Doug made the point that 'A lot of scientific discoveries have been made by accident and even more thru trial and error. Did Bessler design a genuine perpetually turning wheel by trial and error, by accident, or by a dream in the night? Or did he realize the sphexishness of his efforts? Did he then design wheels that would convince everyone they were genuine, even though they weren't genuine?'
It's true that trial and error have played a part in scientific discoveries, but I think Bessler told the truth about his dream giving him the information he needed. I have had those kind of dreams as have others working in this field. But discovering the concept which may lead to the solution is usually followed by a bout of trial and error and might even involve sphexishness!
My own current construction has proven stubbornly stationary. Yesterday I finished the latest prototype and it failed miserably. However I know why and also what to do about it, so I won't be revealing anything just yet. The problem can best be explained by considering a horizontally opening window.
Imagine that it is wide open at 90 degrees from the closed position. The hardest effort to close it is at the start and then it become progressively easier to close . The same thing is happening to my mechanisms. They are slow to begin the move and then they slam into position, but too late. The solution appears to be to reduce their range of movement. It would be like only opening the window half way, to 45 degrees. Easier to close then.
This causes another problem which I also know how to solve - the range of movement of the main weight is reduced to the point of ineffectiveness. I must therefore increase the range of what I call the initiator, so that is what I shall be working on. Bessler described the weight as flying upwards and that is vital in my own design as it has to start and complete its range of movement within a fifth of a turn of the wheel itself, as there are five mechanisms.
I don't feel disheartened by this latest failure, as the end appears to be in sight.
JC
Just press on John,..Sooner or later we'll get there!
ReplyDeleteJohn, hope you can help me out a little.
ReplyDeleteJust had an idea for a movie, (not about bessler or the wheel),
there is no script for the movie,(hopeless at writing), only a concept to build a script around.
only guessing you may be able to help, as you have been working on a bessler script.
How would one get in touch with the right Hollywood contacts, to either write the script, or plug the concept for a movie (without having the idea stolen)?
not sure if tying to promote a concept alone would interest Hollywood types, would not want to give the idea away for free, especially when new ideas must be hard to come by, when judging the same old crap Hollywood shoots out.
P.47
I have no experience in how to write a script nor contacting Hollywood. I did give the scriptwriting a try but quickly gave up as being far too complicated, but I wish youluck!
ReplyDeleteJC
John, I'm sorry to read about your failure but at the same time it's fantastic how are you fighting for your dream, the dream from all of us. Have you considered to connect your weights by a cord to have maximal flexibility?
ReplyDeleteSorry to hear about that. What do you think the many small weights on the rim were for in Bessler's wheel..? Do you have those??
ReplyDeleteJohn
ReplyDeletefound a site in which you can pitch a movie idea, not too concerned about it.
what do you make of this statement from AP, which in the original AP needed decoding
The man from Kassel is certainly described by all that has gone before.
Could it be thought of as a man (who somehow is in kassel during the time period AP was written ), but for some strange reason, has been known by all people through out history.
if it's not important, why would the original statement be written in code.
P.47
Anon,..John has not commented on those but my personal feeling is they do perform a definite vital function.
ReplyDeleteIf I was to tell you,it would be giving the game away,especially since my wheel is about to turn.
Thanks trevor, hopefully will be testing my wheel next week.
ReplyDeletestrange thing about my wheel is that it definitely resembles a horse before the cart.
P.47
Yes SOPM, I've given that idea some consideration but I'm running with my current ideas at the moment, but thanks for the suggestion.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, I fear that you are referring to the descripotion given in Frank Edward's book, 'Strangest of All', which describes those many weights you mention. Unfortunately that description comes from his own mind and has no relation to the established facts.
I've often wondered about that small piece of code at the beginning of AP. It is supposed to be a small piece of praise for Bessler's work, each of which was written in a visitor's book kept by Bessler. As it was the last one reproduced it seems to be referring to all the previous ones in the book so, "The man from Kassel is certainly described by all that has gone before", means that the writer agrees with all the praise written beforte his. The code itself was not hidden and I presume it was done for Bessler's amusement.
Trevor, there may have been many small weights around the rim of the wheel, but there is no evidence of that, and plenty to suggest that only Karl would have known and he said nothing about them or anything else about the wheel other than that it was simple.
Thanks agin for your encouragement, guys.
