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

[neptune]

@Gdez. First of all , no progress will be achieved by accusing other members of BS. I am a gentleman, and treat others with respect.  Why can you not do the same? OK, yes I have done the experiments described. I have shown no videos because I do not have a suitable camera . If I had achieved OU I would have borrowed a camera , but what is the point if the result is negative. All I seek is the truth . Why don`t you show me? For the first time I have shown a simple cheap way that anyone can use to prove it one way or another . It is interesting to note that in his latest paper, Marjanovic [Milkovich`s mathematics man] proposes a similar test method to mine. We both seem to have thought of it around the same time. So, no more name calling, lets just find the truth.,
@sm0ky2. I could and would build a feed back device , but until I can prove that it is OU, what would be the point.
        Please do not attack me for treading on your cherished beliefs. Let us discover the truth, one way or another. If it is 2x OU or more , either loop it, or use my method to prove it.

[Merg]

from YT: The Scale Going Crazy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d9wu0lFKL8

[Merg]

VAWT 6 blads 55 gallon drums? by R. Head
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swrvprtDrAg

[sm0ky2]

@sm0ky2. I could and would build a feed back device , but until I can prove that it is OU, what would be the point.
       

I believe that IS the point.  If you built a feedback system and looped this thing, that in and of itself would "prove" overunity. Thats the only solution to end this madness, look how much has been posted since this mess started.

When, if you go back, myself and several other engineers presented mathematically where all of the energy is going to, during each stage of the oscillations, shortly after this nonsense began. Proving mathematically, that this system is not OU. But rather, a very efficient method of transfering mechanical energy.

[neptune]

@sm0ky2. We have both proved that the 2so is not overunity. You used mathematics, and I used real world experiments. This is my reasoning. If it is OU, then the OU will show itself during each cycle of operation. What is one cycle? well that depends on if the device behaves the same as the pendulum moves left-to-right, as it does when the movement is right to left. To be safe, let us assume that it behaves differently, so we need to do 2 tests, one in each case, and add the results together. Test procedure. Start the pendulum from horizontal. Then measure its hight when it stops at the other side. We now know how much height the pendulum lost during its swing. We now know the input energy. weight of pendulum x distance it fell . When the counterweight at the other end of the beam rises, we prevent it from falling with a ratchet. So output = weight of counterweight x distance it is lifted. If output is greater then input, we have OU. If it does not pass this test, it is not OU. All the mathematical calculations in the universe is not going to change that. Show me a machine that passes this test, and I will guarantee to loop it.[Terms and conditions apply, OU must be 3 or greater. ]
    Simples!