Is this how Milcovi'c pendulum works?

[rlortie]

For those aware and or acquainted with "Glenn Rouse"

I have received a short e-mail from him:

Got interesting news of a breakthrough in India. You still with us I hope!

Ralph

[Art]

"news of a breakthrough in India."

---

That will be Raj ! : )

[eccentrically1]

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.
Lloyd

The first law of thermodynamics is falsifiable like any of the other laws. But throughout the history of the universe, it's never been falsified.

You can build a milkovic 2 stage oscillator and measure the energies if you think it is over unity. Why would it be OU? It doesn't keep going. You don't even have to build one, you can watch the videos. He has to keep pushing the pendulum to keep it going.

[Lloyd Burton]

eccentrically1
'Over Unity' means getting more out that is put in. It does not mean using what you get out to send back to the input side, although this is the ideal of all OU devices. There have been many alleged OU devices but 'closing the loop' remains illusive. It always seems to involve an 'out of phase' problem. If we used the water that M's pendulum pump produces to fill a header tank that would break the phase. Then we could use that water to power the pendulum. If the pump gained on the tank, it would be proof of OU. If the tank ran dry it would prove that OU had not been achieved. Why didn't I think of that before?

[Tarsier79]

I don't think it is a phase problem. Although the MP is mostly difficult to make a reaction mechanism to power the pendulum.

[Lloyd Burton]

You said: "So MP is mostly difficult to make a reaction mechanism to power the pendulum."

Sorry Tarsier, I can't work that out. Would you care to re-phrase ?

[Not_James_Lindgaard]

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

What I'm working on is knowledge that could be gained from understanding the pendulum. If the swing is 1 meter at 1 m/s, then if the weight is raised to 1/2 meter then it's velocity is 4 m/s.
Also inertia can be calculated, that's what Milkovic uses. mv^2/r.
This means a weight moving at 1 m/s at 1 meter has 1/2 the inertia of a weight swinging at .5 meter.
With Milkovic, a short quick swing can have more force than a long slow swing. The short swing actually has less velocity but can generate more force away from the fulcrum.
It's strange that in here no one has considered the different forces that can be associated with a pendulum. Maybe Bessler included those in his drawings as a hint ? They do get their force from swinging, right ?
Kind of why I think I know what I'm doing. Am quite familiar with physics.

[Tarsier79]

Sorry Lloyd, it made sense to me at the time I typed it. Let me try again:

It is quite difficult to create a feedback mechanism from the pumping side back to the pendulum side.

And further: Once created, you have to know how efficient the feedback mechanism is before you can determine if the MP is OU (, unless it runs by itself.)

The MP has many variables that changes its frequency and efficiency. My own research into the matter has not been positive.

[Tarsier79]

Also just read JLs post. JL, I suspect your understanding of the pendulum is less than you think it is.

The bigger drop, the more inertial energy the pendulum has to pull the load.

[Grimer]

I've found the most interesting videos of the Milkovic are those of Raymond Head.

Two points of interest. I would have thought a lot of energy is lost by the heavy weight banging on the plank. He seems to put very little effort into keeping the pendulum going.

I wrote quite a few posts on this. A search on Milkovic AND pendulum together with my name as author should probably find them. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have after you've read the posts.

[Lloyd Burton]

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.

That would be easy to find experimentally. Just measure the reduction in height the bob reaches when it returns to the starting side. Unfortunately I am too busy building my wheel to do this myself.

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi Lloyd,

My view on Milkovic Pendulum is this, if it was Over Unity then it should only take a crank, push rod, and slider to close the loop.

I think there is a small anomaly in the Milkovic Pendulum, but nothing that cannot be explained with the proper analysis.

Edit, + slider.

[Lloyd Burton]

Hi Trevor.
I'm not sure what you mean by a 'slider' but the feed-back would have to be timed to come at exactly the right moment either at the end of the outward swing of the pendulum or at the end of the return swing. Although the manual input only comes at the return (once per evolution)it would be redundant but mechanically simpler to do it at both (twice per evolution).
A better idea would be to operate a vacuum pump from the output side to charge a tank. The vac could then be used to operate a piston to push the pendulum at exactly the right time.
Cheers,
Lloyd.

[Grimer]

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.

That would be easy to find experimentally. Just measure the reduction in height the bob reaches when it returns to the starting side. Unfortunately I am too busy building my wheel to do this myself.

It would perhaps be more interesting to boost the Milkovic pendulum from a ±60° to ±360° thus boosting the nadir pulse by a factor of 4 if my memory serves me correctly. This would make the measurement of the difference between a stationary and a Milkovic pendulum easier and be a more sensitive device for measuring the effect of changing various relevant variables.

[Tarsier79]

I did this test with my 3d printed see-saw and a pendulum fall of 90 degrees. I was massively disappointed. I was hoping to see something to give me hope, but only saw what appeared to be a puzzling loss of energy.

Before you ask. I am not repeating the test with any minor modifications. I did however always want to do the 360 degree pendulum test using a highly efficient motor, counter rotating arms and a load.... Maybe If I have time and money to burn.