Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 94 95 96 97 98 [99] 100 101 102 103 104 ... 304   Go Down

Author Topic: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !  (Read 2237896 times)

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1470 on: September 07, 2010, 04:05:04 PM »
Quote from: AnandAadhar on September 07, 2010, 03:57:57 PM
Nice demand, but that would be the end of this thread. Maybe someone should only make demands if he leads the way in this too.

Why the end of this thread? So, you don't think a self-sustaining device based on Milkovic idea can ever be built, is that it?
Logged

AnandAadhar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
    • The Order of Time
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1471 on: September 07, 2010, 04:22:26 PM »
Quote from: Omnibus on September 07, 2010, 04:05:04 PM
Why the end of this thread? So, you don't think a self-sustaining device based on Milkovic idea can ever be built, is that it?

You say one should only post a success. Is this what you say such a success?
A selfrunning challenge? What is your experiment in this?
Logged

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1472 on: September 07, 2010, 04:33:18 PM »
Quote from: AnandAadhar on September 07, 2010, 04:22:26 PM
You say one should only post a success. Is this what you say such a success?
A selfrunning challenge? What is your experiment in this?

I think one should post careful analytical results proving this is OU or if a device is to be posted then it should necessarily be OU. Repeating over and over again variations of Milkovic's device brings no advance.

There were several papers written with some attempts of tom solve the differential equations describing the system eve prior to it being self-sustaining. These should be continued. I think a couple of Serbian authors did that, other than Milkovic. As far as a constructed device goes, it make sense to publish only a self-sustaining one, as I already said. Do as much work as you wand, try all kinds of variants but why publish it if it isn't advancing the matter at hand? What's wrong with experimenting without constantly showing to others your failures. The only reason I can think of is to alert them that there's still someone interested in the die and that it isn't dead. That can be said in words, then, from time to time without showing the failed attempts in. Ida and so on. Otherwise you're just fueling the negativism of the partial critics. That serves no purpose in the pursuit for OU.
Logged

AnandAadhar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
    • The Order of Time
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1473 on: September 07, 2010, 06:19:27 PM »
Quote from: Omnibus on September 07, 2010, 04:33:18 PM
I think one should post careful analytical results proving this is OU or if a device is to be posted then it should necessarily be OU. Repeating over and over again variations of Milkovic's device brings no advance.

There were several papers written with some attempts of tom solve the differential equations describing the system eve prior to it being self-sustaining. These should be continued. I think a couple of Serbian authors did that, other than Milkovic. As far as a constructed device goes, it make sense to publish only a self-sustaining one, as I already said. Do as much work as you wand, try all kinds of variants but why publish it if it isn't advancing the matter at hand? What's wrong with experimenting without constantly showing to others your failures. The only reason I can think of is to alert them that there's still someone interested in the die and that it isn't dead. That can be said in words, then, from time to time without showing the failed attempts in. Ida and so on. Otherwise you're just fueling the negativism of the partial critics. That serves no purpose in the pursuit for OU.

I agree with that. That is exactly what I am doing. Testing this and that but no real progress found as yet. I am convinced that to arrive at a OU device has a difficult learning curve.
Logged

Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1474 on: September 07, 2010, 06:23:35 PM »
Indeed, it's a very difficult engineering problem which shouldn't be taken lightly as if it's something insubstantial which we can play around with and make irresponsible videos just for fun. This is a serious business and what looks like fun is taken very seriously by those who want to destroy the OU research and falls right in their hands of destruction.
Logged

Solomon111

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1475 on: September 18, 2010, 04:22:46 PM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gSokCcsu7s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiLLlFYOv18
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D73mcdvhyZA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajc6hzY-XXU Milkovic's Pendulum Replica video 10 (KG 1340 PENDULUM)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9MzYmRFjog&feature=related

This is absolute proof - over unity!
Lever has equal arms, and it is independent replica. Try to take a hammer, from the example of 20 kg, and you'll see how much you can do.
It should be noted that this is initial experiment, improvised in order to collect basic data.
And, of course, they will continue

more on... http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/indexEng.htm
Logged

Cloxxki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1083
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1476 on: September 18, 2010, 06:05:21 PM »
I hope you are kidding.

All those vids prove the same, that no excess energy is produced, nor extracted.

A bigger device doesn't make the claims any more valid.
Not a single gram of weight was lifted as much as one mm over the course of minutes of penduling. All weights quickly came to rest as they had started.
Useful work = mass * distance, right? No distance was overcome, by any amount of weight.

Put a steel ball in a steady bowl. Tap it. See it gain height, as long as you time the tap well. Stop tapping, and see it come to rest where it started. Same idea. Nice show, but no energy extracted, AT ALL. The energy put in is therefore quite substantial.
An independent replication, sure. But without added proof of the bold claims from the Milkovic camp.

