Sunday, 18 September 2011

Disenchanted with Bessler's wheel? Energize - Invigorate - Revitalize!

I'd be interested to know how people became aware of, and interested in, Johann Bessler.

I fear that the enthusiasm for Bessler's wheel is waining. I don't mean those who are already 'on board' so to speak but 'newbies' seem to be few and far between. I note that the majority of those who frequent the websites devoted to Bessler with an open mind are retired or approaching retirement, I apologise to those to whom retirement is still a long way off, but there does seem to be a lack of interest in this puzzle among younger people. I assume it has something to do with the public perception of 'perpetual motionists', as we are seen to be. The facts about Bessler are completely swamped by negative opinion and a humorous/scornful approach to descriptions of those who are dedicated to finding his solution.

When I began this journey in 1997, by publishing "Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?", I was pleasantly surprised by the amount of interest worldwide, I don't mean that it became an instant best seller (I wish!!!) but there were emails from all around the world and lots of interest from academics as well as engineers and people from many varied professions and as well as educated amateurs. Now there is nothing. I see that posts on the forum have largely dropped to armchair discussions - few people have any input on possible solutions any more. Do we think we have we exhausted every possible concept or design? I know I haven't and in fact I'm working on something that I feel more confident about than I have for some time.

Of course I was helped in the early days by articles about my book, appearing in Nexus magazine, Infinite Energy magazine, the Journal of Free Enery and others. This may have triggered interest in my book - I don't know. But I do think that this subject does not appeal to younger people and I regret that. When you look back at the history of great scientific discoveries, many were made by people in their intellectual prime, usually their twenties and thirties, and the majority were not 'professional' scientists but educated amateurs. Some, such as Michael Faraday, had only the most basic education yet his achievements in the fields of chemistry, electricity and magnetism were huge. I feel that we need to find some way of attracting the interest of younger people to inject some new thinking into this ancient topic.

When I finally get around to finishing my book on Bessler I will court the advertising media again as I did in 1997 but I have nothing to offer them at this point so there is nothing to new to engage them. I don't know how we can engender new interest but we must keep trying.

PS. Note the American spelling in the title - I love all those 'z's!  As did Bessler.


  1. I've been working on alternative energy devices for some 45 years now. I've got lots of ideas some of which look quite promising from the mathematical perspectives if nothing else. I find the subject intriguing, though I sometimes wonder why I do it when everyone seems to bandy the well worn phrase that it's against the laws of thermo-dynamics. People put store into what scientists say, and generally believe them, so if they say it can't be done, then it can't be done; end of story. One only has to remember the treatment of phlogiston, and the facts that the world was flat, and at the centre of the universe, to realise that authorities are not always as correct as people would think they are. The effect of this is to oppose anything new or controversial and dismiss it as nonsense. But we probably know all that already.

    On the point of getting in touch, JC is difficult to reach. Maybe he doesn't think so, and that this forum is the only way, But I've had great difficulty in making contact, and with only one email ever acknowledged (and then we're told the mailbox was deleted), it's difficult to know if anything reaches its destination. I suppose there was some reason for doing this, as public mailboxes do tend to attract a great deal of Spam, irrelevant offers (like Nigerian officials wanting to transfer large amounts of money to my bank account), and often weirdo's, who believe their favourite theories, which usually encompass UFO's, crop circles, the CIA, and the Illuminati), adequately describe everything, although none can prove what he or she asserts. This forum was actually discovered by accident, but I'm glad I've found it now. There are probably many who still don't even know it exists!

    Myself, I've found that there is a tremendous interest in free and/or alternative energies. However, many are happy to hear about these providing they don't have to do anything about it themselves, whilst keeping in mind that such things are of course, impossible. I don't think interest is waning, I think that there are too many other things in the world today to provide distractions. Kids and young adults have their video games , and when not playing with these, there's facebook, and then Youtube… I was speaking to a young chap just a few weeks back who'd recently discovered HHO, (sometimes called Brown's gas). And he was ecstatic about it! When I mentioned Bessler, he wondered how he'd never heard of him or his invention before, and ran of quickly to consult the internet.

    The problem of getting people to add useful information to forums such as this, I feel is because of the potentially huge financial losses an individual may suffer if his comment or idea leads to the solution. I already asked if there was some agreement amongst members as to how any bounty would be shared if it came to fruition but this front has remained very quiet. As such, we get generalisations of what principle may drive the wheel but nothing of substance. If you knew the secret, would you tell everyone for free?

  2. This is probably the wrong place to post this, but have no other known way of contacting you. Are you aware that your book sales page (and others)are unavailable for purchases?\Cbooks_for_sale.html

    Please feel free to delete this posting.

  3. I agree with most of what Great Bear here has posted. In fact, I am quite sure that indeed there is tremendous interest in alternative energy in general, including gravity-driven or gravity-assisted technologies.

