fields cancelling." It's more like adding 3 + 3 and getting 7. Even if you use a different font, or Roman numerals, or really big purple letters, you still can't make 3 plus 3 add up to seven.

In other words, Linear SMOTs require energy input to "work" and so do circle SMOTs.

[aber0der]

Watch his hands, guys! He claims to have a hidden motor that spins the disc, but again, WATCH HIS HANDS. This is clearly telekinesis.

Absolutely hilarious! A telekineticist is trying disprove magnet motors by pretending to use a hidden motor. LOL.

Get a brian, morans!

:)

[noimw]

By golly I think you got it. Good Job !!!