Saturday, 29 April 2017

Gravity, Wind and Water - Conservative or Continuous forces

This subject crops up from time to time.  A regular poster on besslerwheel forum has long maintained that gravity is like the wind and this is an analogy I too have suggested on many of my websites for several years.  But people simply don't get it.

They argue that gravity is nothing like wind and just because wind drives windmills the same cannot be said of gravity.  It is common knowedge that the heat from the sun creates varying air pressures, causing high pressure areas to rush to fill in lower pressure ones, hence the wind.  But how each force originates is not part of the argument. Yes, they are different physical forces, and indeed wind applies force to the external surface of an object whereas gravity applies its force to the atoms which make up the material of the object.

But the important thing to note is the resulting effect is just the same.  If we picture wind as a stream of air moving across the earth's surface, a balloon floating in the air is driven along with the wind.  If you tied the balloon to a piece of string and attached the other end to an immovable object it would remain stationary relative to the wind until it was released when it would again travel with the wind.  You could take the balloon back upwind again, and repeat the same action.

The same thing works with gravity and a ball. The ball falls downwards under the force of gravity.  It can be picked up and put higher up so it can fall again. Gravity is a continuous force and so is the wind at the point at which it interacts with the balloon.

The same applies to a stream of water with a boat in it.  Each force can be shown to exhibit potential energy and kinetic energy. Forget where the water came from or how it and the wind originated, all that matters is what happens at the point of interaction with the object in question. No one knows how gravity happens although there are plenty of theories, but what we do know is gravity causes things to fall unless they are fixed in some way, on a shelf, hanging from a wire or held in your hand.  Streams of wind and water also cause things to move, and also have potential energy because they are continuous forces, and they can also convert potential energy to kinetic energy.

The term 'conservative force' is vague and conveys a slightly misleading impression.  'Conserve' originally meant 'preserve', so a 'conservative force' preserved its force and power, in other words it was and is a 'continuous force'.  So-called non-conservative forces are brief, explosive forces which cease once they have moved an object.  If I hit a ball with a tennis racquet that sends the ball through the air, it travels onward due to the impetus I gave it but it ceases to move once the energy given to it has been expended.  The same applies to billiards, pool and snooker balls, these are not conservative forces because their force is not conserved.

When I say that a conservative force is a 'continuous force', I mean that it is not a one-off explosive force but rather a lengthy, continuous force and although the length might be very short, it is still not the explosive force of a hit,  but rather an extended push.

So those who claim that gravity is a conservative force and therefore cannot be used in Bessler's wheel are utterly wrong; it has to be a conservative or continuous force otherwise it wouldn't work.

A windmill goes round because the wind applies force to the sails; a water turbine rotates because water pressure is applies to the turbine blades,  gravity wheel rotates because gravity applies force to the weights.  We don't call a windmill a sail wheel, and we don't call a gravity wheel a weight wheel, We refer to diesel, petrol of gas engines because they run on those fuels, but actually it's not the fuel but the internal combustion of that fuel which drives the pistons and hence the crankshaft.  It's not gravity that drives a gravity wheel but the weights which fall under the influence of gravity.


Friday, 21 April 2017

Bessler's Evidence and his Critics.

There are three areas or shades of scepticism about Johannn Bessler's claims; there are those who follow the establishment line, that the scientific laws codified through more than 300 years, prove that such devices are impossible; then there are those who are willing to consider that Bessler's claims, based on the persuasive historical evidence, might be true and that perhaps there is a loop-hole in the physical laws which might permit a gravity-enabled wheel to spin continuously. Lastly there are those who were convinced either immediately or over a short period of time that Bessler's wheel was indeed possible, but who, after countless experimental designs have failed, have finally conceded that the establishment view is correct and they have given up on the project.

There is a small hard core of people who remain convinced that Bessler's wheel was genuine and that if they or someone can succeed in replicating it, it could provide a welcome addition to the sources of energy required today and in the future.  Failure after failure does not dim our optimism and despite numerous setbacks we continue to design, experiment and consider, ruminate and conjecture on numberless hypothetical mechanical arrangements, perpetually seeking that speculative loop-hole in the man-made laws of physics.