    Let me give you two examples, John. Just this morning I was surfing the web, as I often do, looking for ideas and information on gravity. I'm always curious to see what others think and postulate, also when they are critical but open-minded. And guess what: I read a interesting article by an Indian scientist singing the praises of your research, mentioning and referencing your work throughout the article. There's more interest than you think, I feel.

    Second example: there exist a number of companies, worldwide, who are doing very serious research on (and commercializing technologies) gravity assisted devices. Including utility-scale energy generation systems; with amazing results already, i.e. savings of up to 50% using a... yes, here we go again... a parametric oscillator. Why? Because it works! I've tested that to my own satisfaction last December. I don't think commercial companies would invest untold millions in systems that are hopeless. There's enormous potential in these technologies.

    So the interest is there. But its also true that many scientists are closed minded, I call that the ivory-tower syndrome. Some have the perception that "we already know everything there is to know" and therefore, nothing new (or different) is possible. That is, of course, a extremely unscientific approach. I've said it many times, and I really believe it: real science is about questioning everything and anything, and not taking anything for granted (or as self-evident). Consensus doesn't yield any progress, there are no absolute laws. Progress comes from doing things differently, in often unexpected ways. Like you said, progress has often -if not most of time- come from the lonely tinkerers in their garages. History is rife with examples of that.


  4. There are many reasons for this, including the peer-review system that often weeds out any dissent and promotes ("publish or perish") consensus. Although the peer-review system has its advantages, its a very sad state of affairs, and slows progress down considerably.

    What can we do about it? Plenty. Great Bear made a suggestion the other day that I thought was good: set up a database with failed ideas and concepts. And keep researching. That way, we avoid reinventing the wheel a thousand times. And there's more we (all) can do.

    What is making this Bessler-thing difficult, is the fact that we all seem to sit (and guard) our own ideas. We do share some concepts, but certainly not details. And we all "know" that we have the right solution in mind. Obviously that is not always the case, although we MAY (all) have very workable ideas that are never developed further because it didn't work or we thought it wouldn't work. But we may still throw useful ideas and concepts out the window that way. The result is that many of us are inventing, discarding, and re-inventing the wheel, of parts thereof, over and over again.

    With painfully slow progress as a result.

    I have proposed this earlier. If we all work together, open source what we are doing, we would easily have thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people participating. A couple of bright engineers can weed out the nonsense, and the good ideas are considered until we have something that seems interesting enough to try. Then run simulations, evaluate and improve. Even if the sims say "no" but the idea seems sounds, we can start a build.

    I can assure you one thing. If we generate sufficient interest, funding will come. There's literally millions of people out there that want to see an end to expensive, polluting energy from rogue states and robber-barons. If we work together, we can pull it off much, much easier. We can use the most sophisticated and powerful systems to run our sims, and the best software. There's builders out there with the finest equipment and believe me, many will gladly assist.

    I am even quite sure that many (open minded) scientists, given sufficient protection (anonymity), would love to participate. With proper project management, we could make fantastic progress in record time.

    Great Bear did ask the question in an earlier post, and now again: "If you knew the secret, would you tell everyone for free?"

    I would say: "yes". If we do this properly, the financial rewards will come anyway. Look at the success of many open source projects. And there's protection in numbers too - once its on the web, nobody can suppress it anymore.

    I for one would love to participate in such an endeavor, and would love to contribute and finance it, too. The world is ready for it...more than ready. Once Bessler's secret has been found, the money and fame will come.

  5. Wow Great Bear! I don't recall ever having had an email from you unless you used another name? My email address is so if you would like to email me please do so.

    As for the book sales page being unavailable, I don't understand why. I can access it anytime from any computer. I checked the books for sale and they seem to work. Can you email me and we can discuss, I'd like to get to the bottom of this problem. Thanks in advance.


  6. Great Bear, if you replace the last backslash with a forward slash, it works. Thus:\Cbooks_for_sale.html


    Note the forward slash. The server is (most likely) a Unix or Linux system and doesn't understand backslashes i.e. interprets them differently.

  7. I made a post earlier, but it never showed. Maybe it was too long?

    Anyway, my interest in Bessler started when I read about him and his inventions in Ruppert Gould's book "Oddities...". I was convinced he actually did discover a working design for a PM wheel and I wanted to know how he did it.

    Well, I still want to know, but, despite my efforts over the years, have not found an answer. I'm sure, however, that it will be found.

    In my last disappeared post I mentioned that I thought a film on Bessler and his wheels would help create interest in the subject. You also mentioned in past posts that you were trying to interest some compnay in making such a film.

    So, has there been any progress with that approach?

