Leverage can look like OU because of what little work is put in to move a lot of potential.

for instance you can have a 1 ton magnet sitting in a coil and with the proper leverage I can move that 1 ton magnet with a very small solenoid coil on the opposite side of the lever, of course the 1 ton magnet won't move very much but what counts is the large amount of magnet force being moved in the coil.

I could actually use a traverse sound wave on the longer leverage side to vibrate the 1 ton magnet on the short lever side with a simple piezo speaker running at 100 to 200MHZ. I don't know how much power generation could be made because I have only worked out the mechanical solution in my mind and not the math nor has any research of my knowledge has been done to test such a contraption.

I have seen videos of just three men using a very long lever and moving a very large ship onto dock for repairs. it almost seems OU but they say it isn't according to physics.

Not even an Antimatter to matter reaction which is a 1:1 energy conversion is OU because of the Neutrinos given off in the reaction that can't be utilized for power production other than the Gamma Rays emitted and that my friend is a lot of unmerciful gamma rays to say the least.

I don't know where to take this thread because I know that OU will not be in the mechanical area of power production, perfect optical Traps for Light on the other hand will be OU because there will be no losses and there will only be photo amplification of photons within the optical trap, there are full spectrum solar cells in this trap that convert photo reactions to electrical energy at all potential band gaps.

I hope to see more research into this area from the mainstream because as soon as my money comes in I am going to take solar technology to its next level by using specialized photovoltaic effect laser optical materials for a ride!

I am not talking about a type .07 solar cell I am talking about a type 4 solar cell. if you want to know what I mean by type 4 then do a you-tube on Michio Kaku on a type 4 civilization and then you will see what I mean.

Jerry

The interesting thing about Mr. Milkovic's design is that it is a form of parametric oscillator being used in the opposite way.  Most physicists think of parametric oscillations as a child on a swing.   The swing must have a small amplitude and the child's center of mass change adds energy to the swing causing the amplitude to increase.  So, you take a small amount of energy and store it in the oscillation of the swing (energy storage).

The problem with the child on a swing is that if you were to add a load to the swing, the swing would damp.  And the energy input by the child would simply get used 1 to 1.  Mr. Milkovic's design is actually the opposite of that.  In this case the swing is already at max amplitude, you input a small amount of energy to keep the swing going (since there is a portion of the energy that will radiate due to losses).  Centripetal force is what produces the parametric oscillation.  It is this parametric oscillation that you load. 

In the case of the swing, it would be like loading the child instead of the swing (which for the child's case would not be very good).  So you load the child, and keep the swing at max amplitude (the child ends up doing the work).  Yet in this case, it is a natural force you are taking advantage of (not a child) and the amplitude of this natural force is directly related to the mass and gravity (2mg actually).  The problem that Mr. Milkovic has in his design is that the pivot point also moves.  This produces a dampening effect, causing the energy of the pendulum to radiate faster than it normally would.  Still, this shows promise since the entire concept is backward from conventional thought.

YES! You described it in scientific terms that I couldn't 

This is where the focus should be, and then try to explain exactly how energy is conserved while the "child part" is doing work. As I said earlier force will not retaliate back to slow it, it is only a matter of distance. This means that you can make it much less efficient then theoretically possible by normal oscillators, but also more efficient. It all depends on how much you allow the pendulum pivot to move.

Edit: You could say that it in essence is a partly reaction-less drive, since it doesn't do work directly on the mass being moved. In know though that somebody here would be furious that I use such a term on "this simple toy".

Julian

@Nabo00o,

I think the most efficient way would be to not allow the pivot point to move at all.  But to do this you'd need a different design since this MUST happen in Milkovic's system for it to operate. 

Yes without the pivot point moving, it acts like a spring pendulum operating in the parametric regime.  If you can damp only the spring, it won't damp the oscillation of the pendulum.  This is because damping the spring causes the system to act more like a normal pendulum, the energy staying in one frequency.  The parametric oscillation tries to distribute the energy across a range of frequencies.  Its a very interesting phenomenon since it appears that if you can pull energy from the spring of a spring pendulum, the pendulum won't damp.  This may be the "holy grail" of action without reaction.  Yet energy conservation will not be violated since the total (including initial energy input) all sums to zero.

QuoteIf you can damp only the spring, it won't damp the oscillation of the pendulum.  This is because damping the spring causes the system to act more like a normal pendulum, the energy staying in one frequency.

Hmm are you sure about this, this sounds a bit like the common chaotic pendulum....
I've tried something very close to this, and it seems like it will only expand upon the original oscillation, giving it more weights to oscillate, but a dampening will act directly on the pendulum as a result of this.

I think I have a really easy solution to increase the efficiency. As you also said earlier, if we decrease the distance which the pivot is allowed to travel we will increase the efficiency.
So instead of allowing it go far when it makes work, we must give it a really high resistance (a huge load for example) so that there is little loss as a result of displacement, but a lot of work produced because of the force (work equals force times distance). So we just need to alter this relationship, and the hinge is an efficient way of doing it.

Also there are more efficient ways of doing this while still using the same principle. The Milkovic pendulum is incredible useful as a demonstration device, but if we attempt to make a full feedback system there will be lots of mechanical losses, even more if we try to use the common crank system.

As a very practical way to make this all simpler and more efficient is to use it with water.
I called it a 2-stage hydraulic oscillator since I think the name fits very well.
It can soon be ready hopefully, my main problems lies in that I'm not to good with mechanics, not with the construction itself. It is really as simple as it can get, and uses the same centrifugal force used in the pendulum to provide a direct trust to the motor.

If I get it going some time soon I'll post both videos and pictures, so that the skeptics can once and for all accept this concept.

Bye, Julian