Hi Inquorate,
maybe you already know this video/build:
YouTube - Energia Perpetua Infinita

It is by an Italian, obviously, and there is a solenoid involved, but no power supply apart from gravity.

I don't know anything else about it and just wanted to post it because the movement of your "thing"
YouTube - gravity mill progress reminded me of it.

Good luck.

Thankyou for the link, the machine looks impressive - I'll have to find someone who speaks italian now.

This is a dead-end for me in a follow up on the inventor, Gaspare, and
what is happening with this device.

Too many unknowns, someone, like Inquorate said "who speaks Italian", needs to put together some words used by the inventor in the video, to narrow down the search criteria.
Better yet, translate/narrate the entire video and publish it.

Google translation of the description of the Video.

If you haven't yet, please read the thread I made here:

Need help with circuit to delay reed switch triggering transistor.

One more step complete

And it only took three full days of experiments with circuits.

Your 1-2-3-4 drawing on Page 1 => Veljko Milkovic' - 2 Stage Oscillator Violates 3rd Law of Motion is interesting, and the page an interesting read. A question: when the left end of the device impacts the anvil below it, doesn't that represent energy lost out of the system into the anvil?

I'm not versed in this device or its Pros and Cons. This is simply an off-the-cuff question. It seems that striking the anvil is Work done against the anvil.

Woodrow Riley, CloudSeeder

Yes, it is work done on the anvil. And if we clamped down the lever onto the arm of one veljko oscillator, so no work can be done, while letting an identical veljko oscillator do work on an identical anvil, we would be required to push both pendulum's with an equal amount of energy to keep both pendulums swinging at an identical rate.

In other words, once we are oscillating the pendulum, any work done by the lever arm on the anvil - doesn't cost anything!

The centrifugal force on the swinging pendulum makes the pendulum appear to 'weigh' more at the bottom of it's swing. This lifts the lever / hammer... At the apex of swing, the pendulum 'weighs' less, and the hammer / lever arm descends.

Gravity supplies most of the energy, we supply a small amount of energy to keep the pendulum swinging.

Are you saying make a double device like mirrored?

The story goes on Johann Bessler that he had assistants turning a small crank, adding a small force to bump his device along. So you're saying your device bumps another device along similarly.

I'm not opposed to using bumping techniques because the bumping mechanism can also serve as a system timer to keep them regulated.

And you have still gotten more Out than you have put In.

You're Cheating. My Gravity Wheel also cheats.

Cheating is a valid way of Winning.

There's an Old Saying that says "Good things come in pairs". Sometimes
we should listen to sayings passed down to us from the Ancients.

@ cloud - to clarify just in case, I was saying that the pendulum swings independently of the lever / arm / hammer.

But if the pendulum is swinging, it will cause oscillations in the hammer for no extra cost from the pendulum.

Tests have been done that measure up to 12 times more work out than we must put in..

I am in the process of seeing how efficiently we can convert electrical input into the mechanical oscillator and how efficiently we can convert the mechanical work into electrical output..

We see so far because we stand on the shoulders of giants

Many of my inventions seem to contradict set rules but they do not and
I suspect yours doesn't either. Essentially, all we have done is design
the MECHANICAL EQUIVALENT OF A STEP-UP TRANSFORMER.

Same thing Johann Bessler did in 1712... but he painted himself into a damning corner by calling it perpetual motion, so he felt compelled to hide what he had done so he wouldn't lose face. He eventually got caught in his hiding the truth when his housekeeper ratted him out in Court years later, you see. Bessler had done nothing wrong I'm aware of other than fixing a working device that had a "trick" to it... a minor or "secondary" outside force.

Perpetual Motion is impossible, so he put himself into an impossible situation he couldn't win.

Cloud of course, you are totally right,

Thanks DarkWizard. I've been telling that message for 5 years. I know it's right, because one really Primary example of a Mechanical Equivalent of a Step Up transformer is the Jet Turbine.

If someone argues my point they also have to say jet turbines don't work.

Or even whew, a hand pump on a farm.

Power magnification is not "energy created from nothing".

