Is this how Milcovi'c pendulum works?

[Lloyd Burton]

As I am an infrequent visitor this may all be old hat to you regulars, and I could be talking through MY hat. If I am, I am sure you will let me know. In whichever case, I value your opinions.
Having said which, these are my thoughts on how Milcovic's pendulum works. As I'm sure you know, Over Unity have been claimed for M's pendulum, although I have not been able to find an explanation. So these are just my thoughts on the subject I have mulled over for a long time that I now cough up for your consideration.
For those who are not familiar with it, Milcovic's pendulum is a beam set on a horizontal pivot like a child's see-saw. The long end rests on a support while the short end has a suspension point for a pendulum. If the suspension point is 1 unit of distance from the pivot, the length of the pendulum is about 3/4 to 2/3 of a unit, while the optimum length of the longer end of the beam is 3 1/2 or 7/2 units from the pivot. The long end of the beam is relatively massive by comparison with the short end.
The device is set into operation by giving the pendulum bob a light push with the hand. Keep pushing as the bob swings back and forth, until a stage is reached when the swing of the pendulum increases to an arc of 70 to 80 degrees. At this stage, depending on relative weights, the pendulum bob with plunge sharply , causing the other (heavier) end of the beam to lift up quickly.
The action is the result of centrifugal force (okay, okay its a 'fictitious' force). As the bob falls it gathers velocity under the influence of gravity. As it approaches the lowest point of its swing the CF (acting on the point of attachment) overcomes the force of gravity bearing down on the other end of the beam.
Now consider what happens when the bob swings past the lowest point. Travelling upwards the bob loses velocity until the CF becomes less than the
force of gravity on the beam, at which point the bob lifts up and the counterweight beam drops to its original resting position on the stand. After the bob has reached the highest point of its outward swing, its repeats its journey in reverse, finishing up in the position it had at the start before the latest hand-push sent it forth at the commencement of its journey.
What I am trying to demonstrate is that the plunge of the bob happens largely under the influence of gravity (9.8 m/s/s). The heavier counterweight beam however rises at 3 1/2 times the speed (9.8 m/s/s x 3.5), so it takes only 2/7 of the time it would take to fall back onto the stand. Because the rising beam has to resist gravity for a shorter time, IT TAKES LESS ENERGY TO GO UP THAN IT GENERATES COMING DOWN. If that is not over unity, what is?
Now point out the error in my thinking.
Lloyd

[eccentrically1]

The error in your thinking is the part about the rising beam resisting gravity for a shorter time so it takes less energy to go up than it generates coming down. How long something takes to go up or down in a gravitational field doesn't influence the amount of energy that is converted back and forth between PE and KE. It's the same amount exchanged either direction.

[agor95]

Hi Lloyd Burton

Thank you for your analysis on this interesting Milcovic's pendulum device.

It deserves more time to investigate.

This is some way started my analysis of the internal struchures of moving devices.

Regards

[ME]

I haven't worked out the Milcovic pendulum, but I guess the effects wouldn't differ much from a Swinging Atwood.

[agor95]

@ME

You always come up with a good link.

Thank you for the information.

Regards

[daanopperman]

The Milcovich pendulum is nothing more than a flywheel in disguise , when the pendulum reaches 6 o clock , the bob weigh 4 times it's own mass , this overcome the dead weight of the beam , and pull the beam down , as the pendulum bob slows down on the upswing , only its relative mass is working on the beam , and with the dead weight of the beam , the beam drops down to it's original position , when energy is added to the pendulum bob , this happen over and over , but if you had the beam lifted only , without it dropping back to add energy back into the system , the Milcovich pendulum would not be so easily disguised .
With a small weight on the one side of the beam , and the pendulum on the other side , the only thing happening is a weight going up , and returning all the energy when it comes down again , that is the reason a small push is needed at every swing of the bob , less the whole kaboodle stops working in one or two swings .

Daan .

[Lloyd Burton]

eccentrically1
I am open to conviction but I am not yet convinced. This sounds like the proof for the First Law of Thermodynamics: the First Law is because nobody has ever built a PPM therefore the 1st Law is etc etc etc....Likewise, PK always = KE because nobody has yet proved an exception to the law.