  8. It's simple, really. The vast majority of people that encounter claims of perpetual motion or free energy or whatever, move on. In bessler's case, the "facts" are swamped by common sense as well as rudimentary laws of nature, not necessarily negative opinion or humorous, scornful images of PMists.The only reason there's been any increase in interest in bessler 300 years later is because of the Internet.
    It may be difficult to accept, but his wheel wasn't powered by gravity. Or parametric oscillators.

  9. @Technoguy: I think that may have been the case. I noticed that too - when there's too much text, it simply doesn't show up. One cannot even make the post. That's why I split up my last post in two parts - then it works.

    @Doug: I think it has been carefully researched and quite well documented that the people that inspected bessler's contraptions rigorously, were not exactly idiots not easily fooled. Many of them were the top scientists of their day. I agree with John here that there is more than enough, very credible evidence that the man and his invention was genuine. Even modern day scientist (and no idiots either) agree that under circumstances a machine working on gravity can work. Tesla among them - a man I personally consider one the greatest scientists and engineers of the last century. When studying, his professor also accused him of delusions when he speculated on his electric (AC) motor with a rotating magnetic field; after all, that was perpetual motion and not possible.

    There are many good, workable concepts out there that *might* work. The "buzzsaw" machine for example: two counter-rotating vertical discs with slats, weights shifting from the inner (drive) wheel to the outer (free) wheel. When the slats line up weights are shifting. Numerous witnesses claimed to have it seen working in 1909 (!) and driving a sawmill. No external power sources in sight - especially not in 1909. Yet, it worked. There have been attempts on replication, unsuccessfully, the problem is in the shifting weights. Still, it's viable, at least in concept, and remarkably simple.

    The fact that we haven't found the right trick/knack yet, doesn't mean it is impossible. Heavier-than-air flight was also impossible, science and common sense told us, until two bicycle mechanics (!) did things differently, in unexpected ways. With remarkable success. Rockets into outer space were also impossible, as the weight of fuel would be millions of tons. Until somebody developed more powerful fuels and turbopumps and *staged* boosters. And on and on and on.

    There are very few absolute laws. The only constant in the whole universe is change. And bureaucracy :-)

  10. Bessler gave two additional clues as to how his wheels worked that are often not discussed.

    First, he said that the working principle was the same one that was used by kinds who "play in the lane" and, second, he said that the mechanism was described in the words of Jesus. I am not sure if these are direct quotes from Bessler's writings or by some of his contemporaries that are quoting him in letters or newspaper articles about him.

    I wonder what kind of "games" were being played in a "lane" back then and I'm thinking of getting an edition of the King James Bible what has the words of Jesus printed with red ink to see if He mentions anything that might pertain to moving weights within a wheel. Should be interesting!

  11. Technoguy, I looked around a bit and found a games that might be of interest to us. It's called "button whizzer" or "buzzsaw". One needs a heavy coat button, and some string. Thread the twine or string through
    two of the button holes (opposite each other). Tie the ends together. To get the button whizzing, hold the ends apart on one of your fingers on either side with the button in the middle. Loosely hold the twine or string and twist the string around by looping it backwards with your hands moving in a clockwise motion.
    Pull the string on both sides and loosen repeatedly. If done quickly you can keep the whizzer going.

    I have noticed that in his drawings the bottom of the wheel seems to wider. He even mentions it somewhere in apologia. By contraction and expansion inside the wheel, a "whizzer" inside could be kept going, just like in the "button whizzer" game.

    I heard mention "wheel in wheel" more often, in context of Bessler's wheel. Incidentally something also mentioned in the Bible. I thought it would be some kind of torque storage mechanism, but it could also be a "whizzer".

  12. @Andre

    Your "button whizzer" certainly sounds interesting and I vaguely remember making one of these as a kid. But I'm thinking that the "principle" those kids played with in the lane probably was something that several kids could do together as a group.

    Poor kids playing in the unpaved lanes back then probably just used scraps of material they found as toys and playground equipment. Possibly, Bessler's remark refers to a simple seesaw made by using an old plank of wood that the kids had found.

    Maybe one kid would sit on its long end while two or more kids sat on its short end. Then, via simple leverage, the kid on the long end would rise up much higher than the kids on the short end sank. Now all one has to do is figure out how to modify this kid's game so as to keep a wheel constantly out of balance with it.

    As far as the words of Jesus are concerned, I remember one line where He says something about His believers who had died before His prophecized Second Coming being "raised (from the dead) in an instant" on the Day of Judgement which would take place 1000 years after His Second Coming had occurred. This ties in nicely with Bessler's quote in Apologia Poetica about the weights in his wheels "being raised in a flash".

    Well, this is all very interesting, but not specific enough to begin building something. But such clues could certainly point one in a general direction to proceed with research.

  13. I'm curious about Bessler's words "it shoots four pounds, four quarters high", in particular the word "SHOOTS".

    Is this a direct and accurate translation of his words or are there other meanings to the original German?
    If he says "Shoots" and means it as such, it indicates a projectile action rather than just "raises" or "elevates".
    Does anyone know?

