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

[fishman]

In my opinion  one needs only utilise the downward movement of the output arm . Add a heavy weight to the output arm ,

I agree i found that after watching slow motion frame by frame examination of a few videos. I found that the downward "free-fall" of the weight is at least 40% faster than the rise of the weight. This extra energy is very important when considering how to collect the output of the TSO.     

[Cloxxki]

Is the claim still standing at 12x output vs input?
A small child can loop such a device, regardless of irratic timing. give the child the manually powered device and a supply of Lego, and it will take about an hour.
12x offers SO much for effciency losses.
The inventor should reduce the 12x claim (to say 1.5x) and then still it would be hard to believe. A device like Rhead's should be working even if there was just 1.1x (less than 1% of claim) to be had.

Here's a challenge.
Let an electronically controlled engine simulating the way the 2SO is claimed to operate. At 12x input, but adjustable to lower efficiency of course. You give a pendulum a tap, and the output lever multiply it 12x that in useful work.
Now notice how childishly easy it is to loop the thing. Even at 2x OU.

The free energy in the 2SO is like a dream running through your fingers. You can alomost grab ahold of it. You just need to believe and keep trying.
It's a fun aid to overcome stiction in a waterpump, but the great minds looking at the 2SO are being kept for more worthwhile projects.

[neptune]

The 2SO has now been around for about 10 years ., There have been various mathematical "proofs " of OU , but the best one I have seen is by Jovan Marjanovic . The particular example he examined turned out to be 3.25 times OU .I personally think that Raymond Head is struggling a bit because he has chosen the electrical route to OU rather than the mechanical .
    I have designed an experiment which I hope to work on , which will easily prove OU or otherwise .Imagine a classic 2SO . At the opposite end of the lever to the pendulum is a weight .This weight is mounted on a horizontal arm , like a horizontal pendulum . The weight just sits on top of the lever . The arm has a ratchet , so the weight , when lifted , does not fall .During the test , the pendulum is allowed only one swing , from left to right . It starts in a horizontal position . At the end of its swing , it is caught by a ratchet . The beam is just heavy enough at the left side to return it to its horizontal start position at the end of the test .During the swing of the main pendulum , the counterweight will rise , and stay up due to the ratchet . The main pendulum will stop on its ratchet at a point lower than the start point . Measure how much lower . Suppose it is 2 inches lower . And say it weighs one pound . So input energy was two inch-pounds . We can measure the output by weighing the counter weight , and measuring its rise . The same equipment and tests can be used to optimise various parameters , such as how far the main pendulum pivot is allowed to fall during the swing . So for example we find that with 2 inch pounds of input we get 4 inch pounds of output , this will prove beyond any possible doubt that the 2SO is overunity . Better than all the theories on earth . If someone beats me to it on this , and gets it on youtube , Please mention my name . Regards , Ken Hardy .

[tagor]

The 2SO has now been around for about 10 years ., There have been various mathematical "proofs " of OU , but the best one I have seen is by Jovan Marjanovic . The particular example he examined turned out to be 3.25 times OU .I personally think that Raymond Head is struggling a bit because he has chosen the electrical route to OU rather than the mechanical .
    I have designed an experiment which I hope to work on , which will easily prove OU or otherwise .Imagine a classic 2SO . At the opposite end of the lever to the pendulum is a weight .This weight is mounted on a horizontal arm , like a horizontal pendulum . The weight just sits on top of the lever . The arm has a ratchet , so the weight , when lifted , does not fall .During the test , the pendulum is allowed only one swing , from left to right . It starts in a horizontal position . At the end of its swing , it is caught by a ratchet . The beam is just heavy enough at the left side to return it to its horizontal start position at the end of the test .During the swing of the main pendulum , the counterweight will rise , and stay up due to the ratchet . The main pendulum will stop on its ratchet at a point lower than the start point . Measure how much lower . Suppose it is 2 inches lower . And say it weighs one pound . So input energy was two inch-pounds . We can measure the output by weighing the counter weight , and measuring its rise . The same equipment and tests can be used to optimise various parameters , such as how far the main pendulum pivot is allowed to fall during the swing . So for example we find that with 2 inch pounds of input we get 4 inch pounds of output , this will prove beyond any possible doubt that the 2SO is overunity . Better than all the theories on earth . If someone beats me to it on this , and gets it on youtube , Please mention my name . Regards , Ken Hardy .

we are waiting for more than 10 years

real proof of a working device
not mathematical proof or virtual proof

[neptune]

@Tagor .Yes we are awaiting a self runner . But waiting will achieve nothing .I am limited to what I can do , due to failing eyesight , poor health , old age and poverty . In spite of these problems , I am working on building my experiment . Surely a test where a one pound weight falling two inches raises a one pound weight four inches or more is more than "virtual " ? Such a demonstration , on its own is the holy grail that has been sought since the death of Bessler .My hope is that this test will inspire builders .I know exactly how to loop this machine if the Grim Reaper doesnt beat me to it . Why not stop waiting and start building ? Just a thought , my friend .