Bessler’s Obfuscation to Hide Meanings

Obfuscation - the act of making something unclear, dark, or difficult to understand, usually intentionally!

Since my last offering, which failed to impress, I have been reconsidering the use of the scissor mechanisms or storks-bills.  One comment suggested that my scissor mechanisms were too large, or cumbersome.  This comment echoed my own thoughts and my initial reaction was to try to design a linkage which achieved the same action in a simpler way with less friction and an altogether lighter construction and a quicker reaction to changes in attitude.

I kind of succeeded but I’m still testing various ways to find which is best. Before I explain more; I reconsidered Bessler’s writing about scissor mechanisms and realised that he doesn’t actually say, “use them,” he merely points out that they are useful especially as they work sideways or horizontally in either direction.  My reading of this is that something with a similar action, but not scissors, might be the answer.  It must be simple and able to move freely in either direction, actioned by gravity

I said I kind of succeeded because a new thought was sparked by a curiously contradictory passage I came across, while looking up the exact wording of one of Bessler’s well known passages..  I’ll post the passage in a moment, but at first sight it seems to be recommending opposing views.

In his Apologia Poetica, Bessler wrote, “ 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 up an outer position, the other takes up a position nearer the axle. Later, they swap places, and so they go on and on changing places all the time. At present, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants can go on about the wonderful doings of these weights, alternately gravitating to the centre and climbing back up again”.

Further on he wrote, “ Many would-be Mobile-makers think that if they can arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the centre than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. A few years ago I learned all about this the hard way. And then the truth of the old proverb came home to me that one has to learn through bitter experience.”

So what ever ingenious configuration we propose, it won’t work if it falls into the old trap described by Bessler above.  But we all know that and yet the same fault keeps reappearing, and yes I’m also guilty!

So the point I’m making is that in the first quote above he described the weights as working in pairs, so they are linked in some way. He wrote,  “…….as one of them takes up an outer position, the other takes up a position nearer the axle. Later, they swap places, and so they go on and on changing places all the time.”  But in the second quote, he seems to be saying that such an arrangement won’t work. “…they can arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the centre than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. A few years ago I learned all about this the hard way. And then the truth of the old proverb came home to me that one has to learn through bitter experience.” 

An ambiguous text, seemingly offering opposing opinions, and difficult to extract the truth.  

Another curious feature of the quotation describes “ ... the wonderful doings of these weights, alternately gravitating to the centre and climbing back up again”.  “Falling to the centre and then climbing back up!”  Is that an instruction to place the weights above the horizontal centre line and allow the weights to fall towards the centre? And then arrange their lift  to ….where? 

I copied the original German into google and got this! “ At this time, everyone can still guess what wondrous deeds this one’s heavy journey to the center and that one’s high journey. I may not speak of the devil here, nor open all the windows.” This one and that one, referring to the two weights which work together.

So one weight moves to the centre while its twin move upwards or high - more or less what Bessler and my translate wrote. No sign of the word “gravitating”, because, I assume, it meant the same thing, but gravity wasn’t a term familiar to most people then. Sir Isaac Newton published “Principia” in 1687, Voltaire famously remarked that in the Principia, Newton "walked where others could only crawl" many years later. As a chief champion of the Scientific Revolution in France, he viewed the text as a pinnacle of human reason, though he candidly admitted that its intense mathematical complexity meant "very few" in Europe could truly understand it.

JC

Explanations and Acknowledgement.

I’ve received a fair amount of criticism for what seems to be perceived as my unwillingness to let go of some of my personal convictions about Bessler’s wheel.  But my intention in beginning this blog was to inform and discuss certain facts which I believed were easy to establish about Bessler’s wheel.

Many people believe that Bessler intended to supply a range of clues which it is thought would eventually lead to the discovery of the secret of replicating his machine.  I am one of those people and I have presented that evidence both in my biography of Bessler, and in several web sites (I’ve had to let some go as it has become too expensive to maintain so many) and here in this blog.