  14. great bear here is an explanation from Stewart on that, from the forum at

    This isn't that hard a part of AP to translate thankfully - it's quite clear and seems to makes sense - there's no need to try and twist his words. Interpreting them is another matter of course!

    He/One shall be called a great craftsman/artist,
    who can easily/lightly throw a heavy thing up,
    and when one pound falls a quarter,
    it shoots four pounds up four quarters. &c.

    schnellt = 3rd person present of the verb schnellen
    schnellen = means a sudden, quick movement - here are the definitions from two old dictionaries...

    1810 dictionary: Schnellen, v. r n. to spring: - v.r.a. jemanden vor dir Näse schnellen to fillip; von sich schnellen to fling away; er hat mich richtig darum geschnellt he has fairly flung me out of it.

    1902 dictionary: schnellen I. 1. to let fly or go (with a jerk), to launch, to shoot, to toss,to jerk; to whip (up), to yank; to fillip, to flirt; einen Pfeil vom Bogen schnellen to launch (or let fly) an arrow;....

    hoch = high,tall - as an adjective
    hoch = high,up, highly - as an adverb

    hoch is an adverb to schnellen here and so we have a sudden, rapid, upward motion - "it shoots up four pounds four quarters."

    One modern German dictionary I have only lists one translation for the verb schnellen and that is 'to shoot' and "in die Höhe schnellen" as to shoot up.

    Also look up the word 'hochschnellen' which is schnellen with the adverb hoch prefixed and you get... to jolt up, to jump up, to leap up, to bounce up, to spurt, to skyrocket etc. etc.

    Jim_Mich wrote:
    The last sentence might be saying, "four pounds rise, full circle quickly moves."

    There's no way you can get that from the original German text.

    However, because he is talking in 'quarters' he of course could well be referring to quarters of a circle. Which, as you say, four quarters would be a full circle. It might also be possible that he is simply referring to the positions of quarters within the wheel, i.e. 'one quarter' represents the top right quarter, 'two quarters' bottom right, 'three quarters' bottom left, 'four quarters' top left. This perhaps has more merit if you understand how they talk about clock times....

    es ist ein Viertel auf zwei - this literally says 'it is a quarter to two', but actually means (as we would say it in English) 'it is a quarter past one'.

    es ist zwei Viertel auf zwei - literally 'it is two quarters to two', but actually means 'it is half past one'.

    es ist drei Viertel auf zwei - literally 'it is three quarters to two', but actually means 'it is a quarter to two'.

    It makes sense if you just think that all quarters mentioned just refer to the next hour coming from current one.

    So, could he be saying when one pound falls one quarter (12:00 to 3:00) it shoots four pounds up to four quarters (12:00). This doesn't give us a starting position for the four pounds, so it could be at the bottom of the wheel and therefore go from 6:00 to 12:00 for example.
    Anyway, just a thought.


  15. I agree with Doug's interpretation of the German words here. If he literally meant "to shoot" the translation would be "schießen" ("schiessen" without ringel-S)

  16. Here is the 4 lines in German

    Der wird ein grosser Künstler heissen/
    Wer ein schwer Ding leicht hoch kan schmeissen/
    Und wenn ein Pfund ein Viertel fällt/
    Es vier Pfund hoch vier Viertel schnellt.

    He probably used schnellt because it was the best poetic fit to fallt.

  17. However, some say (and I agree) this a warning rather than a clue. "He shall be called" is rhetorical speech, used for effect, not instructive.

  18. "Der wird ein grosser Künstler heissen" - a better translation, in my opinion, would be "he would be known [as] a great artist". Künstler means artist. A craftsman is "Handwerker", a master craftsman would be a "Meister".

    "Schmeissen", in the second sentence, especially in the context of the whole sentence, is more "to throw". "werfen" (from "wegwerfen") is also to throw [away], but "schmeissen" is more to throw something really hard, as if discarding it, and more colloquial German.

  19. Sorry for non participation at this time. My grandaughter has started at Winchester University this week and we have been helping move her into her student accomodation. Only a hundred miles away but torrential rain for the entire journey in both directions for three days. If this is global warming bring back the ice age!

    Also big thanks to Great Bear and Andre for bringing my attention to the crappy state of my web site, supposedly selling digital copies of Bessler's books. I'm re-writing free-energy for now and will start on the others shortly. Be back soon. Be happy!



  20. I think that as soon as one starts to interpret these "quarters" as meaning 90° of arc, one will get into trouble. They are clearly meant to refer to linear distances because the weights fall and rise which is a linear vertical motion. If Bessler had said the weights rotated through a quarter or four quarters, then I might agree with attempts to interpret the quarters as measures of arc.

