Talk:Directory:Milkovic Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator

Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 14, 2016 at 9:32 pm.

  • One error has been found on this page. Administrator will correct this soon.
  • This page has been imported from the old peswiki website. This message will be removed once updated.

Discussion page for Directory:Milkovic Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator

Image:Milkovic seconday pendulum pump set-up 95x95.jpg

Serbian inventor, Veljko Milkovi?, shows how leveraged secondary oscillations produce around twelve times more energy than the input energy supplied to the primary pendulum. Highest scientific rating of "original scientific work" granted the patented technology.

Directory:Veljko Milkovic:Latest


post here

(Just click on the "There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1].)

Introductory comment

: "This does not appear to be a primary energy source, such as solar, but serves as a lever to amplify an existing energy source many times. The act of keeping the primary pendulum swinging through minimal energy input computes to a leveraged energy output via the resulting secondary oscillations. Anyone involved in mechanical energy, whether in the generation or in the application thereof, ought to consider using this lever mechanism to amplify / economize the system." -- Congress:Founder:Sterling D. Allan, Dec. 12, 2006

The primary obstacle that must be overcome in convincing the skeptics is satisfaction that the input:output energy is in accordance with the simple but very relevant equation . . . Work = Force x Distance.

Sick of measurements

Nov. 21, 2008

i don't know if i am alone, but i am sick

of seeing endless stupid stories about

Milkovic and his stupid measurements.

all he has to do is connect a hydraulic

tube - just using water and 2 syringes,

and construct a perpetual motion machine.

i feel so irritated when i see the

same old stupid stories over and over.

he already knows how to prove his

device or not - why bother with

endless talk about it?

Chad in AK.

Reply from Veljko Milkovic and associates Nov. 22, 2008:

"Since we are in the R&D process, all updates and research results are

published in order all people are informed how to properly interpret these

effects and how to use this knowledge and info into the right way.

This research report, as well as others before, are based on the

experimental works and present an experience gathered during many trials and

testing. It is dedicated to proper interpretation of the pendulum-lever

system in order people don't repeat the errors in perception and correctly

set up the base for further practical applications.

Measurements, experiments, theory analyses, video reports are part of the

scientific process and they present the section of current experience and

knowledge. The more knowledge we would have about this system easier it

would be to properly use it in practical applications.

We still learn and only successful method of learning and collecting the

knowledge and experience is to keep researching and working.

We are aware people would like to see the mass practical usage right now,

but simply it cannot happen quickly and overnight. There is already defined

way and strategy of research and we cannot resign from it in order to

fulfill someone's wishes. More work and tests of ideas are needed in order

to get more reliable and more effective technology.

Nothing is easy and quickly when it is tried in practice. As it is always

said, all people are invited to make the replica and to try to test their

ideas and to see how easy or hardly it is to conduct the experiment or


We are grateful for all ideas, but since we are not working in the

professional conditions and working according to our capabilities, simply

all ideas cannot be tested and checked. The replicas and independent

research are welcome cause only through common work we can succeed and speed

up the unavoidable research process."

Opinion on the invention

Opinion on the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator (156 KB PDF) - Supporting comments by Peter Lindemann, D.Sc. (USA). "Most of the discoveries in the field of Classical Mechanics were made in the 119th century and are embodied in Sir Isaac Newton's three laws of motion.. So it is surprising and unexpected that a new discovery in this field of science might be made in the last l0 years. ...This certainly ranks as one of the most important discoveries in science in the last 300 years."

NEC Remarks
Apply an Electromagnetic Coil

On Dec. 13, 2006, New Energy Congress member, Earl, wrote:

I am still on the fence about this idea. I do not think that the

measurements until now have been very scientific.

One of my gut feelings is that there will never be a purely mechanical

OU device.

