Lifting 660 grams with 110.

[nicbordeaux]

Sounds too good to be true ?

As per vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCALAuUYy6c , 110 grams over 115 cm lifts 665g over 30 mm. Raised mass height is measured by inserting 30 mm wood plate under bob at highest point and leaving it there.

Just done some measurements with/ precision (.1 gr) scales. Protusion from 110 gr OB weight, raise by putting scales' plate under protusion. Lift to release position "3 o' clock'. Suspended weight over pulley still 665 grams. In spite of holding scales in hand so some tremor, maximum reading is 128 grams, minimum around 70, must be some angular stuff at work, plus fact that heavy bob moves pendulum arm in a direction which assists raise.

Irrespective of any angular hocus pocus, leverage or else going on during the operation, the end result, which I am standing very firmly by is : 110 gr losing 115 mm position of height causes 665 grams to rise 30 mm to err on the safe side, because it's 4).

Is that enough to relaunch the system ? Yes. More than enough. If the weight is just caught at height and sat on a stand, the system (eg pendulum arm, OB wheel) will swing away till keel, so you could argue that the end result is loss if you don't also capture pendulum at high point. However, by winding and spooling the tether, The system raise is undisputable.

The other vids of note already published are a "balanced" 2 ball setup with total bob mass of 366 grams)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QpdtV7X2VA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJtB8eUEtCk and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsVXNvtEEWY (in which preliminary conclusions : a mass of 110 grams gaining ke from a "pe loss" of 2 cm vertical is setting in movement a system weighing approx 1700 gram, w/o direct drive via chain or else. Balancing act. The 1700 odd composite mass via a line over pulley wheel is raising 183 grams over 4 cms from start point, vertically. Spinning the wheel at high revs is of no use. Even releasing it from 9 or 3 position gives no more motion than from 7:30 or 4:30. The reason it is not shown released from the lowest position is because I did the vid alone, so had to allow time for setting apparatus in motion, walking away and aiming camera, hitting "shoot" button on camera. Just look at the way the pendulum starts swinging when the OB wheel rotation hits the right "frequency/height" from 4h30 to 7 h 30.

These are very imperfect results, as tuning the system as regards length of componets, weights, diameters will yield more.

Please don't call this a "S2O oscillator or anything else. It is my invention, therefore with all due modesty I am calling it the MARCH pendulum.

[NerzhDishual]

@NicBordeaux,

Are you from Bordeaux ?

Yet another Veljko Milkovic (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/indexEng.htm) effect, or what?
Decidedly, our "Official Science" should be amended. Should it not be?

Very Best

[nicbordeaux]

NerzhDishual,

Yes, Aquitaine region. I don't think the system is really an oscillator, more of a pendulum which is capable of swinging to a greater height than it was released from. Even if it doesn't look like a pendulum.

Science amended? Probably. The problem I have is not so much with things like coe, but the way they are construed to exclude certain mechanical behaviours. The usual analogy : sit 10 kgs on a nail, nothing happens, 10 cm of travel to a 400 gram hammer for a total of 2 kgs on impact, the nail goes through the plank. Just an image. But fitting for this "open" device and developments on it which use timed conflict or accumulated force.

Best rgds 

@NicBordeaux,

Are you from Bordeaux ?

Yet another Veljko Milkovic (http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/indexEng.htm) effect, or what?
Decidedly, our "Official Science" should be amended. Should it not be?

Very Best

NerzhDishual

[NerzhDishual]

@NicBordeaux,

OK. I'm from Brittany. I should be French too 

What do you mean by "COE"?

I do agree with you. I'm not a scientist but I must confess that, IMHO, some of very basic scientific "explanations" sound awkward.

For ex:  a strong (but small) neo magnet is able to lift a weigh against gravity (= the whole Earth, BTW). Saying 30 Kg. According to Official Science, no work is done.

Now, take the place of this magnet.  As no work is done you should be able to support this 30 KG weight without any problem. Obviously, it is not the case.

-------------------

I was just consulting:
http://chalkalis.blogspot.com/
and also : Gravity_Assisted_Power.mp4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yheVAF-Zrvo&feature=player_embedded

Really, somethings are strange with pendulums and gyros...
I'm just wondering whether Newton was absolutely right...

-------------------

I have also noticed that "Official Science " always exclude certain configurations or seem to forgot the half part of certain equations.

Very Best

[Kator01]

Hello nicbordeaux,

very intersting idea. You have uncouplet the two planes of inertia of both masses : the bob and the swinging Pendulum. This is not the case with the Milkovic - Penulum
Instantly when I saw your video I remembered a communication with Alan Cresswell long time ago who had this proposal in Diagram 21 on his website. If you implement a spring on which the small 110 gr-weight is attached - guided vertically - you might impove the output by providing an additional degree of freedom

http://www.unifiedtheory.org.uk/

good luck

Kator01