JC
It occurred to me while I was reading the comments that if there was a way for everyone to share their designs that didn't work, it would save a lot of time and effort. No one would be giving away anything if that particular design didn't work, and if everyone could look at them somehow, they wouldn't waste any time on a design that had already been tried. Illustrations would be difficult to share, but descriptions with words would be helpful. What do you guys think about that idea? We would just need a central archive or database for the designs somewhere. I think it would speed things along. Since the 300th anniversary is just around the corner, whoever is going to solve the mystery would benefit from a wiki-style, collective knowledge, wheel archive such as that.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the sphexishness!
Bonjour à vous tous
ReplyDeleteJ'ai du mal à suivre vos commentaires, je suis nul en anglais. Je lis régulièrement ce blog et j'ai l'impression que vous tournez en rond.
Je travail sur un projet de gravitweel poids leviers. Une idée m'est venue en 2009 mais comme je suis un coupeur de cheveux en quatre(perfectionniste) je n'avance pas vite.
Il serrait bien de pouvoir consulter les idées que vous avez mis en oeuvre de sorte à analyser votre façon de voir les choses.
J'ai analysé plusieur dessin proposé par différentes personnes et ceux de Bessler, la majorité mènent à l'équilibre.
Cordialement
J. BONIFACE
Hi Boniface. Thanks for commenting here and good luck with your own efforts. Unfortunately my French is worse than your English!
ReplyDeleteMerci de votre commentaire et bonne chance avec votre propre travail dans ce domaine.
Malheureusement mon Français est plus mauvais que votre Anglais!
JC
John,..I think sphexishness has a virtue in that it helps to us to instil the good and whittle away the bad.
ReplyDeleteBesides,no matter how many people tackle a task,each one feels that they can do better and very often one does while the others fail.
Doug,..I'm quite in favour of sharing the secret of the wheel so that the world can benifit,and I think John would agree, that who ever cracks it would want some sort of remuneration first,woudn't you?
All the would be perpetual motionists know how much mental work has gone into it,not to mention the cost of time and money.
Good point Trevor.
ReplyDeleteIf I have an idea for a new wheel design that fails to turn, what is the harm in sharing that idea? I'm not going to get renumeration for it anyway. And if any would-be wheel designers thought of the same idea, they could check and see that it had already been tried and move on to their next idea without wasting any time on a failed idea.
ReplyDeleteCould it be the realization is sinking in that there's only one design to over balance weights in a wheel using gravity as a power source: all other designs are just variations of the first design dating back thousands of years?
Contrary to what John says the basic design and all variations are "closed" systems. A wheel is open to gravity as a power source, but the gravity permeates the interior of the wheel, it doesn't move the weights from the exterior. This may seem like a minor point to make, but it's one of the reasons gravity wheels are considered impossible. In an open system, all 3 properties of the system can be exchanged across the boundary of the system: mass, work and heat. However, in a closed system, energy can cross the boundary, but not matter. So a wheel exchanges mostly heat with it's environment, no mass. Any work a wheel does that could be attributed to gravity as a power source is cancelled out by yes, gravity, after one half of a revolution.
I'm trying to help; i hope this comment saves would be perpetual motionists mental work, time and money.
I understand your argument Doug, 'gravity does permeate the interior of the wheel', but if a gravitywheel was a 'closed system' it could not work, because the energy from gravity would eventually be used up, therefore it must be constantly replenished and must be an 'open' one. If it was a closed system the gravity would have be only available inside and sealed from the outside.
ReplyDeleteTake the case of a water-turbine. A water turbine is a rotary engine that takes energy from moving water. Unless the water 'permeates' the interior of the turbine it cannot make it turn. The blades of the turbine are analogously similar to the weights of the gravitywheel or the blades of a Savonius windmill.
The force-field that is gravity is the analagous equivalent of the force-field that is moving water or wind, but we don't see the gravity field moving but its effect is the same - it move things, but only if it can access them, from outside.
JC
John, agreed
ReplyDeleteP.47.
But,but John,..The wheel can still be termed a closed system in terms of energy because it is replenished by the force of gravity all around inside the wheel.It is totally self reliant.
ReplyDeleteI can say this because I know definitely how the wheel works.
Johan Andreas Weise a witness from magistrate court, stated:that within a minute it had rotated 40 and more times,and than 70lb load was attached to the axle and this load was raised and lowered several times.The most noteworthy detail regarding this particular experiment was that the wheel,while under this considerable load continued to rotate at exactly the same rate as when it was running empty.(Das Triumphirende)
ReplyDeleteStrangely,that's typical characteristics for synchronize electrical motor.Other witnesses stated that the wheel run 26rev.per min.and when under load it dropped to 20rev.per min.This example is typical for asynchronous electrical motor.Strange coincidences.