If anyone has ever found an explanation for the alleged Over Unity in the Milcovic pendulum I would be glad to see it.

I see now I need to do some sums to understand how the momentum of the bob overcomes the inertia of the counterweight and what its velocity would be.

Daan:
You said “when the pendulum reaches 6 o clock , the bob weigh 4 times it's own mass�
This sounds suspiciously like Bessler’s famous ‘excess weight’. It also reminds me of what he said about the importance of the number 4 in his machine.
Thank you all for your replies, keep the comments coming.
Lloyd

[Tarsier79]

You also need to understand how much velocity the bob loses due to pumping the main arm, vs how much work it is actually doing. I wish I fully knew all of that.

[DannyBouy]

Hello Lloyd

If that is not over unity, what is?
Now point out the error in my thinking.
Lloyd

One way you can know is Veljko Milković hasn't managed to close the loop. Here is a link to his site if you don't already have it.
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/rucnaPumpaEng.html
There is this link at the bottom of the page with specifications.
http://www.veljkomilkovic.com/Docs/Velj ... eights.pdf

Another way you can know is no one else has managed to use the output to drive it. Here is a very good link
http://www.pendulum-lever.com/theory-maths.html
and here is a paper talking about the problems of closing the loop
http://www.pendulum-lever.com/docs/Jova ... k_Loop.pdf

There are people all over the world experimenting with this pendulum but so far no one has manged to use the output to keep it moving. That would be conclusive.

I'm glad you started this thread. I found something here
http://orffyre.tripod.com/bessler/id41.html
Where Bessler said:

Unfortunately, Leibniz died even before taking part in examination of my pendulum at Kassel.

Several places at that site Bessler mentions my pendulum. Is there anyone who can confirm or reject that? I don't know if orffyre.tripod is a valid source.

Thanks
Daniel

[John Collins]

Most of the content on this site comes from the fertile mind of Dr Ramesh Minaria. His texts are imaginative but bear little connection with the known facts. I translated and published everything I could find either written by Bessler or to him. No where does he mention"his pendulum".

Sorry but I feel duty-bound to point out these inaccuracies where ever I find them. Wrong information is worse than none.

JC

[DannyBouy]

Hello John,

What German word does Dr Ramesh Minaria take to mean "pendulum" and what is the proper translation.


Thanks
Daniel

[John Collins]

I have no idea what German word Dr Minaria took to mean pendulum, but then he quotes extensively from my English translations and then adds his special interpretations of what he read. In my biography of Bessler I discussed the presence of the pendulums in the published images, but which were never described by a single one of the many witnesses. I suspect that Minaria took my discussion and ran with it to pastures unintended.

JC

[DannyBouy]

Hello John,

Here are his quotes:

This I was told by Leibnitz when he took interest in my machine. I wanted to learn calculus from him and he desired to learn perpetual motion from me. He told me that Borelli and Hook had already discovered law of universal gravitation. Unfortunately, Leibniz died even before taking part in examination of my pendulum at Kassel. If he were alive today, things would have been different to scientific world and me.

How significant is the problem of friction in your machine? How do you eliminate it? Fischer asked.

‘As raindrops drip or snowflakes fall, they sweep and cleanse the air of dust particles that would be a detriment to the operation of my pendulum. My pendulum for reliable, long-lasting service should be operated in a clean nearly dust-free environment.

Each thing belongs to either the animal or vegetable or matter kingdom. My pendulum invention is exclusively made of matter as you can plainly see by examining the physical parts which I have described before you in my little book.

My innermost invention though good, the parts being good are perfectly obedient to God in their own realms as God is perfectly obedient to his own laws. From the smallest snowflake to the largest planet, from the greatest circling herd to the least round "wheel," from the most glorious peacock tail to the most playful pup, from the oldest column to the newest chain, from the slowest crab to the fastest wind, and from the sharpest anvil blow to the quietest of questions, "... all things denote there is perpetual motion. This is universal law of God. My pendulum is included in all things.

Are these quotes real?

Thanks,
Daniel

[John Collins]

No. His words are the acme of poetic license.

JC

[DannyBouy]

Thank you John

Daniel