Again, with the self pity and blaming others. I've been patient and you know it.
 
You evidently do not have better things to do, at least not when on OU websites. It's all about your obsession over Alan, and your self-pity. You have no idea how shitty the lives of some of the posters on here may be. They just don't drag it into what should be scientific discussions.
You're allowing emotions and weaknesses to take away from your inventing, and the respect this community can offer you.
I'm not especially a fan of Alan's grumpy old man's attitude myself, but actually liken that to your broken record drama queen act. Man up, and share the good stuff you've got to share.
You should look at Stephen Hawking. His work may be off sometimes, as is yours. But try and catch him on self-pity.
 
I like you more when you talk experimental science.

   Nah, I guess you don't like it when someone states a fact as fact. Things have been much worse for myself than what I've made known. And I have tried discussing the science behind the engineering. It seems that for some reason, I can go into greater detail.
 It might be the years I spent studying math specifically for this type of behavior.
 Unlike other sciences, the potential energy needs to be turned back on itself or it will be lost as entropy. I think this is one reason why the first builds I did many years ago was for the purpose of studying conservation of momentum. I tried discussing that in a  thread once, no one was interested. And no one seems to care that inertia will be equal to the acceleration caused by any over balance. Quite simply put, if inertia can not be negated without cost, then it will require an equal amount of work by the device to compensate for the inertial energy created by the over balance. That is the basic science and yet nobody seems to care those are the limits science puts on any attempt at mechanical overunity.
 I think understanding these things allows me to know that what I have been pursuing has a high degree of probability of working. But then, it doesn't matter if only I can understand it.
 Just like I have gone to school for basic and advanced blueprint reading, some CATI (computer aided 3 dimensional interactive design programming) as well as mechanical drawing and architecture in jumior high school. Plus my machining experience where I worked to tolerances of .0002" and did some cnc programming.
 This on top of going to school for Propulsion Engineering and working in an engineroom and working as a millwright over hauling and repairing steam turbines and generators up to 1500 kw. Needless to say, I have a well rounded background.
 This could be why I can see things in Bessler's drawings others have missed. I am used to applying and working with engineering in more than one way. Have even worked on cars since I was a kid. I guess what some critics miss is that between schooling and experience, maintaining a willingness to learn something new helps with Bessler and OU in general.
 I have learned a lot by studying Bessler's works. And the scientific explanation for WHY what I am building and do call Bessler's Working or Water Wheel is because the potential kinetic of one mass will be transferred to another physical body which will be realized by it developing and maintaining angular momentum. As such, the initial mass will not have inertia. It would be factored force = mass * 0 where 0 is no acceleration due to gravity.
 Quite simple if a person takes a moment to think about it. Because what happens is while the wheel has force = mass * 0 where 0 equals the balance of the wheel. a (potential to accelerate is thesame on both sides) cancels out a. This allows a from the initial mass to be transferred.
 Got it ?
 
 
 edited to add; Cloxxki, does Mr. Hawkings have to tolerate personal attacks while trying to discuss anything ? If not, then why should I be forced to endure it ? I see no reason yet Alan has always harassed me. But it is like when i asked a local repair shop to adjust my parking brake today. They told me the cable had broken. If it was, they would have seen it hanging free underneath the car. They didn't tell me they saw this. I will fix it myself.
 And this is why when I get around to it, I will build what I have been working on. But I can say that when other people can not keep up with the material, then attacking can be considered a defensive postion. I have been told before in this forum that what ever Alan does is okay because OU is not possible. I think that is what most people secretly believe.
 Even rlortie told me in besslerwheel.com that it has been 300 yearssince Bessler built his wheels so why try. And yet he financially helps to support that forum but does not support the idea of actaully building something.
 The reality is, this thread is not far off of what I have been trying to discuss. It uses many of the same principles but in a wheel type format. Doesn't matter though if you can't understand how the motion of the weight changes it's potential, does it ?
 
  Cloxxki, I know you guys don't care but i have missed 1 year of work in the last 3 years. And have worked in quite a bit of pain the last 2 years to keep my job. the 1st surgery came with unexpected complications which i am still dealing with. Why I am off work today, again. I think that in itself is more than enough for me to tolerate. Working on bessler's wheel has been mostly a coping mechanism to keep my mind off of my situation.
               