I have promoted the books I published for two reasons, one to spread as much information about Bessler as possible, and secondly to try to recover some of the costs I’ve born since I first self-published my first book.  Including the translation costs for four books, and maintaining several web sites, a rough estimate of costs since I began is about £25,000 and I’ve probably recovered a lot less than half that.

I undertook this journey for the simple reason that I found evidence that Bessler told the truth, and if his machine was genuine, it was worth pursuing to try to present as much evidence as I possibly could manage to finally build a Proof of Principle device which could revolutionise the way we generate energy. 

When I began this journey, oil wells were believed to be running dry, earth was suffering from the effects of greenhouse emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, leading to global warming. I thought, here is a potential solution to those two problems; nothing has changed.  Yes we have electric cars and many other inventions, but these still don’t solve the main problem of using nuclear power to generate electricity, when the construction costs, long development time, catastrophic accidents, and the unresolved challenge of long-term of radioactive waste storage.

The alternative solutions on offer, such as solar panels, windmills, tidal energy are too expensive, unsightly and unpopular.  Bessler’s wheel offers, cheap, clean energy, anywhere on the planet in any climate conditions. 

So in conclusion, the many clues I’ve found and solved are definitely real. They can be verified as a fact.  Dismissing my clues and descriptions mean that you are cherry picking the clues and avoiding the chance of a solution.

I’m not seeking riches, but acknowledgement of my part in this story would be gratefully received

JC

Bessler’s Favourite Number

This is just an idea that has been hanging around in the back of my mind, for ever, it seems.  Everyone is well aware of Bessler’s apparent obsession with the number 5 (and mine!).  There are numerous pointers indicating to its importance in Bessler’s mind.  I won’t repeat the many indicators but….what if it has nothing to do with the number of mechanisms inside the wheel?

Recent comments on this blog brought to my mind this question and a possible connection with the frequency of the number five.  The Fibonacci numbers are well known and their relationship to the golden ratio.

We know that Bessler was familiar with the golden ratio and the Fibonacci numbers because he demonstrates it with MT137.  See my blogs dated 25th October last year and 7th September 2024.

And https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2025/10/a-brief-reminder-about-besslers.html

https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2024/09/johann-besslers-aka-orffyreus-maschinen.html

He knew the maths, 360/1.618 = 222.5 or  360-222.5=137.5 Curiously 1/137.5 = 00727272727 etc. and 5x72=360, the basic numbers of the pentagram again. 

He needed to fill the gap between MT136 and the first number in the Toys page, 138.  He did this with MT137, which seems to be an of odd inclusion considering the MT was a collection of machinery drawings.  MT137 has no  apparent mechanical properties usable in a Bessler wheel. It does, however show it’s connection with the golden ratio. 

He demonstrated his requirement to achieve certain totals by using a collection of related numbers to get the final total to some significant number.  He used this technique in all the drawings in GB and DT.  

So the Toys page had the four numbers pencilled on the bottom left corner of the page, 138,139,140 and 141.  

There are 141 bible references in Chapter 55 of his Apologia Poetica, and 55 four line stanzas. We know that this number 55 is constantly shown  as well as 5.  In the Fibonacci serine’s of numbers 5 and 55 are present,  why would he push the importance of a those two numbers?  Perhaps he was actually pushing the golden ratio.

141 has only two factors, 3 and 47.  MT47 has three number 47s.  Euclid’s instruction 47 shows how to construct a pentagram. He also describes construction of a  line representing the golden ration, although he doesn’t give it that name.

The Toys page numbers total 558. The 55 seems a popular number for Bessler, but what of the 8?  Well the three numbers in 558 total 18 and that is the basic number in the pentagram, all the angles are multiples of 18. 

The number connected with then Golden ratio is 1.618, but 0.618 is its conjugate and is close to SoS’s Bessler’s favourite number 0.777…

I wondered if the actual measurement ratio which was thought to be 0.777 might actually be 0.618?