The evidence in support of Bessler can be categorised in three ways too.  Firstly the witness reports describing the tests that each wheel underwent.  Each demonstration required a tougher test for each subsequent wheel, and they in turn emerged in a more convincing format, larger dimensions and capable of lifting heavier objects. All of these tests were suggested and designed by Gottfried Leibniz, to convince the sceptics that Bessler's wheel had a genuine potential even if it wasn't technically a perpetual motion machine.  This caveat at the end of the previous senece, lends weight to his personal belief that what ever lay behind its motion, Johann Bessler was absolutely honest about his wheel.

The second category consists of Karl the Landgrave of Hesse Kassel, his personal opinion that the machine was genuine, based on his actual observation of the inner workings of the wheel - a condition of his patronage.  There is no doubt about Karl's integrity and thus no chance of collusion in a fraud, between the two men.  It must also be remembered that Karl was a knowledgeable amateur scientist himself.  He financially supported a number of ongoing experiments including a Denis Papin's steam engine, and the establishment of an observatory and also sent his court engineer to England to obtain information on the Newcomen engine.

The last category is often ignored but for me it is at least equally persuasive of Bessler's sincerity. I refer to his autobiographical account of his search for the solution to perpetual motion and the public reaction to his declaration of success in such a controversial field.  In 1715 he wrote a booklet called Apologia Poetica in which described in somewhat harrowing terms his upbringing, education and his ten year search for the secret of a gravity-enabled wheel.  He then describes the moment when he gained success; followed by marriage to a former girlfriend.  Up to that moment he was triumphant and full of optimism, but that mood didn't last.  The men he continually referred to as his enemies, had hassled him publically from the start of his first announcement that he had built a perpetual motion machine.  They published slanderous tracts claiming to know how the scam, as they saw it, was carried out.  These offensive comments were easily dismissed by examining the demonstrations, but mud sticks and it wasn't until Karl the Landgrave granted Bessler his protection that the public accusations stopped.

It is absolutely clear from Bessler's writing in Apologia Poetica, that Bessler was desperate to prove these enemie's accusations were lies.  His life was full of stress and he must have been in a state of mental or emotional strain or tension resulting from these adverse and demanding circumstances.To us reading the words of all parties involved it is clear that Bessler felt humiliated, offended and desperate to clear his name, a requirement which should not have been necessary given Karl's verification and the demonstrations suggested by Leibniz. Nevertheless, although their criticism was muted while under Karl's protection, as soon as Bessler left Kassel to live in Karlshafen, they re-emerged with the same public complaints, this time trying to get Bessler arrested on a trumped up charge of fraud.  This was dismissed immediately by Karl who knew the truth.

So is it any wonder that his language in Apologia Poetica was from time to time full of bitterness and bile, hatred for his enemies and frequent appeals to God to witness his appalling mistreatment?


Tuesday, 11 April 2017


I'll be away in Spain for a few days but will still be able to comment etc.

I've built this new log cabin in which I originally intended to have as my new work shop but my wife thinks it's too good for sawing wood and drilling and cutting metal so I shall be using it to do the wheel design and write blogs etc, but the actual work will be carried out in the garage, now somewhat truncated as a part of the building alterations we have undergone in the last six months.

Here are some picturs of my log cabin under way so-to-speak .

There's nothing much in it yet, other than an old PC which has a lot of drawings on it.  But it will do for writing scripts.  The log cabin will be the place to make the video and I have begun to write the script.  The need to include plenty of images means I can use some for the paper I'm writing.  I call it a paper but really I just intend to publish it maybe as just a digital download or possible in hard copy, so it could be a book, and/or a website.

I've been drawing the wheel design onto a three foot MDF disc so I can drill the holes in the right places and attach the various levers and weights.  Although the garage is shorter than it was, I'm creating an additional storage area at the side of the house where I can put all the stuff which is taking up too much room in the garage at present.  It's not ideal, being long and narrow but it'll do and I'm putting a translucentt roof on, so I can see what's in there in a few months time when I've forgotten what I originally stored there!  It seems as though more work produces more work before I can begin the real wheel work!  

Even at this late stage in my Bessler research I had one of those blindingly obvious revelations which cleared up a question I had which had been bothering me for a long time and which now seems so simple I cannot understand why, after so many years of study I didn't see the reason for its presence.

