On 01/08/2010 04:04 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
>>From Terry:
>
>> All I have ever read is that he says the motor was definitely not OU.
>> But, AFAIK, he never admitted to a hoax. And no one ever replicated
>> although many tried.
>
> Sheesh! As if that doesn’t muddy Alsetalokin’s position anymore than
> where the matter currently stands.
Sounds like he's laughing in his sleeve over it, however it worked.
"Not OU, not a hoax, but apparently miraculous and completely
inexplicable" -- I'd be pleased as punch to be able to exhibit a gadget
like that!
It seems to me that if he says flatly it's not OU, then he's clearly not
out to scam anybody with a perpetual motion claim. He's put himself in
the position of a magician who makes the Statue of Liberty "disappear"
rather than a con man who wants to sell you the deed to the Statue of
Liberty.
> Assuming the contraption was actually turning on its own, meaning with
> no alleged external assistance, I would be forced to speculate that
> there must have been some form of an energy transference going on
> between the rotor and stator PMs. This would seem to suggest that the
> device should eventually begin to wind down as the magnets began to
> dissipate their magnetic properties in the form of kinetic energy.
I'm not sure but I think a gadget which turns the energy of a permanent
magnet's field into kinetic energy, while destroying ('using up') the
magnetization, is nearly as hard to produce -- and breaks nearly as many
laws -- as a Type 2 permanent magnet perpetual motion machine in which
the magnets get cold while driving the machine.
As far as I know, nobody's ever exhibited such a gadget (and had it turn
out to be real rather than YAH [yet another hoax]). But as usual I'll
be happy to be corrected.
>
> Do you know if such a “fate” was ever mentioned?
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>
