12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !

[shruggedatlas]

@all,

having looked at this site,since the beginning and doing several experiments, i now realize that you can't take the power off of the center fulcrum, without killing the effect.  there is simply not enough torque.  however looking at the water pumping proplems with a very innefficient type of pump even,  i have to ask the stupid question,  has noone ever heard of a "foot valve"?  it seems to work much like a diode, only allowing water to flow in one direction.   when used with air it can effectively increase the distance verticaly that you can pump water by the use of an air tank with a bladder.

it seems to me if we can develop enough head pressure, whith water, and the right water turbine, we should be able to have a closed loop, where we can run the pendulum with the power generated.

lol
sam

Did you come from the Lead Out thread?  Lawrence Tseung goes on at length about the benefits of a foot pump, one way valves, and mixing air and water.  You should probably read his experiments if you are not familiar with them.

[capthook]

Hi all -

I'm trying to move the pendulum from the 6 o'clock position by 45 degrees to the right applying the rotor "fins" to the pendulum.    The "fins" slope push the pendulum, allowing it to drop at the end of the "fin".

How to reduce the friction/impact to minimize rotor speed reduction?  Materials?  Bearings?  Designs?

Scratch this idea and instead do "_____" ?

Thanks for any ideas!

CH

[Prophmaji]

Gravity is a polarized, oriented gradient.

Hope that helps.

Edit: Now...what does that mean...concerning inertia?

[hansvonlieven]

G?day all.

Quote from my post 601 page 41 this thread.

Consider the following:

You have a balance beam, but this time you have on each end a pendulum of exactly the same length. This is important since the pendulum's frequency in this case is solely dependent on its length. You now give one pendulum a push and it begins to oscillate. The balance beam behaves as before, going up and down at twice the frequency of the pendulum.

What do you think happens after a while?

This is one of the classical experiments in physics because the effects are unexpected.

Say we have given the right pendulum a push. As it swings there is a noticeable diminishing of amplitude. The left pendulum now starts to pick up momentum, which increases with every loss of inertia on the other side. After a while the right pendulum will come to a standstill with the left one in full swing. Slowly the right pendulum will start to pick up momentum as the left one now starts losing energy. After a while, when the left pendulum's energy is spent the right one is in full swing again. The process keeps repeating itself until all energy is spent through friction, drag and heat. If there were no losses the process would carry on forever.

All this flies right into the face of what Milkovic and Lindemann are saying.

So all this Hoo-Haa about Newton being wrong and that the Milkovic device proves it is a lot of crap.

Try the experiment with a coathanger and two pendula of equal length suspended from it on opposite sides, give one of them a push and observe.

Hans von Lieven


To which I received this reply from abassign:

@hansvonlieven

Excellent the analysis, but it is not the motive for which the object proposed from... it has some strange properties.
I have said that the process is not reversing, or the movement of the arm doesn't influence the oscillation of the pendulum. Non only, the force applicate on the arm not influence the pendulum oscillation. Your clear scheme shows that or move of the arm provokes a move of the pendulum but the energy of the pendulum, at the end of the cycle, it is always nothing.

There is not a transfer of energy between the move of the arm and the pendulum, energy that the pendulum accumulates with visible oscillatory movement.
For instance, if the pendulum oscillates, and I stops the arm, the oscillatory energy in the pendulum remains.  From the mechanical point of view, the pendulum is isolated in comparison to the arm, in the direction arm - > pendulum. Instead it is not isolated in the direction pendulum - > arm. The system operates as a sort of diode, the strength applied to the arm, for reaction, can't have influence on the pendulum oscillation.

In mechanics the systems to double pendulum are not often studied, in how much they ask for the calculation of chaotic systems. The study is often made with the theory of the impulse, but the results are always rather scarce, the chaotic systems are not predictable...

Wrong.

There is transfer of energy through the balance arm. No increase of energy is observable, the total energy in the system is static.

I have made a computer simulation of my proposed demonstration using WorkingModel2005. Only gravity has been programmed into the model, no drag or friction has been allowed for to show what happens in the system without outside influence in an ideal scenario. If there was any excess energy it would show up here since there are no other influencing factors.

I repeat it again, Milkovic cheats. The demonstration of his that allegedly proves that Newton does not apply where his system is concerned is flawed, as I already pointed out in post 601.

Here is the proof.

I am sorry the avi of the simulation is very large (38MB) but I wanted to show a complete cycle.

You can clearly see the transfer of energy, very slow and almost unnoticeable at first and then speeding up as the process accelerates until all energy is transferred, at which point the cycle reverses.

Newton?s laws remain intact and so does CoE. There is NO overunity in the device as designed by Milkovic.

Hans von Lieven

As I cannot upload the avi to the server here because of its size I have put it on my website.
http://keelytech.com/overunity/milkovicdouble.avi you can download it from there.

[gaby de wilde]

Hi all -

I'm trying to move the pendulum from the 6 o'clock position by 45 degrees to the right applying the rotor "fins" to the pendulum.    The "fins" slope push the pendulum, allowing it to drop at the end of the "fin".

How to reduce the friction/impact to minimize rotor speed reduction?  Materials?  Bearings?  Designs?

Scratch this idea and instead do "_____" ?

Thanks for any ideas!

CH

I don't think I had seen that concept before.

This is a great idea I think. I don't really care what anyone else thinks, I like it :-)



gradually push the pendulum sidewards.

Bessler describes that.

Clocks of course use an escapement mechanism.

As a note:

Keep looking for ways to make gravity powered devices.

I already know how to do it but I'm trying to find attention for my permanent magnet overunity invention.

http://forum.go-here.nl/viewtopic.php?p=750
View topic - Perpetual motion made simple.

That anyone can understand.