I don’t know because I never knew how SoS found the 0.777.  However given Bessler apparent obsession with the number 5 and 55, and the pentagon, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to connect the golden ratio with SoS’s favourite Bessler number 0.777.

JC

Update

I’m still working on some changes to the current design, AKA ‘the work-around wheel’.  It is open to a number of variables and I hope it will prove to be a simpler version of my last one.  The problem with interpreting Bessler’s clues correctly is the strong possibility that there are several options to consider some of which seem more suitable to producing the desired actions commensurate with the Bessler-Collins Gravity Enabled Continuous Rotation Hypothesis, and some less so.

This is not the so-called “bright shiny object”  mentioned occasionally, it’s just part of a lifetime’s work in trying to replicate Bessler’s wheel. New versions are an ongoing process, each is a serious attempt to solve this puzzle and studying the actions of the mechanisms to see if there can be an alternative that could be an improvement is also a necessary feature of most research.  If I post something along the lines of, “I know how it worked!”  I’m sorry if I give the impression that I’ve proved something;   because I haven’t, I’ve just got over excited at my latest model. I’m very sorry to mislead anyone, but I’m an excitable guy.  

The problem is this tends to lead to people asking me to share it, but when I have shared something too speculative, it leads to general disappointment. 

Each version is tried out on a previous wheel structure which leads to numerous holes and alterations to the various parts of the mechanisms visible on the test model.  I’m sure this is a common feature of Bessler wheel research.  The final PoP wheel won’t be a thing of beauty, nor a “ bright shiny object”, but as proof of the legitimacy of Bessler’s wheel, it will outshine more than 300 years of oblivity.

JC

Bessler’s Wheel - Two Solutions?

Recently I suggested that Johann Bessler might have invented two solutions to his perpetual motion machine. I considered this possibility because of the history of the Landgrave’s offer of patronage to help Bessler try to sell his machine.  Bessler had been invited to show his machine to Karl the Landgrave of Hesse, but the distance now, between Draschwitz and Kassel is over 130 miles now and journeys could take weeks for distances covered in hours today. Travellers relied on personal carriages, walking, or local wagons.  Stagecoaches had begun to connect a few major towns, although service was infrequent and slow due to poor road conditions.

There is no mention of a carriage being sent to fetch him, and there would be no chance of Bessler showing the Landgrave his latest machine in his own home.  It must, therefore, have been a small model of his perpetual motion machine, small enough to fit in a case on the stage coach or on horseback.  Or possibly, the model he showed Karl could have been a disassembled version but whatever the truth, it had to be portable and still convincing enough for Karl to give it his seal of approval.

If Karl formed his initial opinion of Bessler’s wheel, from his examination of a small version of the PM machine, then its apparent simplicity might have been misleading.  I always wondered if the inventor, having found the solution, subsequently improved it to make it more powerful. He did improve the design of the Merseburg wheel making it able to rotate in either direction and I expect that each version incorporated improvements

Karl was reported as expressing surprise that no one had discovered the solution before and Bessler himself, commented that when the secret is revealed, he is afraid that people will complain that the idea is so simple it is not worth the asking price.

This leads me to the conclusion that I, at least, am probably overthinking the problem.  I’m trying too hard to use every clue he left us.  Maybe they refer to his larger more complex models? All we really need is working model achieved with a simple concept, possibly eliminating scissor mechanisms, ropes and pulleys.  Some may now suspect I’m underthinking the problem!

So I do have an idea that might work, but I’ll share it once I’ve tested it.  

JC

More ‘Hidden in Plain Sight’.

 I used the picture below a few years ago to share some of Bessler’s ways of hiding information in plain sight.

In the above picture Bessler used the alphabet to label the various parts.  In previous images he numbered all the parts and designed them to add up to a significant total. In this one we are required to convert the letters to numbers and add them together to arrive at another significant total.