Trevor, is your wheel running ?
ReplyDeleteP.47
Anon,..No,but in a day or so it will be.You see when you actually stumble on the secret there is no other way it could work.
ReplyDeleteNow I know you have heard this before but I can't help be enthusiastic when I discovered how to raise one pound using four ounces.
This was Bessler's requirement.
John your analogy of the water wheel is wrong. The blades of a turbine aren't the analogous equivalents of the weights in a wheel, the water is the equivalent of the weight. Gravity isn't the equivalent of the water or the wind. the water only turns the wheel because of gravity. Open and closed systems aren't defined by a gravity field, they're defined by the exchange of energy and/or mass.
ReplyDeleteDoug you argue that the blades of a turbine aren't the analogous equivalents of the weights in a wheel, but they are. The water moves the blades and gravity moves the weights. The water is not equivalent to the weights, it is equivalent to gravity though.
ReplyDeleteAn analogy can be used to explain similarities between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based; for instance the heart can be said to be analagous to a pump. No one is suggesting that a heart and a pump have identical features but it is a way of explaining what it does and in a general sense how it works..
So when I draw an analogy between gravity, wind and water I assume that you will take into account their dissimilarities while taking the point I wish to make.
JC
Trevor said, "But,but John,..The wheel can still be termed a closed system in terms of energy because it is replenished by the force of gravity all around inside the wheel.It is totally self reliant."
ReplyDeleteIt cannot be a closed system and yet produce and use continuous energy to turn a gravity wheel. If it was closed then the gravity field would have to be entirely self-contained within the confines of the wheel. Gravity has a direction, downwards locally. So it has to have source point or area, from which it can first move something with mass. Theoretically it could move an object with mass, millions of miles because it is in the form of either a moving field or a field which moves things. Everything of mass within the field either moves or has potential to move. You can't suggest that gravity starts and stops within the confines of the gravity wheel and be a closed system.
I don't know of a single scientist who, despite not believing in a gravitywheel, would still accept the theoretical premise that such a device would be describes as closed system, and the reason for this is because all perpetual motion machines are known to be impossible because they are closed systems, and yet we know that Bessler's wheel worked and therefore it could not have been either a perpetual motion machine nor a closed system.
JC
Hello John,..Ive said it once and I'll say it again,gravity is not an energy,it is an inert force.It is always there and permiates everything so why not use this force to create energy,there is a way.
ReplyDeleteIn anycase you can stop start gravity by using the property of freefall.Have you not heard of air jumping.Monkeys do it when they jump from tree to tree.
It is gravity and enertia itself that creates the 'worm hole',...by means of which we can access perpetual motion power.
ReplyDeleteJohn, your analogy is not between gravity, wind and water. It's between water turbines and perpetual motion gravity driven wheels. You say the water in the water turbine is the equivalent of the gravity in the wheel. That's incorrect. The water is the mass that gravity acts upon to drive the turbine in the water wheel, and the weights in a PM wheel are the masses that gravity acts upon to drive it.
ReplyDeleteThe reason you seem to argue that a wheel is open is that gravity is an energy (that could be exchanged with the wheel's environment). But like Trevor said, gravity is not an energy, it is a property of a mass. It isn't included when open and closed systems are defined. Besides, you can't use the example of Bessler's story to support an argument for an open system, that's putting the cart before the horse. To support your argument using the bessler example you have to duplicate the feat, which so far has remained shrouded in mystery.
The other argument you made, that gravity doesn't start and stop is misleading. The correct argument is that the potential energy resulting from gravity's force drops to zero (when a mass's acceleration in a gravitational field stops, when the masses in question collide). The potential and kinetic energy of a mass in a gravitational field are the properties we can use to define whether or not the system is open or closed. In a wheel like bessler's, there is no exchange of mass with the environment, only work and heat. That's the definition for a closed system. It could only be defined as open if there is an exchange of matter. The ocean is an open system, it exchanges water molecules with it's environment.
Trevor, free fall isn't the absence of gravity. It's the sensation you feel. Gravity is acting on you, but you have no reference to detect it's presence. Until you hit the ground!
Yes Doug,.But in free fall bodies are weightless,they can float around and you can manipulate them to the right atitude in relation to their fulcrums.Thats what happens when you air jump like a monkey.
ReplyDeleteI respect your right to hold differing views to mine. In the end all that matters is replicating Bessler's wheel.
ReplyDeleteJC
Nothing personal John. We just like to hear what you think of our thoughts.
ReplyDelete