    Come to think of it, I'm not even convinced that this quote has anything to do with the PM mechanism Bessler used! All he really says is that a great or talented craftsman would understand how to make a four pound weight rise four quarters as a one pound weight falls one quarter. I've previously posted how this could be done. Then Bessler tells us that whoever can figure out how to do this will "soon the motion perpetuate".

    IMO, all Bessler is saying is that a craftsman skilled enough to make the four pounds be lifted as indicated by the one pound should then be able to find the working design that Bessler found. Of course, "soon" might be on the order of a decade or more and involve hundreds of attempts!

  21. I've managed to make sense of most of Besslers statement about his machine when he states: "In my machine a hammer blows on an ordinary anvil; the Driver drives; the Runner runs; Seer sees; Buyer buys; the Shotgun Shoots and the Bow twangs."

    The only part I'm not sure off is "the seer sees". In the original text, does seer refer to something optical, as in an eye, or as in a clairvoyant, or as on overseer e.g. examiner.

    Any ideas?

  22. My wheel Is nearly ready to work.

    I find it from bible "Book of Judges"

  23. @Great Bear

    I think you have misquoted the section from AP. Here's the translation I found:

    "Greed is an evil root.

    An anvil receives many blows.

    A driver drives. A runner runs.

    A seer sees. The buyer buys.

    The rain flows. Snow falls.

    The jack fires. The bow twangs;

    a large herd of fat, lazy,
    plump horses wanders aimlessly.

    etc., etc."

    Nowhere does Bessler state that any of these "actions" are actually going on inside of his wheels.

    He seems to be just stating what the natural actions are of various unrelated things. It is only in the next stanza that he begins talking about his wheels. I think he is trying to say that everything in the world has a natural action or function associated with it and this also applies to his wheels. In other words, once people learn how his wheels work, they will see that there is nothing really that mysterious about them.

  24. I've always thought that the phrase, 'the seer sees' might refer to the eye when seen from the side, in profile. So if the seer sees, then eye, the seer, is open and seeing, and not closed.

    It would look like the letter 'V' on its side. If it was closed it would look something like the letter 'T' on its side.


  25. to contribute a little to the confusion, here's what some say - Bessler often speaks of the "first mover", a main symbol of the traditional metaphysical worldview. It symbolizes the cause of all movement. This symbol, the first mover, emerges in all old traditions.

    Some think that therefore part of the secret lies in the axle of the machine. But how can an axle be the propelling strength of a PM? Some interpret the first sentences in "Apologia" as follows:

    The avarice [greed] is a root evil,
    An anvil gets many blows.

    Blows, steel, vibration: a vibrating axle. How can a vibrating axle cause a gain of energy? In combination with standing (inverted) pendulums. Is is a fact that standing, inverted pendulums will accelerate under the influence of rapid, abrupt motion. Just like the (hanging) pendulum of a 2-stage oscillator gets accelerated by moving the pivot rapidly.

    Similarly, the "seer" and "buyer" would be describing effects of the vibrating axle:

    Seer: The swinging (vibration) of the axle in the rotational direction whilst there's no contact to the inverted pendulum. The pendulum is allowed to free fall.

    Buyer: Swinging (vibration) of the axle in the rotational direction whilst there IS contact with the inverted pendulum. The axle pulls the pendulum inward and thereby is accelerated, a fair barter deal.

    This accelerated inverted pendulum, allow to free fall (for a part of the arc) and accelerated by the moving axle, does imply the necessity of a second wheel (wheel in a wheel) which acts a torque storage "buffer" mechanism, transferring it ultimately to the outer part of the wheel.

    The "shotgun shoots" would be the impact of the inverted pendulum onto the torque storage mechanism, thus transforming the kinetic energy of the pendulum into torque.

    "Bow twangs" would be the torque storage mechanism (the inner wheel, most likely spring loaded and somewhat flexible) releasing its stored torque into the main wheel.

    I've been studying this theory of operation and I find it quite credible.

  26. For those interested in this theory of operation, please see

    It's in rather horrible English, but not too difficult to follow. The reasoning is not always straightforward and somewhat far fetched in places, but the resulting CAD design on the other hand is quite interesting and innovative and does make quite a bit of sense, in my not-so-humble opinion.

  27. The quote I worked from was taken from: relating to DIALOGUES AT THE CASTLE OF WEISSENSTEIN (by Dr Ramesh menaris)

    Maybe he's got his information wrong!

  28. I've noticed several possible deceptions in Bessler's statements. To learned men, they're absorbed in the truth of statements, which while appearing straight forward and clear lead one completely down the wrong path. Sometimes it pays to think like a politician and say one thing but mean something completely different. A good example is that of the chancellors 2008 budget, where he cheerfully announced that the 22% tax rate was coming down to 20% but said nothing about the 10P tax band - because he'd abolished it, and thought he'd get away with it by implicitly not mentioning it. He was correct in all his statements and told no lies, but the nation was much aggrieved to have been taken for idiots to have the wool pulled over their eyes in this manner.