The labels on the left side converted alphanumerically total 190

Those on the right similarly treated, total 170.  Addend together they total 360.

So with a total of 360, we then count the number of letters used, they run from ‘a’ through to ‘t’ and ‘t’ is the 20th letter.  As was done with all the drawings in DT, 360 divided by 20 gives us 18 again, the angle at the base of every single one in the pentagram.

But in place of the lettter ‘j’, Bessler places the number 10, which confusingly could be read as the letter ‘w’ - red-ringed in the above picture.  This must have been deliberate as ‘w’ is the RoT 13 version of the letter ‘j’, and ‘j’, of course is the alphanumeric version of the number 10.  So ‘j’, ‘w’ and ‘10’ are interchangeable.  ‘W’ is used by Bessler to indicate two letter ‘v’s and show them as linked together.

All this is supported by the frequent pointer to the importance of the number five and the geometric figure, the pentagram.

The reason for the pentagram is to tell us to use five mechanisms - or seven or nine.  It also allowed him to embed the pentagram in his drawings which was demonstrated by his inclusion of Euclid’s instruction on how to draw that figure.  It is also a convenient way to contain the important parts of the drawing, leading us to extract the important information.   I believe Bessler included two versions of his perpetual motion machine hidden in plain sight within that drawing and it is down to us to find the right configuration, the one that will work. 

This is all old stuff but I’ve published it again because either my visitors are new to the blog and unaware of all that’s gone before - or, frustratingly, all my efforts to lead people to the right answers is ignored, overlooked or dismissed as my obsessive, paranoid personality.  

Anyway I’ll continue to publish what I know and hope that one day someone will prove me right.

JC

Why Did Bessler Add the Name Johann to His Forenames?

One of Bessler’s clues which may have slipped past our attention is this one, it begs the question, why did he add the name Johann?

We are familiar with his use of the atbash code, the Caesar shift and the RoT13 code, and his addition of an extra two initials J and E to his original E for Elias Bessler.

He adopted his pseudonym, Orffyreus, by using the RoT13 code, which was a well-known code system in his time.  I think he knew this and expected those people who were curious would search for other clues within his published works, just as we have.

His use of a variety of codes included - alphanumerics, Caesar shift, chronograms (a sentence containing certain letters which can be interpreted as Roman Numerals and stand for a number when rearranged.) Steganography (the practice of hiding information within a different media such as embedding it invisibly within a drawing) - plus a few of his own invention.

I asked the question, why did he add the name Johann? He had already got two E’s to give two 5s, alphanumerically; then from the E to the R via the Caesar shift; and to 18 from R again, alphanumerically.  These all fit in perfectly to confirm the pentagram.  So why did he think it necessary to add the J.

J is the tenth letter alphanumerically, or W by the Caesar shift.  W is the 23rd letter.   I can’t think of a convincing reason for the number 23, so its purpose may be the fact that the W is composed of two  Vs.  But we already have two 5s, but the W which does however, provides two linked Vs. This might reflect Bessler’s statement that the weights worked in pairs

His use of the W was definitely an important clues and conceived as a clue right back in the beginning when he adopted the name Orffyreus,  

His initials after his forename additions were JEEB, and after the RoT13 change became WRRO. 

 But when converted to Roman numerals, before the addition, JEEB in Roman numerals 10, 5,5,2,, which then becomes XVVII.  If we stick with his chosen pseudonym, Orffyreus, then XVVO is the interesting result.

So we have a W which is composed of two linked Vs.

But there’s more.  Throughout his Apologia Poetica Bessler inserts numerous examples of rhyming couplets containing three Capital letters being the three initials of his ‘enemies’, Wagner, Gartner and Borlach - W,G and B.

 

Although the W looks a little like part of a scissor mechanism, I think its primary purpose is to confirm the linkage between each V.  Each V shows the action of a single lever, but indicates it’s starting and finishing points.  