Please put your engineering talent and Free Energy intentions to a new design.
Logged

Solomon111

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1477 on: September 19, 2010, 05:59:39 PM »
It is obvious that teams from Italy, done only a preliminary investigation. But, all in order to gain first impressions, because they have not dealt with this issue. Better results are expected in the future. What is obvious is that over unity is achieved and cant be expressed in numbers because they didnt  measured.
It took over 100 years to accept evidence of free fall and 50 years to accept the law of conservation of energy. I hope that we will accept this for few years...
Logged

Solomon111

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 44
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1478 on: September 19, 2010, 06:04:25 PM »
Logged

AnandAadhar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
    • The Order of Time
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1479 on: September 20, 2010, 11:16:19 AM »
Quote from: Solomon111 on September 19, 2010, 06:04:25 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajc6hzY-XXU
over unity sure!

I also spoke at first in my IPMM OU trial searches of overunity when I witnessed magnetic reaction force resulting in spin and pulses won from a magnetic rotor approached by a neodynium rod magnet in my hand. But the actual proof that it is really OU is not as easy to achieve. We have a conviction here, not experimental proof. If we see a flying saucer moving against the laws of aerodynamics e.g. we are convinced that we can move around space (or warp time) in stead of air. That is a conviction, but not proof from controlled tests of our own. With this it is the same: we see the Milkovic two phase response happening, but no way is proven that the energy output here is greater than the input. Only a self-sustaining mechanical loop does that, irrespective of what Marjanovic e.g. theoretically defends about it. That is what it is all about here in this thread.

compare: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4449.new.html#new
Logged

spinn_MP

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1480 on: September 20, 2010, 03:00:14 PM »
Quote from: Solomon111 on September 19, 2010, 06:04:25 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajc6hzY-XXU
over unity sure!

Sure, sure...  ;D

BTW, the video is showing the most inefficient "OU" device I managed to see over the last few years...

AAaah.....I mean, really?
Logged

Cloxxki

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1083
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1481 on: September 21, 2010, 12:47:01 AM »
Sure??

I can make a device from a few elastics bands and random weights and rods which will move much more unpredictably, for a longer period of time, and it onl needs a tap of my finger to set it off. Yet, it will not be OU either.
There is so much we could calculate. But only the one interpreting the data can make the righ tor wrong assumption.
We as human used to think human eyes were the lights that made things visible. For when they were closed, we could not see further than the insides of our eye lids.
And we believed the earth was flat and quite huge, because hoever far we'd dare to travel, we'd never roll of drift off it.

Is the Milkovic camp delisional, or disinfo agents? Or perhaps, they are holding back their best (and only significant) work?
Logged

Alexioco

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 579
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1482 on: September 21, 2010, 11:59:24 AM »
Its quite clear that the pendulum is independent from the lever, it retains the power of free movement so the pendulum can effect the lever (causing it to move) while at the same time retaining its own swing. Therefore the movement of the lever is an energy addition inherient to the pendulum. When stopping the output/lever the input/pendulum is not reduced, so why not connect the output/lever to the input/pendulum causing it to perpetuate? The additional energy inherient from the pendulum is more than enough to keep the pendulum going. I am building the device then adding a very simple mechanism to "connect" the output to the input. The synchronization of the output and input seem quite simple. Once built and tested, ill post results...

Alex
Logged

Merg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 438
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1483 on: September 22, 2010, 04:05:10 AM »
RHead is on the road again!

UpDate on escapement that works for 2 stage oscillator
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu3cy9MyzFI

Size , Shape , AND Weight of pendulum Does matter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-rjJbTs200
Logged

AnandAadhar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
    • The Order of Time
Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #1484 on: September 22, 2010, 09:31:46 AM »
Quote from: Alexioco on September 21, 2010, 11:59:24 AM
Its quite clear that the pendulum is independent from the lever, it retains the power of free movement so the pendulum can effect the lever (causing it to move) while at the same time retaining its own swing. Therefore the movement of the lever is an energy addition inherient to the pendulum. When stopping the output/lever the input/pendulum is not reduced, so why not connect the output/lever to the input/pendulum causing it to perpetuate? The additional energy inherient from the pendulum is more than enough to keep the pendulum going. I am building the device then adding a very simple mechanism to "connect" the output to the input. The synchronization of the output and input seem quite simple. Once built and tested, ill post results...

Alex

Not quite independent... Clearly the lever is energized by the pendulum and thus takes energy from it. Even though the pendulum movement seems to be unhindered by it, the pendulum will, logically spoken - and this I also noticed in my tests -, swing less, that is shorter, when the lever is allowed to move along. This you can test. If positive to you as well, - mind e.g. the position of the pivot point, high or low - that doesn't mean that there wouldn't be any gain in efficiency of transmitting pulses this way. But the OU claim still needs to be proven by experiment before we can confirm that we have gold in our hands here. So indeed go ahead and build a loop. But we mustn't confuse efficiency gain with energy gain. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 94 95 96 97 98 [99] 100 101 102 103 104 ... 304   Go Up
« previous next »