These breakthroughs both small and miniscule add up to a significant amount of information which, if I had published back in 2008, without the new stuff, would have missd the mark by a mile and probably have been of little help to anyone.  Hopefully the new stuff will galvanise everyone into action!

I'll be back soon.


Saturday, 8 April 2017

Visitors to this blog, and a personally shocking discovery.

I was looking back at some early blogs I posted and noticed with something of a shock that eight years ago on February 27th 2009, I wrote, "I am completing the video about Bessler and I'm completing the paper which contains everything relevant to building Bessler's wheel, which I have discovered over a number of years".  OMG - how time passes and nothing gets finished!  I am a serial procrastinator! The video and the paper is going to have to be redone.

Since those days in 2009, I have made a number of discoveries about Bessler's codes and I believe I've made a lot of progress towards the solution, but of course back in 2009 I also thought the same.  I even placed a coded message at the bottom of the blog page which contained, or so I thought, the secret to Bessler's wheel.  How we delude ourselves!

I cannot afford to wait any longer, I'm 72 years of age and so I'm going to speed up the building of this wheel and then get straight on with finishing the paper and the video and publishing them.  Not that I fear anything terminal happening, just being careful!

On a different subject, I was looking at the stats page for this blog and I thought I'd include a few pieces of data while I compose my next blog,  I hope it makes for a brief but interesting read, for instance:-

Page views by country for March 2017.

United Kingdom  1335
France                  1057
United States        713
Belgium                340
Ireland                   94
India                      87
Turkey                   60
Germany                59
Australia                39
Indonesia               38
Canada                   36

I'm pleased that the UK is number one, and I'm surprised that France ranks as number two, I thought the USA would be there.  But it changes every week and other countries sometimes appear briefly, such as China and Japan among others.

The most commonly used browsers use inluded:-

Chrome used by  48%
Firefox                27%
Safari                  12%
Internet Explorer 7%

I'm also surprised that Internet Explorer has fallen so far in popularity, although I use Firefox in preference to Chrome anyway. There were several others, some of which I had never heard of but all of low percentage

Operating systems : -

Windows    3210 (54%) 
Macintosh  1360 (23%)
Linux      578 (9%)
iPhone     235 (3%)
Unix       227 (3%)
iPad       140 (2%)
plus assorted mobile systems.

Windows are still in there, but Apple is getting a good chunk of the rest.  I have one imac and two windows and for me the Apple involves a fairly steep leaning curve and I wonder if that is why it hasn't taken more of the windows market.

Google have provided almost all of the referring URLs, and almost as many referring sites apart from my own web sites.

Commonly used search keywords:-

Bessler, Orffyreus, perpetual motion, secret drawings, free energy, continuous motion, circular motion, Maschinen Tractate, Bessler's code, Apologia Poetica, Das Triumphans, Collins, gravitywheels.....................

I don't know how old these are but I assume they were references recently.

Page views all time history  912,547.

Disppointing really given how many years and how many blogs I've written but then this is a niche subject and I struggle to put up new blogs without giving away the work I've done so far.  Still the total breaks down to over 300 daily, so perhaps I should be satisfied.


Friday, 31 March 2017

After the Construction of Bessler's Wheel?

When Bessler's wheel finally materialises and the accompanying furore has died down, the world will be looking for ways to use it.  We have discussed many times the potential for energy generation and there are as many doubters as proponents of the potential for useful electricity generation.  For me it's simply a matter of scale; if you can produde a tiny amount of electricty from a small machine then a bigger one will produce more.  How much bigger the wheel would have to be remains to be seen, but as I have often said, several wheels on one axle obviously has a much larger capacity to produce multiple amounts of power than a single wheel could.

I'm interested in other possibilities for its use.  In third world dry climates there is the potential to pump water from wells, irrigation of crops, greening of deserts, air-conditioning and refrigeration units.  In cold climates I suspect a way may be found to produce low level warmth into suitably insulated buildings. But what of the actual mechanical design, might it be adaptable for other mechanisms?