When you make a circular Step Up transformer that feeds back into itself in circles, that's where the full Efficiency Gravy comes in. With a circle yes, there are negatives, but if they are across from each other their negatives cancel each other out.

At a 180 degree opposite in the circle ~one heading one way the other the other way~ cancelled out as if they do not exist. So in my opinion the best expression of these principles will always be in a circle (or a circular design).

Electronic circuits are a very close second... but they are in a different class than pure Mechanical anyway.

Apples versus Oranges, both should work.

Today I thought about how loop back the output energy to the input energy. Electrical way is too complicated. So what I came up with is the following. Why could we not just use an air compressor on the up/down side. We would just need to convert the up/down movement into circular motion and that is easily done using something similar than those one cylinder lawnmover engines. This then would turn the air compressor and compress air into a compression tank. This compressed air then could be used to push the pendelum at apropriate times. With modern day pneumatic instruments this can be done easily. What do you think?

On the other hand, why do we even need the circular movement? We can only use the piston part of the compressor and use the up/down movement directly. This is also preferable because the up and down movements are not even and regular and this would not be good for getting a rotation movement.

You could try it with a bicycle pump, even a foot pump, and glue (really well) a second valve to an inner tube. The hard part would be getting a piston to push the pendulum - how does it switch on to fill the piston with air and how does the piston open in order to let the pendulum fall back - Maybe look up steam engine pistons, maybe buy one of those hobby / toy steam engines and sacrifice it's piston? Or one would need precision machining tools. And then it begs the question, what useful work can it do once - hopefully - it is running itself? But, interesting thoughts.

I see no problems using a piston assembly from a 12v car tire compressor. We would need a few swings to build up pressure in the pressure tank and then just use that stored pressure to operate a pneumatic linear actuator at the correct timing to push the pendulum. If you did not understand the idea, I can make a drawing

That's right. In fact my own Gravity Wheel could also use a balloon~soft diaphragm pump behind the smack plate in place of the spring, so the air pump from the ball hit could be channeled up to give extra to turning the wheel. But I can see where it would work with yours also.

The advantage of the wheel is the weight in the rim that helps carry its motion past the flat spots. That's what you would have to do, place something in motion that its inertia would carry through the transition spots.

@ jetjis, I understand. I think. Someone else - of all our nameless guests, some may not. So in that sense a pic would probably be good.

You sound like you've given it quite a lot of thought. If you have a go at it, I won't feel quite so alone

@ cloudseeder - I intend to use falling of hammer / lever to push on a bike pedal. I'm looking for a kid's bike for now, but one with gears would be great.

The chain will turn a wheel with magnets on it that pass a bunch of coils (how many depends on how much torque I can get).

The wheel will be heavy so it will carry inertia for the period of time that the hammer / lever is pulling the pedal back up..

That should solve the irregular beat. I think.

Bicycle bearings or roller skates are extremely low friction but tires and spokes catch the air like sails on a ship. If you find the correct ratio it should be a success for you. The magnets going into nearness and out of nearness (proximity) is the trick to get them correctly positioned close as possible. It doesn't have to be exact perfect timing because the spinning wheel should carry them through. Godspeed.

I would draw exception to this thread saying "Violates the 3rd law of Motion". If any of us finds a better improved Law it isn't really a violation => it is a superior law above the level of existing law. I had that 3 laws of Thermodynamics thrown into my face for 5 years, and when I looked up and read those 3 laws I found out they only apply to "HEAT-PRODUCING ENGINES".

My engines have such a high efficiency of design they did not generate excess heat... because excess heat is a product of inefficient and otherwise patched together engine design. So my engines -the system as a whole- did NOT violate the 3 laws after all. They were either #1 outside or #2 above or #3 worked around those 3 laws. My car engine (not on Energetics) generates heat but then it uses that heat to pre-heat water toward being steam again: a workaround that goes above the "thermo" laws by virtue of intelligent design (using every scrap of the heat).

So having the thread named VIOLATION is an admission you have, we have, violated something...which I understand in a way yes we have but we violate on the HIGH SIDE, THE GOOD SIDE, but to people reading it the wrong way (NEGATIVE~UGH) it makes us LOOK LIKE WE'RE ADMITTING GUILT. One should never ever admit guilt even when you're guilty, as in a traffic accident, you just don't do it.

