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

[Marctwo]

Although I'd expect this mechanism to be obvious to most, I can understand how a casual observer may be mislead by the 'magic' it seems to possess.

However, it's painfull to see a grown man put so much time and effort into something he obviously hasn't thought about.

It's a bit like the secondary momentum conduction device...  Ok, it's a tray on wheels.  But you can push 20kg on it with your little finger.  All I need to figure out is how to get the wheels to push the tray. 

[tagor]

It shows something very interesting, that you can create motion/action without a reaction which defies newtons third law of motion.

where do you see this action without reaction ?

if you can proof this fact , you are a genius
you have to become more famous than Einstein

[Paul-R]

Ok, it's a tray on wheels.  But you can push 20kg on it with your little finger.  All I need to figure out is how to get the wheels to push the tray. 

You've missed the point. If you want to learn, go back to the inventors site, and read the papers.

[Marctwo]

You've missed the point. If you want to learn, go back to the inventors site, and read the papers.

No, I'm one of those that hasn't missed the point.

This device simply transfers energy to and fro between the pendulum and lever.  And quite inefficiently too.  The energy losses are mostly due to the usual friction and enertia acting on the load.  So it doesn't take much energy to keep it going as not much energy is lost in the first place.

Useful?  Given an appropriate context and an efficient design, yes.
Over-unity?  No.
Special or unusual?  No.
Worthy of a fancy name?  No.

[Nabo00o]

No, I'm one of those that hasn't missed the point.

This device simply transfers energy to and fro between the pendulum and lever.  And quite inefficiently too.  The energy losses are mostly due to the usual friction and enertia acting on the load.  So it doesn't take much energy to keep it going as not much energy is lost in the first place.

Useful?  Given an appropriate context and an efficient design, yes.
Over-unity?  No.
Special or unusual?  No.
Worthy of a fancy name?  No.

I can only disagree to what you have said here, as this clearly demonstrates an incredibly easy way to collect more energy from either or both gravitation and centrifugal force. It as been either ignored or not yet stumbled upon for centuries, but it without a doubt working.
When the pendulum swings back and forth, it loses only a tiny percentage of its energy in the process because of its low friction and air resistance, but still though it manages to manifest a force in the hinge, and that force is not related to the swing of the pendulum, as any ammount of work done by the hinge will not relate back to the pendulum. It is, to me at least, very easy to understand, and can also easly be demonstrated by yourself.

Its funny, because normaly that's the thing we allways want to restrict or remove as much as possible, at least when we want to make a wheel or anything rotating be as stable as possible.
Tell me why you think the pendulum is in some way diminishing its energy to the hinge, as their motions is totaly unrelated to each other and unable of affecting each other. Because really, the only thing that is affecting the hinge is the weight of the pendulum, which is more or less work free.