I mentioned many years ago that as a device for changing linear motion into rotary motion there could be potential for using the Bessler mechanism in a similar but alternative way.  I'm thinking of an inertial thruster but not a reactionless drive.  It has to be open, not a closed system. So the mechanism is driven in reverse by, say, a small electric motor which rotates it, creating a linear force on one side of the rotating mechanism.  Such a device mounted on wheels should cause it to move in the direction of the force.  It might even offer a space drive. Who knows if it would work, but logically if Bessler's wheel worked then so should this.

Once the technique Bessler invented is known, better ways of achieving the same thing may well  be invented and his design relegated to the history books, but that is progress and highly desirable. I'm working on an idea I've had for some time which I believe could be the solution to Bessler's wheel; it's what somone called 'a workaround'.  It doesn't conflict with the usual well-known problems and if I'm right then there are probably other ways to achieve the same result.

Curiously just such a thought was posted on my previous blog, and such coincidences can make your hair stand on end (those of you who have hair!).  Is someone reading my mind? I hope not! I've wondered if there were alternative ways of making a gravity-enabled wheel for some time, because although I have tried to follow Bessler's clues in my design, fitting it in with my own thoughts, perhaps I've misunderstood the clues and I'm trying to achieve the same result as he did but in a different way, and not deciphering his clues correctly.  In the final analysis the path doesn't matter as long as the desired end is reached.


Wednesday, 22 March 2017

Johann Bessler's Graphic Clues

Despite including several drawings illustrating his wheel (although external views only) in his publications, Grundlicher Berchicht, Apologia Poetica and Das Triuphirende, most people have seized upon his unpublished work which I have called his Maschinen Tractate (MT) (although there is no such title contained within its pages) to try to find answers to the Perpetual Motion (PM) machine. The MT contains 141 illustrations prepared for printing and some of the pages have handwritten comments attached to them.  But there is a note on the first page which warns the reader that he, Bessler, has destroyed or hidden any that show the workings of his wheel.  He does stress that careful study of the remaining drawings could lead someone with a perceptive intelligence to find the solution.

Many people have taken this to mean that a careful study of every page is necessary to find the answers, but in my opinion, Bessler would not have included serious information in all 141 drawings or even some of them, which were completed over a considerable length of time.  But also he would have had no idea that an arrest charge was imminent and therefore he would have had no time to add numerous drawings done painstakingly on wooden blocks for printing.  I'm sure his original intention was to conclude the MT with an explanation of how his wheel worked, but due to the possibility of imminent arrest he removed those particular pages and replaced them with an illustration on paper. The page which I called "the Toys" page is numbered 138, 139, 140 and 141.  This is the only page with more than one page number, therefore I think it is only necessary to study that single page.  The fact that it includes four page numbers suggests that it replaces those original four pages, the ones showing how his wheel worked.

It is true that there are hints at othe hidden information within the preceeding 137 pages and perhaps he did insert pointers to additonal information but it is my belief that these little clues pointed to the some small features within his concept, not intended to convey the complete picture.  If we assume that his MT was designed to be a tool for teaching his apprentices at his planned school then these small inclusions might have been there to raise points of discussion within his anticipated classroom.

So the 'Toys' page may well hold some important information that while not providing the full picture, might prompt us in the right direction.  One other picture, MT 137, appears to be prepared for printing might have been added as additional clue.  You can read my hypothesis about this page on my web site at :- 
Check out pages '2' and '3' too for the full picture.

Note the drawings below include the original MT137 and below it,  how to construct MT 137 taken from the web site linked above, and if you have read the above link you will know that I have always worked on the assumption that there were five mechanisms.  There are several supporting clues which also point to the same number.

In the 'Toys' drawing below I have divided the drawing into five sections.  I used the figure marked 'A' to guide me and included one of five pairs of depictions; one straight vertical and one pair of verticals in each division.  In the 'Toys' drawing there are five letters, A, B, C, D  and E - note that, five letters.  An apparently hastily added sketch of  a spinning top is labelled '5', not 'F' to follow 'E'.  and he calls it '5', not '6'.  Weird?  Or is he trying to tell us something?