    I feel Bessler is doing the same, and to the logical man, these are very difficult to spot, but then again, I feel he meant them to be difficult.

    When he states: "In my machine a hammer blows on an ordinary anvil; the Driver drives; the Runner runs; Seer sees; Buyer buys; the Shotgun Shoots and the Bow twangs."

    At first it seems gobbledygook, but look closer (this is my interpretation):

    In my machine…
    A HAMMER BLOWS ON AN ORDINARY ANVIL; something strikes something else. Also the ear contains bones called the hammer, (which strike the) anvil, (which moves the) stirrup; Bessler I believe was a medical man.
    THE DRIVER DRIVES; a motivator motivates or actuates, pushes or moves along.
    THE RUNNER RUNS; something moves along (a guide), usually a slide. Or a messenger.
    SEER SEES; eyes, loops, a predictor, something that moves in a socket? Catch with the eye? (could the translation be seer as in optics - an eye that sees, or as in clairvoyant, or as in examiner, or governor (or regulator), as in overseer.)
    BUYER BUYS; a purchase; the mechanical advantage gained by being in a position to use a lever. Or an exchange.
    THE SHOTGUN SHOOTS and; balls are emitted or propelled.
    THE BOW TWANGS; Energy used (Stored energy to provide greater momentum on release e.g. for launching arrows) or contained (as in a damper), or a musical accessory for playing a stringed instrument, or a piece of cord with two loops and two ends (as in tying shoelaces), or a bending of the head or knee in submission, respect, or greeting. Or the front of a ship.

    Now to me at any rate, if we take the mechanical aspects, he's describing a mechanical system, though not in sufficient detail to explain it entirely.
    A hammer strikes a target, which is or moves an actuator, which slides or causes something to move or slide, possibly into a socket (seer sees), which causes a lever to act [ get a purchase], then a ball or lead weight is propelled from or by a stored energy device (spring or bow).

  29. A seer is also a catch or latch don't forget, relates to gun trigger mechs, clock mechs, etc.


  31. Hopeless !

    Same speculation year after year. Everybody is talking but no-one do not listen.

    I wrote that I have working wheel but nobody wan´t to know is it true or not ?

    If bessler somehow from heaven could wrote here instructions how to build working wheel I´m 100% sure that you will ignore him and continue your blindfull journy only for vain.

  32. Bold claims, Anon. O.k., I for one want to know. Can you describe it for us?

  33. Great Bear: yes, I believe too that he's describing mechanical properties of devices/mechanisms in this cryptic way.

  34. Anybody who wants to solve the mystery of Bessler's wheels needs to stop wasting time with such things as mystical symbolism interpretation, Bessler family geneology, 18th century politics and other such dead ends and focus exlusively on what we know with close to 100% certainty was actually going on inside of his PM wheels. Then, to paraphrase Sarah Palin, "Build, baby, build!". In this way one very lucky person might actually have a chance of rediscovering the actual design that Bessler used.

    A PM wheel based on the Book of Judges? No Thanks. This is yet another distraction and won't have anything to do with what Bessler used.

    What do we really know about BESSLER'S wheels???

  35. Technoguy, the problem is that we know very little for sure about the mechanism(s). We know that (also?) cylindrical weights were employed as Bessler showed some of these to witnesses; possibly drilled lengthwise; acting in pairs according to Bessler, and also springs (but not as a driving force as in clockwork) and perhaps compartments around the inside circumference, according to a witness. That's about it, the rest is (hidden) hints and clues and (our) interpretations of them.

    So we have to try to envision some kind of simple, probably crude, yet powerful mechanism that can be quite easily constructed.

    We know that (only) overbalancing weights won't do the trick. There must be more to it. What's missing is what I call the "amplifier"; some device that gives us considerable mechanical advantage and is fairly simple. Such devices exist. The question is, how was is implemented.

    I'm curious (especially considering your name: technoguy) what you thought of the Swiss inverted pendulum design (with moving pivot) I posted earlier (see link). Although I think that several embodiments are possible, that one is quite well-conceived and credible in my view.

    Actually I am also very curious what Arktos (using Silux) thinks of that one.

  36. @Andre

    You wrote:

    "We know that (only) overbalancing weights won't do the trick. There must be more to it."

    Agreed! If it was only overbalanced weights, then one of the tens of thousands of hopeful mobilists during the last 300 years would surely have rediscovered the magic design Bessler found by now.

    This leads me to conclude that Bessler's design was an overbalanced wheel, but somehow he found a way to make it work with something extra added. Since the only other components he ever mentions other than weights are ropes and springs, then these must have been what allowed his design to work while all others failed.

