Milkovic & your PM model...

A Bessler, gravity, free-energy free-for-all. Registered users can upload files, conduct polls, and more...

Moderator: scott

User avatar
Grimer
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5280
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Harrow, England
Contact:

re: Milkovic & your PM model...

Post by Grimer »

The following text was accidentally posted on a 2008 thread. It relates to Wubbly's link above and belongs here.

Grimer wrote:
rlortie wrote:Ralph, you were doing pretty good!

But in all these types of discussions it is much like trying to explain color to a blind man.
Then of course my favorite,,," you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think"

You are at a one down disadvantage in that you don't have hands on experience with this. Even I will admit to you that after two years
I don't have the answer. But I will keep on until I do.

So what are most people missing?

The pendulum is an old device, as close to a pm machine as we can get. It has always been build with a rigid structure, to prevent any motion
at the pivot point. It was Veljko that saw that if you could loosen off the pivot point, it will flop up and down and in looking at this movement, understand the theory of the energy released at this point.

As the pendulum falls through the 6:00 position the pivot has to restrain the fall. The whole gravity addition must be contained and diverted
into uphill swing, right? Then at the end of this swing the pendulum bob actually starts to lose weight. Just do the math or experiment...
at about a 120° swing the bob will weigh half it's weight... and at the bottom of the swing it will weigh half as much again.

This is the "force" then, that is on the axle/pivot point. No one before Veljko had ever tried to harvest this "potential energy" in this manner.

If, as Veljiko has done, we fasten the pivot point to a secondary arm and allow this arm to translate this previously hidden energy then the
possibility to extract and utilize this "force" is a possibility. In a grandfather clock the pendulum motion is a very modest 6 to 10° say, but to
generate the most "force" we try for from 120° to 180° of swing. The force is multiplied correspondingly but the DRIVING force is also
increased. Then too as I pointed out in the "botafumeiro" example the motion of the combined pendulum and secondary arm is counter-
productive, in that we are actually dropping the pendulum when to sustain the pendulums motion we should be raising it.

So if we have a 20 Kg pendulum swinging say 120° we have a force of 20Kg's at the pivot point that is relatively cost free, over a short distance.

This is a machine that becomes more practical as the size is scaled up. It might never be proven at small scale.

It will never be proven with bike parts, the lost motion of the ratchet clutch defeats it. One must use a zero backlash indexing clutch.

The motion of the secondary arm is slow and limited, electrical generation is nonexistent at this speed, yet to speed the "force" up 100
times diminishes the torque by 100 times....the end result, friction wins.

But coupled with an invention as postulated by Felix Wüth, such as the "Living Energy" machine....?

Another possibility is the Wilt device...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMb-mab7ad4

I hope I have shed a small ray of light?

Be of good cheer,

(Author name deleted)

PS: you have my permission to post parts, or all of this...
Very interesting and constructive post, Ralph. Thanks very much for that.

What is missing is any conception of the effect of the third derivative (Jerk) on the outcome.

The earth reaction introduces an external force into what is otherwise a closed system. The conventional argument about gravity being a conservative force is true because a closed system is assumed but if one opens it by introducing an earth reaction it is no longer true.

It's not surprising this has been missed because it is very difficult to appreciate things which haven't happened. For instance by building the London sewer network Joseph Bazalgette, a civil engineer, cured far more people of horrible diseases than all the London doctors put together. He cured them by preventing them catching disease in the first place.

Your correspondent is pessimistic. I don't share that pessimism because it is clear to me (and I will demonstrate in a later thread) that the Keenie is a cruder and more complicated version of the Milkoviic and there is reason to believe Keenie worked from the historical evidence. Put in another way, the Milkovic has filleted out the essential features of the Keenie and therefore offers a much better prospect of proving the point of principle than the Keenie.

Quickly re-reading the post above it seems to me that the writer completely misses the point. It is not the lower central bit of the swing that provides the free energy. That central swing is balanced by the raising of the hammer and is part of a closed conservative system. By moving the hammer out of contact with the anvil it has closed the system.

It is the two upper arms that are enabling the free energy since this is where the hammer is sitting firmly on the anvil which is providing jerk energy (force times time) from outside the system and like the London sewer preventing the hammer from catching a falling down disease.
Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata?
iacob alex
Addict
Addict
Posts: 2413
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:37 am
Location: costa mesa /CA/US
Contact:

re: Milkovic & your PM model...

Post by iacob alex »

.....this time as a new proposal , at :
https://youtu.be/q0lM-Ox6tBM
...or a new type of leverage : rotating mass vs. swinging mass.
Al_ex
Simplicity is the first step to knowledge.
User avatar
Mikhail
Enthusiast
Enthusiast
Posts: 238
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 9:54 am
Location: France

re: Milkovic & your PM model...

Post by Mikhail »

Post Reply