However, I am intrigued by the fact that lever output does not reflect

back to pendulum input. This disturbs me a bit. With a lightly oiled,

open ball bearing, very little power should be necessary to keep a

pendulum swinging at it natural resonant frequency. One could even

enclose the weight in a light, aerodynamic envelope, or simply use an

aerodynamic mold when casting the weight. Instead of the suspension

being round or square, it could also be airfoil-shaped. Basically, the

only losses are bearing friction and windage. The lever could also be

airfoil-shaped in the direction of movement. The ball bearing(s) could

be replaced with a magnetic bearing to achieve near-zero friction.

I am sure now that this is becoming wider known, that one or more

peers will experiment with this and give peer reviews.

I suggest that a magnet be attached to the pendulum and repulsively

pulsed N-N or S-S at its point of maximum velocity (bottom dead

center) or slightly thereafter, by an electromagnet. The supply

voltage to the pulsed electromagnet MUST go through a mult-pole

low pass filter so that only constant, smoothed DC will be measured.

This will give a very reliable and accurate DC input power


Then the lever will move a magnet in and out of a stator generator

coil. If the voltage output is low, then Schottky diodes or active FET

rectification will have to be used in order to lower losses. I suggest

bi-filar wound coil for full-wave rectification. With more generator

coil turns and higher voltages this becomes less necessary. With

varying load there will be a point of maximum power output. Also use

an electrical low-pass filter on the output power, so only pure DC is


The proof of the pudding is the ratio of DC power in to DC power out.

Earl's theorem: non-reflection of output load to input power is a

necessary, but not sufficient criteria for OU.

On Feb. 28, 2007, Earl revised his option:

'Getting more interesting. Time to test this very scientifically.

'Getting more compelling. In fact, it is tempting me to try some experiments. I find Veljko very sympathetic.

Needs to Pass Basic Test

March 19, 2007

A few years ago I was also enthusiastic to verify the principles and declare it valid:

However, the analysis has proven that there is no excess energy in this system. I have urged Milkovic to perform a scientifically valid measurement to prove the excess energy. But not the improvised and unscientific way he used to do “measurements?? but, using a correct measurement setup. I have suggested a very simple measurement setup that would fit the purpose and it can be found on the page:

Nevertheless, Milkovic did not perform this simple measurement and this confirms the validity of the mathematical analysis, ie. there is no free energy generated.

Many FE researchers struggle to achieve 200% efficiency that in most cases would be enough to make a positive feedback loop and keep the device in self-sustaining operation. Now, if Milkovic’s device really produces about 10 time more output power than the input (1000% efficiency) then it would be a child’s play to make any rudimentary positive feedback that would drive the primary pendulum. Milkovic still did not produce any self running device not even after so many years (if I were in his shoes this would be my first priority).

If you don’t want to waste too much time and energy on futile pursuits, then I would suggest you to perform the measurement suggested above first. If that proves any excess energy then glory to you and Milkovic, I will be the happiest man to check it out and spread the good news. If it does not show excess energy, then still you will have the credit for finally performing a scientifically decisive measurement that will put an end to the story.

Best regards,

Zoltan Losonc,



email: [feprinciples {at}]

Later, on March 19, 2007

Yes, perhaps I should put a warning at the top of the first page of the series that analyzes the Milkovic invention. The reason for the missing declaration is that the first 2 pages were created before the final conclusions were made, and while I was full of hope and enthusiasm. Those pages are like presenting what the inventor had to offer up to that date.

The other pages are later additions as the project advanced. After concluding the examination that took about 2 months of hard work I totally forgot that the first pages might need to be updated. At the back of my mind, I thought that those who are really interested will click the forward button to see the continuation of the subject, in which case they will find the real conclusions. Here are the 6 pages that discuss the subject in detail:

If you decide to perform the suggested measurement and need further explanation about the measurement process let me know.

The cog wheels can be made by hand from 3-5mm thick Perspex sheet using drill, jigsaw, and precision files. The whole setup is not expensive. I did not build it for the simple reason that my analysis convinced me that there is no excess energy, and in a very unlikely event if I were mistaken then the inventor should be eager to prove me wrong. With other words he supposed to build the setup to prove his claim. Well this did not happen, and that convinced me even more that I was right and there is indeed no free energy in this setup.

The real info about the subject is on the above 6 pages.