    If this is correct, then it means that anyone currently pursuing Bessler's design that is NOT incorporating ropes and springs into his design has a ZERO chance of success!

    Sorry, I did not follow that discussion of the Swiss inverted pendulum because it did not seem relevant to me to what was going on in Bessler's wheels.

    Generally, I avoid any hypotheses involving bouncing axles, wobbling drums, internal flywheels, oversized pendulums, subatomic particles, heat engines, magnets, Biblical symbolism or any other such unworkable nonsense. I focus on designs that contain only eight weights on the ends of levers similar to what is shown in MT9.

    In the notes to MT9 Bessler says, after dismissing "sphere wheels" as useless, that there was a wheel presented by Jacob Leupold which would work if Bessler's "Connectedness Principle" was applied to it.

    I would advise anyone attempting to duplicate Bessler's wheels to do so by finding Leupold's PM wheel that contained weighted levers and then try to figure out how to make that work by using only eight levers, some interconnecting ropes, and, lest we forget, some springs.

    One can be very certain that Bessler would have done a great deal of reading about other previous attempts to build overbalanced PM wheels before he even began to work on one of his own.

  37. The rudimentary laws of nature I mentioned, specifically conservation of energy, have never changed since the beginning of the universe.

    A wheel that could not only turn itself but do work in addition to the work it did to keep itself turning, would not only be a perfect machine, it would be a more than perfect machine. It would have achieved overunity. It would have defeated frictional losses that are inevitable in every physical system. There isn't a mechanism in nature or manmade that does that.

    Saying, or believing, that gravity can help is like expecting your computer monitor that you're looking at to spontaneously float off your lap (or desk).

    The only way to a solution is a system that could utilize an outside energy source someway.

  38. Andre, I had a quick look at the Swiss site you referenced. I can well imagine that an inverted pendulum would gain energy from a "vibrating" i.e. horizontally oscillating axle, but wouldn't any excess energy only come from whatever is forcing the axle to oscillate? So unless energy is being fed to it, its oscillation amplitude must diminish?

    If you've got your version of silux running, you could *force* constant amplitude axle oscillations, just to see what happens. A single line of code in the macro window should do it, e.g.

    CALC FORMULA (V.X(o1) = (1e-4)*sin((1e-6)*T))

    And then activate it: >Macro>Activate Macro.

    V.X is velocity in the x-direction.
    o1 is the axle object number, assumed to be 1.
    1e-4 is 1 metre/sec, and 1e-6 is 1 radian/sec, in the required cm-g-μs units.

  39. I had a look at this site as well (
    Although I'm disinclined to write anything off as truly unworkable, I don't have much confidence in this one.

    First, in a conventional gravity wheel, turning power is determined by the seperation of the weights. ie. the difference between the two centres of gravity of opposing masses. In this wheel, it looks miniscule so power output would likewise be very little.

    Secondly, there is little feasible explanation of how the weights at the end of the arm flip over by themselves. If this was easily achievable, none of the other stuff inside would be required!

    Finally, could a carpenters boy have built this?

    I shall look forward to the truth when and if the author builds this device.

  40. @Technoguy: in this context, look for a moment at the Swiss design (interpretation) of Bessler's wheel. There *is* more than a overbalanced pendulum in there - springs and a flexible tire (one could say: rope) acting as a torque storage mechanism. And that, IMO, is (part?) of what's missing. Just have a quick look - it's worth it, I think.

    @Arktos: thanks! That's a very good tip. Obviously you're far more advanced than me with these formulas and macros on objects. I'll start digging in Silux. This is good stuff. Thanks again! BTW the vibration as speculated upon in the Swiss design is in the (deliberately) "shabby" axel design (see the uneven brass bearings?). The motion of the axle is the result of the rotation of the main wheel itself. Sure, introduces plenty of friction, but interesting nevertheless.

    @Doug: One of the hallowed laws seems to have bitten the dust, very recently. A pillar of physics — that nothing can go faster than the speed of light — appears to be smashed by an oddball subatomic particle that has apparently made a giant end run around Albert Einstein's theories. Scientists at the world's largest physics lab said Thursday they have clocked neutrinos traveling faster than light. That's something that according to Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity — the famous E (equals) mc2 equation — just doesn't happen.

    And yet it seems to have happened. Also this "law" seems to be not entirely valid i.e. complete. We should stop talking about "absolute laws" that never have changed since the beginning of time. Instead, we should be honest and say something like "based on our current understanding, that is not possible". Many "absolute laws" have been broken many times already.

    Unless I am very much mistaken (which is entirely possible) I think that within the coming 8 weeks or so another one of these absolute "laws" will be broken. This time in thermodynamics. Yep, "overunity". And no, I'm not referring to Bessler, right now.