You can't start a race and automatically give the other man
a head start on ya. He wants to win so bad make him earn it.

Let the other man prove the guilt. Let the other man find it. No one turns themself in, puts handcuffs on his own argument, or steps into Sheriff Andy Taylor's jail cell and locks himself up like he's "Old Otis" the wino in Mayberry RFD. Make the other man prove you're wrong not quote laws on you and stomp ya down with a 300 year old pre-computer-software library book written by Daedalus.

Laying down voluntarily across railroad tracks for your opponent
is a poor way to win. You hafta grab him by his collar
and do a reversal. It works in wrestling.

CloudSeeder,

would it be possible to see at least a YouTube video of any of your prototypes?

Thanks,
ABC

No, ABC. I haven't done that so far. However, I do have one specifically planned to be the first => my design for a healthy computer room that helps people lose weight and stay healthy while being sedentary.

I put people's good health above my engines.

Since I don't have any help with any of my projects this has
been on the drawing board for some time now...

Although in truth the healthful computer room is also an engine.

I like YouTube well enough for many of their offerings but I haven't placed it on high priority for a reason => for inventions it is a homogenous mass where they all meld together almost. In the end, most of the inventors who show their work come off looking like Fred McMurray in Son of Flubber flying around in an old jalopy... something to be laughed at rolling on the floor for people's amusement & raucous laughter. If I was interested in being laughed at I would wear a clown outfit to the Mall.

I watch for other ways to present serious ideas, like coming here on Energetics.
It isn't that I'm "above" YouTube. I just don't relish being pulled lower.
Trying to "prove" something works with videos is barely above drawings.
People don't believe in something til it's in their hands, or a Gravity Wheel
is sitting in their closet feeding electricity up to the circuit box and they no
longer pay a monthly electricity bill with monies needed to pay off a Home.

I will you grant you this that it can be distressing being the tortoise watching all the hares running past... but being on disability since 1989 I've watched a lot more than rabbits go ahead of me. I've had a lot of men fight me hard to hold my ideas back but I take the long range view, that a really GOOD IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME is going to brush men like that out of the way in due time... no matter how many tricks they pull out, such as setting up a video website that drowns all new inventions meshed together in a Laugh-In YouTube format. People aren't stupid. I don't have to hawk GRAVITY at an online snake oil convention like a smarmy County Fair barker. People know that all energies can be harnessed to do Work, so people already knew in their heart a Gravity Wheel was coming, sooner or later.

It's a lot sooner now.
How to Turn Gravity On and Off =>
Post #42 CloudSeeder's Gravity Wheel on Fire

Please keep this thread ON TOPIC:
Veljko Milkovic' - 2 Stage Oscillator Violates 3rd Law of Motion

Apologies Aaron. I replied to someone asked me a question. I'm gone.

I like the compressor idea but with a bikepump as inquoret said.
The pump could simply fill the bladder of a tire and a solenoid valve could open the high pressure from the tire into the pendulum at the correct time

u could use a simple reed switch to turn on the solenoid valve.
THis would be a simple a cheap way to test the concept without turning a wheel and a compressor. U could use pickup coils along the path of the pendulum (with magnets) to charge a cap and power the solenoid valve switch which would switch on for less than a second once every swing.
The solenoid valve uses very little energy. Less than using a coil to pulse the pendulum along.

or even those camping pumps underneath the hammer

-shlodo

YouTube - crazy purple flash staccato

YouTube - pendulum push coil tuned up

These videos are relevant to many discussions I've had on different threads. Hope no-one minds me cross posting :-)

NOT under the fulcrum of the lever.

I'm making so many 'learning opportunities' it's become funny.

Put the electromagnet on the lever, pendulum side of course. Otherwise, nary the twain shall meet.

Also, you'll have more time to push the pendulum (smaller arc). When it's got it's weight on it, it falls away too quickly to get in a good push.

My time delayed on, time shut off circuit is still necessary. Which is good, because I'd be pulling my hair out otherwise.

Rinky dinky dink.

I play around with simulation software just now, here is what I build:


It eventually stop.