                                                              Best Wishes
                                                                    Jim

@ Johnny'
 I respect your ideas and situation, but in the little time I have to read, let alone respond to anything here, I don't really want to read about all your problems. I have my own, but  This is not the place for me to talk about them. I don't even know Alan or whoever, I just come here to learn. I don't go onto bessler threads ranting. You do not seem to have anything better to do, Because you have many other threads you comment on, or maybe your just kickass at typing. Whatever. My advice is to spend more time building and observing, it's the only way you will truly learn, since you already know all the angles of the engineering involved. Just lighten up and stop feeling like a victim. It doesn't have to be that way.
 Good luck , Greg

Hey Johnny,
 I have lost well over two dozen family members to cancer in the last ten years and my mom and younger brother are both presently dealing with cancer. Also I participate at 2 to 3 cancer related charities a year, or more. SO ... stop bringing that shit here. This is my hobby that i come to to get away from all that. Stop with the sad stories, I've alrerady heard them all.

to all... let's come back to posting only about free energy and overunity? that is the name and the aim of this forum. thanks.

Here are the news from veljkomilkovic.com e-newsletter:


academician Veljko Milkovic -- An Invention Possibly Greater Than the Wheel[/font]

Wide usage of the rotation, mainly in the form of a wheel, is deemed to be the best solution, which even new constructions are aspiring to use. However, last years some experiments have achieved greater efficiency with usage of oscillatory devices.
 http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Docs/Veljko_Milkovic_An_Invention_Possibly_Greater_Than_the_Wheel.pdf


Zoran Markovic, Ph.D. -- Two-Stage and Three-Stage Oscillator as a Compressor

A new scientific paper by Zoran Markovic, Ph.D.: the purpose of this paper is to explain the functioning of two-stage and three-stage mechanical oscillator, i.e. to demonstrate the possibility of generation of excess energy in two-stage mechanical oscillator invented by academician Veljko Milkovic. Compression of air would be proposed for potential application of two-stage and three-stage oscillators. The paper would discuss the dynamics of the body when gravitational forces acts upon it and the methods of obtaining the over unity.
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Docs/Dr_Zoran_Markovic_Two-Stage_and_Three-Stage_Oscillator_as_a_Compressor.pdf

@Merg ,.I was most disappointed by the two articles shown above . In my posts above I have shown a simple cheap method which provides irrefutable proof that the 2SO is not overunity . The only thing that was new to me was the 3 stage oscillator . Exactly the same method could be used to test for OU in the 3 stage version . I have shown a simple way to measure input and output . When someone can demonstrate a physical model , that when tested by my method shows greater output than input , then I will be impressed . Untill that time , what is the point of mathematicians spewing forth masses of irrelevant algebra ? They are living in cloud cuckoo land .

   Neptune,
>> Untill that time , what is the point of mathematicians spewing forth masses of irrelevant algebra ?  <<

  I agree. I think the following calculus better describes what they're trying to accomplish. What do you think ?

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/math/4/5/7/457e0e895fac0f3cb6bd77a7ae35654c.png)

Hi Johnny . I freely admit that I would not recognise Calculus if it jumped up and bit me . My point was , that you can apply whatever branch of mathematics you like , but unless you can demonstrate that force x distance on the input is less than force times distance on the output , mathematics is irrelevant . For the first time I have shown an easy way to measure input and output accurately .

  I only got as far as trig. wish I learned more. But math does help as well as auto mechanics.
 
>>  but unless you can demonstrate that force x distance on the input is less than force times distance on the output , mathematics is irrelevant   <<
that's wrong. a pendulum's potential comes from it's vertical drop. that's why I consider torque important. but that is something everyone ignores until you get in your car. and if your car doesn't have enough, then you buy a different car with a little bit bigger motor so it can accelerate.
( Horse )power is moving a load a specific distance in a set amount of time, but torque is what accelerates in mechanics and everybody has over looked this for 130 pages. I find that in itself difficult to believe.
 But am making plans for doing a simple build of Bessler's wheel or what I consider it to be. Who knows what the guy really did ? Still, he is very influential in my work. I think I would have liked him.
 
 
 

@Johnny874 .It is good to see that your recent posts have a bit more of a positive output . There may well be something about torque that we have all overlooked . However , if this is the case , people are unlikely to be convinced unless they see a physical model that demonstrates more output than input .By the way , you recently said that your OU research is a "coping mechanism ". That may well be true of us all to a greater or lesser extent . I have said that I feel I have proved , at least to myself , that the 2SO is not overunity ,.To try to convince others would be an uphill task . It is not what people , least of all Milkovic , would like to hear . It reminds me of the story of the Emperors new clothes . Nevertheless , I think Milkovic is " altogether as naked as the day that he was born ."