30 years after whose claim?

One problem of closing the loop electrically is that even though motors can be efficient, generators at large are very inefficient. But the ratched idea is sound, and whether it is used to do electrical work or mechanical work, its efficiency is somewhere close to 98%, it can of course be both better and worse depending on its use. 

Also, it might be easier to make it self-sustained by using a spring instead of a pendulum.
It only goes up and down, and it should work just the same.


But maybe tagor has a point. Even though it is a very good demonstration device, and that it can also do some useful work, there might be other design which we should focus on.


Still the research should be in many places, because I believe this concept of parametric resonance has a very wide use. And who knows, maybe it is one of the "laws" which controls our universe.
After all, and as I have said for a long time, thermodynamic conservation and entropy laws are not very accurate in predicting the way our universe turned out. There seems to be more existing then just the reactions that leads to entropy.....

JUlian

If COP is 12, you can be pretty damned inefficient at converting to electricity to close the loop.  To be specific, you can waste up to 91.7% during conversion and still provide enough energy to continuously run the pendulum.

This claim about 12 times more energy is not scientifically confirmed yet. Milkovic got that result by measuring friction in a tube, actually it was a medical syringe made of plastic. It would start moving down after some pressure applied. After its initial movement it is very questionable how it would continue to move down. Milkovic used that method because no one was able to tell him how to do measuring.
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Images/Measurement1.JPG

So, in reality results could be 2 times instead of 12 times. That still would be good concerning over unity claim, but not so good in using electric generator with low ratio.

Jovan

After all, and as I have said for a long time, thermodynamic conservation and entropy laws are not very accurate in predicting the way our universe turned out. There seems to be more existing then just the reactions that leads to entropy.....

Very well said. 

But, electric generators have the same efficiency as electric motors (when operated at the optimum frequency). 

Very well said. 

But, electric generators have the same efficiency as electric motors (when operated at the optimum frequency).

Hmm, I have heard otherwise. Or in that case it means that both types are really poor in efficiency.
Here's a good idea. If you want to generate electricity from the Milkovic pendulum, use a ratched design to turn an Ecklin generator. Believe it or not, but they are based on some of the same principles. Flux modulation is parametric oscillation. 

Julian

Could you please explain what an Ecklin Generator is?  Did some quick google searches and all I'm getting is that this is yet another OU device in itself which nobody has ever conclusively tested.

That's far from the truth, but it does already have a tread here I believe.
Anyway, it is a type of generator that is not slowed down by lenz's law. It uses ferromagnetic "slugs" to alter the field path. It does have some things in common with the MEG, expect that it is driven mechanically. I have actually tried the concept my self on the SSG motor I got in the garage.
It will generate a lot of mechanical motion on a plate, but the motor itself will not loose speed or draw any more current.

But anyway, that's just for those who actually want to build something, and want it to work even better. Combining several of these technologies can have a lot of merit. Just replace the old inefficient conversion stages with new technologies that we know are better.

Julian

Hmm, I feel I must reply to some of your statements.

First of all, I didn't say that Lenz's law was negated, I said that it didn't slow the rotor down.
Now, your example with the generator coil is not really accurate. If it was the north pole from the permanent magnet, which the iron slug was inducing into the coil, the coil would (if it generated current) induce the same magnetic field against the slug. This means two norths. The things is, two norths will not slow down the slug, they will instead attract it into the middle. 

You can test this by setting up two magnets with both norths facing each other, and then approach them with a metal plate in between. The plate will be pulled inside, and the magnets (if were restricted by springs), would go closer together.

The same thing will happen when the slug leaves, and this means that the slug will be decelerated by the same amount which it is accelerated. Whether you are making a lot of current or not, the opposing (but attractive) magnetic field on the way out will be just as strong as one the way in.

And as I said, the result will be a generator without lenz's law slowing it down.
I do not know what kind of tests you have done, but I know about someone who have maid a very successful unit (after having tried 3 different design I might add).


What I hope you could understand which is even simpler is a pure mechanical design.
If you have those two magnets with the north facing each other, a rotor with iron plates attached going through the field, would cause the magnets to contract and then expand outward again.
This is because the two opposing fields are polarizing the plate, and thus attract themself to it.
This does also cause the plate to be pulled in. If we then want to remove the plate, we need the same level of energy as what we got from inserting it, but the movement from both magnets are completely for free and could power lots of machinery, and its seems that some are already doing that.

Just wanted to mention this because it is a lot easier to understand it when it is two magnets, instead of one magnet and one coil. But the coil will always generate the same field when current is flowing.

If you don't believe me, I really advice you to try the experiment I mentioned. Try it with two neodymiums, which can really give you a lot of power, and then compare it with energy used to slide the metal through 

Julian

Now, your example with the generator coil is not really accurate. If it was the north pole from the permanent magnet, which the iron slug was inducing into the coil, the coil would (if it generated current) induce the same magnetic field against the slug. This means two norths. The things is, two norths will not slow down the slug, they will instead attract it into the middle.

Assuming the coil is loaded so current can flow, as the slug approaches between the coil and the north magnet, the slug will magnetically orient to a south pole (hence it is attracted to the magnet).  The coil will see a decreasing north pole flux because the magnet's flux is rerouting into the slug.  The coil responds to a decreasing north pole by producing a south pole.  The slug is also a south pole because it was first oriented this way to make the change that the coil sees.  Thus the coil reacts on the slug to slow it down.  Only, this force gets retarded because the magnet is usually stronger than the magnetic field of the coil.  At the best the attractive nature of the slug to the magnet is completely neutralized by the coil.  As the slug leaves, less flux will pass through the slug and more will pass through the coil.  The coil thus sees an increasing north pole.  Its response is to develop a north pole of its own.  The combine north pole of the magnet and the coil act on the slug (still being a south pole) and restrict it from leaving, slowing it down.  I have documented this effect very well. 

You can test this by setting up two magnets with both norths facing each other, and then approach them with a metal plate in between. The plate will be pulled inside, and the magnets (if were restricted by springs), would go closer together.

This is not the same experiment as described above because the coil (which has been replaced by one of the magnets as a test) reverses in polarity as the slug leaves.  To more accurately display how the coil will function, the two magnets must start in attractive mode (north to south) as the slug approaches, then be placed in a repulsion mode (north to north) as the slug leaves.  There will be virtually no force pulling the slug in while the magnets are in attraction mode but there will be twice the force to pull it out when they are in repulsion mode. 

Now, the experiment you suggested where two magnets are in opposition is an interesting experiment which I think is worth merit onto its own.  Two magnets suspended by springs with a slug moving between them.  They will move closer because they become attracted to the slug but the slug saturates and their own repulsion force takes hold so they equally move some distance inward.  In this situation, the same force to move into the field is equal to the force required to move out of the field just like you said - AS LONG AS the magnets are free to move in and out.  IF the magnets are not allowed to move, you'll notice it takes less force to move the slug when the magnets are farther apart than when they are closer to the slug.  So again loading the magnets to produce electricity will still cause a drag since the load will restrict the magnets from coming together right away and delay their separation.  BUT, there might be more output than what it takes to move the slug so it might be worth looking into - on another thread of course.

Sorry I don't want to talk about this anymore on this thread since its not directly related to the mechanical oscillator.