Splitting the drawings into five parts reveals some information.  In each division in 'A', you can see, drawn vertically, two uprights surmounted by a single one.. They bear a striking resemblance to the figures labelled 'C' and 'D', which are shown horizontally.  But why two 'C' and 'D's?  I think only one hammer is needed in 'C' plus the parallel rods.  The same in 'D' but the hammer used is rotated around the other way to point outwards or to the left.

The item marked 'E' is the storks-bill, lazy tongs, scissor jacks or whatever you prefer to call them.  Item '5' is a spinning top, just in case no one makes the connection that this is all about a rotating device.  I won't explain item 'B' as it would require too much extra explanation here, but obviously it has a connection with item 'A'. But I will show its meaning later this year, when I've checked a couple of things out first.

Lastly the text is hard to read at item '5' but has been variously translated :-

" 5. Children's game in which there is something extraordinary for anyone who knows how to apply them in a different way."

  Mike, my translator had several goes at it and came to the conclusion that his version was right, but who knows?


Thursday, 16 March 2017

My Favourite Bessler Clues

I often get asked which of the many clues that are associated with Bessler are the best in my opinion, and which do I think will lead us to success.

There are textual clues as well as graphic, but I tend to favour the graphic ones, although there are a couple of pieces of text which in my opinion offer the most useful information and could help in our search for success.  But a single clue taken in isolation is hard to fathom and in my opinion is best understood when considered in conjunction with others.  Bessler had no desire to lie, if only because it would reflect badly upon him at a later date, even if the wheel was sold and accepted as a success.  But he could and did write ambiguously.  Much of his text when referring to the wheels, appeared to be either contradictory or even nonsensensical, but a search for anything constructive while attempting to accept the apparent meaning in an experimental way has led me to some interesting understandings.  Here are some of my preferred clues, not in any particular order of merit for me.

For instance Bessler says, "...these weights are themselves the PM device, the 'essential constituent parts' which must of necessity continue to exercise their motive force so long as they keep away from the centre of gravity."  This tells me that whatever arrangement is responsible for continuous rotation, it has to be ultimately gravity which enables it.

-and, “Alternately gravitating to the centre and climbing back up again." this seems obvious but is ambiguous, look for an alternative meaning which fits the words.

Or these ones,  “'Lightly' cause a heavy weight to fly upwards!” 

“I don't want to go into the details here of how suddenly the ‘excess’ weight is caused to rise." 

  “The inward structure is so arranged that by disposed weights once in rotation they gain force from their own swinging."

“This pressure of two fingers was applied until the moment when a single one of the weights present inside the body of the device began to fall.”
The above four quotes give me a feel for the mechanical action, but no detail.  The next one does give a little detail: "So then, a work of this kind of craftsmanship has, as its basis of motion, many separate pieces of lead. These come in pairs, such that, as one of them takes upan outer position, the other takes up a position nearer the axle. Later, they swap places, and so they go on and on changingplaces all the time."  Very informative, and as before, don't take the words at face value, look for alternative ways to understand what he says.

This following text is the most sensible piece of advice given out by Bessler and I think it applies to almost all designs currently being worked on; "Many would-be Mobile-makers think that if they can arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the center than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. I learned all about this the hard way. One has to learn through bitter experience.”  It seems as though the design features he is dismissing are an absolute necessity for a gravity-enabled wheel to revolve continuously, but as it stands, his advice appears to rule it out utterly.  Do not be fooled, he admits elsewhere that his design relies on weights being a little more distant from the center than the others,so how do we explain this?  It's another example of his textual sleight-of-hand; it comes down to working out how you get the weights to be a little more distant from the center than the others.

There are many other clues in the text but the following one is my absolute favourite and one which is a supreme example of Bessler's deviousness, containing ambiguity, apparent nonsense and absolute truth, if you can work it out.  "A great craftsman would be that man who can "lightly" cause a heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall".  I understand it completely with the proviso that there are two possible outcomes either of which it can argued, he meant but which hands-on building will resolve.  There are other translations available but I like this one the best and they are each decipherable in the same way.

I'll discuss the graphic clues in my next blog, but I warn you I shan't be giving much away.


Gravity, Wind and Water - Conservative or Continuous forces

This subject crops up from time to time.  A regular poster on besslerwheel forum has long maintained that gravity is like the wind and this...