Besslers Assistant wrote:Bessler, Milkovic and the pursuit for Mechanical Overunity.
First off I live on Peswiki so most of my knowledge comes from the info that is on the site. The first article I read of Milkovic's two stage oscillator I was sure that in a year or two that his device would be self looped and we would have free energy. But to my dismay it never happened. Because of Professor Milkovic work I came upon the experiments of Boomtown laboratories. I followed every experiment and learned a lot fromMr. Raymond L. Head and his assistants. ...
I've resurrected this thread because in working towards an inverse version of the Gravity Pulse Motor (a version that uses pull of the Bessler pendulums rather than the push of the Keenie falling weights) I've realised why Raymond made his claim of generating energy from his version of the Milkovic pendulum.
This thread is the first in which Raymond's name crops up.
I've now found the thread which records my conversation with Raymond. It's entitled:
I had suggested to Raymond the he automated his hand action but as the following post shows this ain't easy for the reasons given.
Grimer wrote:Been thinking about your (cloud camper's) system. In particular the need to apply the "hand" at the right point to keep the system in resonance. A human does this instinctively but then a human is a very complex system which can even ride a unicycle.
The Achilles heel as far a my idea is concerned? I had given that no consideration till now.
Your phrase, "then begins actively wasting energy slowing the pendulum down until it has no energy at all!"
Says it all really. Unless a system has some natural negative feedback it is going to die the death.
Thanks. I'll have to think about how the Stirling achieves that for example - and the Rubber Band Motor. In the limit is the heat input needed, not for energy purposes but for control? - to stop the adiabatic pulsing from angular drift.
Is feedback in the Milkovic required not merely to make up for frictional loses but for control? It would appear so.
I now realise that the explanation of Raymond's success is essentially the same principle that is being applied in the Gravity Pulse Motor, albeit unwittingly in Raymond's case. I'm working up a full explanation and will post it on the General Discussion Forum when it's completed.
If I'm correct then an extended Milkovic pendulum is essentially the basic building block of the Bessler Wheel. As Bessler said it is very simple in operation. The difficult bit is in the understanding of why it works.
Bit like its inverse,really; the GPM. People seem to have problems following the explanation for that.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
If I'm correct then an extended Milkovic pendulum is essentially the basic building block of the Bessler Wheel. As Bessler said it is very simple in operation. The difficult bit is in the understanding of why it works.
Bit like its inverse,really; the GPM. People seem to have problems following the explanation for that.
Do people have trouble following the explanation? Or do you imagine gain where there is none and cannot understand why others don't.
I don't wan't to be a broken record.... use basic experimentation to prove prediction of gain. There are simple methods of measuring input vs output by efficiently using PE.
Raymond puts his heart and soul into his work, I have to give him that, however, I believe he has not learned the lesson that the Milkovic style 2SO is not the path forward. He is constantly having to tweak his design to make up for inefficiencies inherent in the dual-lever design. If he stays on his current path, he may yet overcome those losses, but in the end, the power output of the device will suffer for it.
The 2SO in my opinion is a remarkable apparatus, and in the correct configuration, will function within a rotating environment, shifting weights to the overbalanced position, which in turn keeps the wheel turning, and the 2SO running. There is a symbiotic relationship between the 2SO and the wheel – the closing of the loop if you will …
Are you saying Raymond's (or Milkovic's) 2SO is a 3SO, are you referring to your design, or are you saying there are actually 3 components (A,B,and C) and that is why it should be called a 3SO?
Sorry Grimer, I read your email yesterday but I have a sick kid at home and have not had a chance to type up a reply. If there were a direct question I would have replied immediately.
I'm also a member on several alternative medicine forums and I get so many daily emails it is overwhelming at times and I have to take a break from time to time to clear my head. I know you are probably thinking ... alternative medicine ... sick kid ... something's not working. Well quite the contrary. I'm testing a delayed "big-bang" approach to giving an anti-biotic rather than regular preventative/maintenance doses. I'm 3 years into a 5 year test.
Very sorry to hear about your problem. I know what it's like to have long term sickness in the family since I nursed my wife on a kidney machine for 14 long years. That was 40 years ago when dialysis involved building the kidney three times a week with cellophane sheets between large thick plastic boards.
Fortunately the worst thing that happened to any of my children was a broken collar bone when one of them took the safety strap off the back door of our Thames Dormobile and fell out at 30mph.
Colloidal Silver is the antibiotic ... nature's antibiotic ... and the number one prescribed antibiotic in the US until penicillin became the profitable choice. There is much to learn if anyone is willing.
You can take small daily maintenance doses or you can wait until you are ill then take larger more frequent doses. I have been testing both approaches. So far, the maintenance regimen is showing the best results.
