G'day ashtweth and all,

The child on a swing phenomenon is caused by a shift of the centre of gravity on the pendulum (swing) in phase with its natural frequency of oscillations. One way of tapping this is proposed in the Milkovic device though not exactly like you imagine.

Have a look at my paper on Harnessing Secondary Oscillations on http://www.keelytech.com/news.html where this is discussed.

It might give you some ideas.

Hans von Lieven

@Hum

If Chas's wheel machine ran in a closed box, and you measured the heat generated and added that to the output, could this count also in the final results?

I have always been curious about the heat.

I think it was on peswiki or something that I saw a new device chip waffer or something that made electricity from heat. What if the drive motor and generator were covered with these also. Take some of that energy and return it to source.

Or maybe I'm just trying to draw water from a rock.
 

Well, if you put any stock in classic thermodynamic laws, every machine is exactly 100% efficient total-energy-wise.  That would count, heat, sound, vibration, light and all other forms of energy output compared to total energy input.  If the law of energy conservation is shown to be invalid, I guess anything goes!

Most machines are designed for a certain purpose and efficiency is then measured in that context.  For instance, we would be very thrilled if jet engines were developed which made no sound and spewed no heat.  Efficiency in terms of fuel vs thrust would be improved unless some other form of energy output that was not adding to the purpose of thrust were to increase, according to thermodynamics. 

Typical design goals for most machines involve converting energy from a single form to another single form.  So efficiency is usually expressed in those terms only.  Energy outputs not in the desired form are called "losses", though no energy is actually lost.

For OU research purposes, in an effort to prove OU operation, it would be fair to include every form of energy output, although you can see how non-trivial it is just to get accurate electrical metrics.  Imagine the task of accurately measuring the output noise, vibration, heat, light, e/m radiation, etc.   The vast majority of science monies spent have to do directly with constructing experiments which allow the theoretical proposals to be tested and results measured accurately.  That's the name of the game in science.

Classic "Peltier plates" and some similar newer solid state approaches to heat-to-electricity conversion do certainly exist, although the best conversion efficiencies reported seem to be below thirty percent, as I recall.  And that number is for rather high temperature differences, like 400C.  For modest temp diffs of 20-30C as found in electrical equipment, I think 10-15 percent would be doing well.

Humbugger

How about measuring the OU by your money needed for the power bill

@GraviTar
So far there have been number of speculations regarding how this might work.
If you think you have figured out how it works: please, share your ideas with us so we can start on replication faster.

Has anyone else here figured out how it works yet? I saw the video, then looked at the still, and it took me ten seconds to figure it out.

It's quite ingenious in it's simplicity.

Yes, Gravitar, tell us how it works!  Please!

Humbugger

Forget the brightly painted flywheels, pulleys, generator and electric motor. They are a separate unit from the big gravity wheel. That is quite apparent in this YouTube video, the TV news report: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QD2Whs_LxA
The gravity wheel is nowhere to be seen; yet the unit is running.

At 00:15 of the video, you see only the second wheel turning. This is the wheel that is connected to the electric motor with a belt and pulley mounted to a shaft behind it. Obviously, the electric motor is plugged into a standard, household electric source, since there is nothing else turning, nor anything else to indicate that it is being powered, otherwise.

At 00:20, all three wheels are turning, quite rapidly. The blue wheel, or the ?first? wheel, is turning counter-clockwise, while the second and third wheels are turning clockwise. The third wheel is connected to the second wheel via a belt and pulleys, so it is turning in the same direction as the second wheel, which we know is the drive wheel. The blue wheel has a smaller wheel on a shaft behind it, which is spinning via direct contact with the front pulley on the drive wheel, so it is turning in the opposite direction just as two gears would.

This is all for show, for the news cameras. It is doing nothing. It is an electric motor plugged into the wall, connected to some pulleys and wheels, and we can only assume that it is turning the generator and powering the saw and drill they show because we don?t actually see any of these devices and/or their connections.

Now let?s examine the second YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9Y8DBXJTt8

Obviously, we now have the giant ?gravity wheel? here, but more importantly, the first wheel, the ?blue? wheel, is now behind the second wheel. This is just further indication that the first video was just for show.

The second and third wheels are still in their original configuration. All three wheels are turning, as is the gravity wheel, yet they are turning much more slowly than they were in the first video. But upon closer examination, we see that all the small wheels are slightly different. Even some of the pulleys are different; leading one to conclude that this entire setup is a completely different set of wheels.

Now let?s get to the meat and potatoes of this whole thing: The ?gravity? wheel. This has three key parts to it: The larger, outer wheel, that looks like a Ferris wheel; the slightly smaller and difficult to see inner wheel, which is actually just a ring, since it has no spokes or hub; and the final part, which I can only speculate on because it cannot be actually seen in the video, the ?roller?.

Apparently, the inner wheel sits atop the roller, which extends into the body of the Ferris wheel. There are spokes on both faces of the Ferris wheel, but the ones facing us are all detached and bent to one side. I assume they are left on the wheel, rather than removed completely, to maintain balance. This leaves a gap on the front face of the Ferris wheel between the spokes and the hub, which allows the roller to extend into the body of the Ferris wheel.

This leaves us the inner wheel. It has no hub or spokes. It is just a ring. It is situated directly inside the Ferris wheel, but it only makes contact in two places. Firstly, it sits atop the roller, at approximately 6:00, actually, just slightly after 6:00; let?s say 6:05. The second place it makes contact is approximately 3:00, on both the outer and inner wheels. That is, the 3:00 area of the inner wheel is contacting the 3:00 area of the outer wheel.

So this is how it works: The inner wheel is sitting atop the roller at 6:05. It wants to ?roll off? of the roller, while at the same time, the roller is going to roll in the opposite direction as the large ring is rolling off of it. However, the outer wheel doesn?t allow the inner wheel to roll off of the roller, but since it is a wheel, on an axle, it turns. Additionally, the weight of the inner wheel on the one side of the outer wheel makes the outer wheel turn, since it is putting the outer wheel out of balance. I liken it to something that?s in orbit around the Earth: perpetually falling in a constant arc.

So there you have it: The Gravity Wheel. No over-unity, just harnessing the Earth?s gravity in a practical, working manner. You think this could be what crop circles have been trying to tell us all these years?

All the other wheels and pulleys are an attempt to optimize and stabilize the turning motion to get usable energy out of it in the form of electricity. I think that the small electric motor is just to make sure it keeps spinning properly when a load is put on the generator.

i bet it works as claimed! (although i am realy not sure, if it will published open-source) Gravitar, your analysis is as acurate as possible at the moment. i agree.