In MT there are several examples of the letter A, some with a straight cross bar and others with a bent one, see the image below.

The letter A shown above might be part of scissor mechanism….or the two arms of the letter V?  I hope this post provides some interesting thoughts

Curiously the picture in DT showing the Weinstein wheel attached to an Archimedes pump, has three items labelled in a confusing way. For a start each part is labelled with a letter, running from the letter ‘a’ to the letter  ‘t’.  For some reason the letter ‘j’ is missing. The last letter listed is ‘t’.   But … there is what appears to be three items labelled with a W. Further examination of the letter W in this case, suggests it might actually be the number 10!  The missing ‘j’.

Back again soon.

JC 

Update and Apologies for the Hiatus.

 Sorry for my disappearing act, I’m still alive and kicking!  I was busy dealing with events unrelated to Bessler, but forgot I’d stopped the comment facility.  Hopefully it’s back on and working.

I’ve got some interesting posts lined up and I think they will generate a lot of comments.

I’ll try to get the first one posted tomorrow.

Thank you for your patience - normal service will resume today.

JC

The Toys Page or MT 138,139,140 and 141

 

As was pointed out in the BWForum, some pages were removed from the original MT and replaced by what I termed some 30 years ago the “Toys” page because Bessler refers to the drawing as Toys.  In addition he added the numbers 138, 139, 140 and 141 to the bottom of the drawing.  There are numerous examples in his drawings in DT of his predilection for numbering all the parts to achieve a significant total. He restricted the numbers used to no more than 24, and when the subsequent total was divided by 24 it produced another significant total, 55.

I won’t go into the significance of the number 55, because my reasons are speculative, and to me, meaningful, but generally they don’t seem to be accepted.  I shall be posting details of the extraordinary trouble Bessler took to make it clear that the number 55 was of the utmost importance.

MT 137 was deliberately inserted before the Toys page to make 138 a logical progression from 136, but also because the drawing, a dodecagram or “Circle of Fifths”, contains some interesting features not directly associated with Bessler’s wheel. The design is used in musical theory, but from Bessler’s perspective the MT number served a dual purpose - 138, 139, 140 and 141 total 558, and that total 18.  18 being the number that every angle in the pentagram is based on, I.e. 18,36,54, 72, 90 and 108.

MT 137

Bessler pointed at the relationship between 137 and the golden angle or the golden mean, well known to the ancient Egyptians and the Greeks who called it phi, after the Greek sculptor Phideas. Phi, the golden ratio, is equal to 1.618, plus an unending succession of numbers. Plato discussed the subject at length in his Timaeusand of course there are the Leonardo Fibonacci series of numbers, and the laws of nature also dependant on the gold mean!

In geometry, the golden angle is the smaller of the two angles created by dividing the circumference of a circle according to the golden ratio, thus creating two arcs so that the ratio of the length of the smaller arc to the length of the larger is the same as the ration of the larger arc to the full circumference of the circle.

This provides two radii with angles of two particular degrees. The golden angle is 137.508. I suspect that using the number 137 for his dodecagram was a useful hint at the circle of fifths, as well as filling the gap between 136 and 138.

The total of 141 is interesting.  It seems as though he wanted to get to that number and not beyond, but numbering the ‘Toys’ page 138 would seem to have been good enough.  141 is not a prime number and it’s only factors are 3 times 47.  If we turn to MT 47 we discover that inserted within  the drawing which is numbered 47, another number 47, twice in fact because one is the mirror image of the other so there are three number 47s present on the page. Is this a pointer to the number 141 or the reverse or is it just a coincidence?

Of course there 141 Bible quotations In Bessler’s Declaration of Faith in Apologia Poetica.  They are included within 220 lines or 55 stanzas.

I’ll publish my own interpretation of the Toys page next.

JC

PS. Click Bessler Wheel Pics at the top of right panel.  Click Home to come back to blog.

©️ John Collins 2026