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

[ltseung888]

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 .

Dear Neptune,

I believe that your design is very different from the Milkovic 2 Stage Pendulum.  It would not give the 2SO justice.

The 2SO works on two mechanisms:
1.     The Pulse-pushed pendulum.  This by itself is already an overunity mechanism.  I attaché Divine Revelation 2.xls again for your information.
2.    The Weight lifting by Centripetal Force mechanism.   If you look at video 6, the 40 pound pendulum cannot lift the 70 pound weight (rough numbers) when stationary.  I assume the lever arms are the same.   However, when the pendulum swings, there will be circular motion and Centripetal Force will take over.  The formula for Centripetal Force is m*v*v/r  where m is the mass of the pendulum, v is the velocity and r is the radius.
Let us examine the swinging of the pendulum from the stationary position.  Initially, the weight of the pendulum will not be able to lift the weight on the LHS.  When the pendulum begins to swing and when the amplitude is small, the Centripetal Force is still not sufficient to lift the weight.  However, when the amplitude increases to a certain value, the highest velocity at the lowest swinging position will be high enough. (remember the m*v*v/r formula).
The Centripetal Force will be large enough to lift the weight.  But then the velocity of the swinging pendulum will decrease, the weight will then drop back (and capable of doing work).  Note that the natural swinging motion of the pendulum is hardly affected.  The original position of the pendulum is restored.  The required pulse-push is to maintain the pendulum swing due to some frictional losses.

Please understand these two mechanisms and how both can lead-out gravitational energy.

[neptune]

I do not believe that my experiment is different from the 2SO . The only way that it is different , is that, after one swing, the pendulum is stopped by being caught on a ratchet, and the counterweight is prevented from falling. Then measurements can be taken. There are 2 reasons why we stop the counterweight from falling
1. If we lift a weight we expend energy, but if we allow the weight to fall, we have lost the potential energy we gained and the net output is zero.
2. I have proven that by correct phasing, the up and down movement of the beam CAN give back energy to the pendulum .
    My belief is that if the 2SO is overunity, it will show OU on just one swing of the pendulum. However, if you believe that a left-to-right swing is somehow different to a Right-to-left swing, let us do one of each, stopping the pendulum and counterweight after each swing and adding the results together . The 2SO is either OU or it is not. There can be no excuse for not trying this for yourself . I did it with a zero budget, using parts found in rubbish skips. I used to think that the reason nobody could make a self runner was due to phasing problems. The real reason is that there is no OU in this device. Until you actually try my experiment you are fooling yourself. With Respect, Ken.

[gdez]

@ neptune,
I do not feel you have done any experiments to verify your conclusions, let alone mine. My swing 5 project shows 23* power, but yet I have not seen one video from you to verify your talk. Show me , don't tell me.
Sick of ur bs,
Greg

[ltseung888]

I do not believe that my experiment is different from the 2SO . The only way that it is different , is that, after one swing, the pendulum is stopped by being caught on a ratchet, and the counterweight is prevented from falling. Then measurements can be taken. There are 2 reasons why we stop the counterweight from falling
1. If we lift a weight we expend energy, but if we allow the weight to fall, we have lost the potential energy we gained and the net output is zero.
2. I have proven that by correct phasing, the up and down movement of the beam CAN give back energy to the pendulum .
    My belief is that if the 2SO is overunity, it will show OU on just one swing of the pendulum. However, if you believe that a left-to-right swing is somehow different to a Right-to-left swing, let us do one of each, stopping the pendulum and counterweight after each swing and adding the results together . The 2SO is either OU or it is not. There can be no excuse for not trying this for yourself . I did it with a zero budget, using parts found in rubbish skips. I used to think that the reason nobody could make a self runner was due to phasing problems. The real reason is that there is no OU in this device. Until you actually try my experiment you are fooling yourself. With Respect, Ken.

You have to make sure that the centripetal force (m*v*v/r) is large enough to lift the weight on the LHS.  Also you need to make sure the weight on the LHS can restore the pendulum to the initial condition (usually not a problem) before you can detect OU effect.

Please read the calculations in the attached file again.

[sm0ky2]

still no successful looping of the device???

hmm......

the escapement was invented 1200 yrs ago,.. weve already posted its design and function...
there are tens of dozens of double-action-pendulum creations from the posters here....
NONE of you guys can build a mock-clockwork piece and try to perpetuate this thing??


There have been other reasonable proposals, including storage of the energy by various mechanical mechanisms, or direct-coupled transfer from the verticle to the oscillatory system.
Have any of these been attempted??

this thing is supposed to be 12x??  all we need is 1x
you can throw the other 11 away if you want to....
just loop one of those x's back to the pendulum and we're done.
problem solved. save the world, blah blah..

Why hasnt this been accomplished ?