Basic misunderstanding?

What I gathered from the demo videos and articles is that this machine is capable of doing 12 times work than provided. I think there has been a basic problem with this.

When pendulum is not moving, weights on both sides of fulcrum are equal and system is balanced. So far so good! Both weights have same potential energy. Now consider pendulum as counter weight and it just moves up and down instead of oscillating. Now if I apply force of X newtons on this counterweight to pull it downwards with say velocity V m/s, I am adding X multiplied by V energy to already existing potential energy of counterweight. Now with the principle of fulcrum, this added energy is going to act in equal but in opposite direction on the weight that we want to move what we call it as Torque and its going to go up. Now here we need to understand one basic fact that, main work of "balancing" the large weight of the Weight in consideration is done by the weight of Counterweight and not by added energy. So it would be "wrong" to say that I am giving force of X newtons only and doing the work of X times 12 newtons! This additional energy is utilized only to do additional work of lifting the weight, so the additional work you get = work you supplied to counterweight. This balances and follows the energy conservation law. It would be not possible to move this weight if I do not supply this "additional" force from outside the system. Now if I try to "close" this system, there is now way that system is going to get this "additional" energy from itself because it will just balance itself and come to full stop.

I do not see any more advantage in using pendulum rather than using a counterweight. Its basically doing the same thing. If we believe the theory that pendulum becoming "weightless" at the end of swing and its transferring more energy than provided to the weight, then heavier the pendulum, more the work will be done! But this is not the case, because the moment you disturb the fulcrum, it will just collapse on heavier side! The counterweight has to be equal and opposite in order for fulcrum to work.

This is a very common practice in Industry for lifting heavy weights, say using pulley or fly presses or lever mechanism! In these cases, a simple man can not lift 500 kg with his own hands, but using pulley he can! So will it be true saying, "See I normally can lift only 50 kg, but now I am lifting 500 kgs, so I have found a new way of getting 10 COP"? No! Because you are just following Newton's principles and laws of conservation of energy and masses!

So I believe that it is a misunderstanding to say that a small amount of input energy is generating more energy and out of generated energy, we can use small amount to give the input again and again, in other words we have got a "perpetual motion machine"! No matter how small the force required to pull the counterweight, it has to be "additional" and can not be obtained from system itself!

I may be wrong and this is just my analysis. Like others, I also hope this really works as a perpetual motion machine which the world is waiting since thousand of years!

Ashish Kulkarni

Perpetual motion machine?

This looks like it's just a perpetual motion machine hoax. Work is force times distance, not just force. Is there anything original here or is it just a hoax? BenFrantzDale 00:36, 19 Mar 2007 (EDT)

Who really designed the pendulum oscillator that Milkovic has claimed to be his invention?

While I am among those who admire the work that Milkovic and his associates have put into the development of the Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator, I have encountered a documentation that the said invention has already been invented an has been in use around a century before Milkovic invented it.

Please refer to the book "507 Mechanical Movements" by Henry Brown and copyrighted in 1868. Check out item # 360 and you will see the picture of a pendulum acting on one end of the lever and producing resulting motion on the other end of the lever to cause a wheel to turn.

Excerpt describes #360 as: "Continuous ... Movement from Oscillating. The beam made to vibrate, ... gives motion to said shaft ...". While the application of the said device in the book pertains to the use of oscillation-generated motion to create rotary motion on the other end, a different usage of the same design does not constitute a patentable product. This was probably something that the Serbian patent authorities overlooked at the time and no one was around to question it. So, let it be stated that the device that Milkovic allegedly patented was already in use in the United States long ago and that all his other inventions were extrapolations of the the basic Two-Stage Mechanical Oscillator. This being the case, anyone who cold develop new applications based on Milkovic's oscillator free to do so by claiming that it was based on item #360 as mentioned.

I heard there is an available download copy if you search on "507 Mechanical Movements avaxhome".

See also

Directory:Secondary Oscillations

Directory:Pendulum Patents


Directory:Gravity Motors

- Directory







There was an error working with the wiki: Code[1]