  41. Graet Bear 15:30: You are right of course, where it not for the acceleration of the pendulum(s) by the moving axle. That's a nifty way to gain kinetic energy. The weights shift round simply by impacting the torque storage mechanism (the flexible rope or tire, wheel in a wheel). It's very elegant.

  42. Don't get too excited, Andre. The test has to be verified. Most likely, the test that measured the neutrinos will eventually be shown to have either human or equipment error. I'd bet my house.

    This isn't relevant with bessler's wheels achieving overunity, or were allegedly gravity powered anyway. One is special relativity, the other is classical mechanics. Would the discovery of Higgs boson imply our observations of simple machines are faulty? That would require some connection between the two.

  43. Book of judgement 13-15.

    Discover the secret of Samson's strength and you find one way to lift weight.

    The length of a strand of human hair changes with different relative humidities.
    As the relative humidity increases, hair becomes longer, and as the humidity drops it becomes shorter.


  44. I'm just fascinated with such anomalies, that keep popping up Doug. Of course none of this has anything to do with Bessler, but it does show that science is always evolving, renewing and questioning itself - and that's the way it should (must!) be. There are no real absolutes. Careful with your house... Two things that's also interesting right now: Uppsala (in Sweden, test site) and reverse thermal entropy. Two (very related) things that will shake quite a few things in thermodynamics in the coming, say, 8 weeks, if I'm not very mistaken. And after that, in the US.

  45. Anon, are you saying we have to keep it out of the rain?
    Very cryptic.

    Several materials shrink or expand under (several) influences. I don't see how this helps us (or anybody). Maybe you can explain it.

  46. @Andre

    Okay, so I looked at it and, of course, immediately dismissed it as both unworkable and NOT what Bessler used.

    I'm sure that there must have been some structural flexing of Bessler's axles during rotation, but it would not have significantly affected a wheel's performance.

    Remember that Bessler gave public demonstrations of his wheels at which skeptics were invited to approach a wheel, insert their hands into its drums, and feel the axle for themselves. If there had been any inverted pendulums attached to an axle, then this would have been immediately obvious.

    I also found the news of the faster than light neutrinos to be of interest. This gives hope to those who suggest that faster than light space travel might be possible.

    So Bessler's wheels might have used HAIR for power! This sounds like a variant of the 19th century machines that used saturated sponges to keep a belt of such sponges moving through a tank of water. The sponges, upon exiting the water, would then pass under a roller that would squeeze the water out and reduce their weight. These contraptions never worked in practice although they were very ingenious in their construction.

    However, the wet hair approach most likely could be used to maintain the overbalance of a collection of weights inside of a wheel and thereby lead to a workable wheel.

    But, like the heat engine hypotheses for Bessler's wheels, this approach can not explain how rapidly Bessler's wheels turned. It takes time for hair to absorb water and expand and even more time to dry out again and contract. At best one would be able to make a wheel that only turned very slowly like a Mu metal wheel I once saw demonstrated.

    That wheel used strands of Mu metal alloy that have the property of "memory". The strands on one side of the wheel (the ascending side) which was in shade and cooler would curl up a bit and shift the center of gravity of the strands to the opposite side of the wheel (the descending side). As the wheel slowly turned, curled up strands arriving on the warmer sunny side of the wheel (the descending side) would heat up and return to their normal uncurled shape again. Thus, the wheel was kept out of balance and would keep rotating as long as there was a temperature difference between the strands on both sides of the axle. I even think I saw another version of this using less expensive bimetallic strips of metal.

    Yes, they turn (under the correct conditions, that is), but do so at a very low rate. I don't think anyone has gotten any useable power out of one of these yet.

  47. Technoguy, thanks for looking at it. I wasn't aware of these demonstrations where skeptics could feel the axle. Dang, I was attracted to that design, perhaps because it's elegant and fits many clues. I also like that torque storage mechanism, quite nifty.

    Indeed heat engines, mu-metal wheels, "hair" engines and such seem not very practical to me as well in these applications. Likewise, atmospheric clocks running on barometric pressure differences are ingenious, quite brilliant actually but similarly only applicable for clocks.

    Anyway, thanks for looking into it. Thanks to Arktos I will do some more digging and experimenting with Silux.

  48. Yes Anon,..I am also about to finnish and test a working wheel.Isn't it funny how every concievable thing comes in the way,almost to try and prevent the birthing of it.Could it be some sort of conspiracy from the dark side preventing us from having such a blessing to mankind.
    Even my computer was of line for a week but I am back.
    Andre I agree with you about Bessler being genuine. I do know how it was done,but do you think I can get to the point where I can prove it!? Now that Einsteins theory is in question maybe we can bring into question Newton's statement that you can not get energy from nothing!

  49. I believe that, despite the recent questioning of part of Einstein's Theory of Relativity, we will find that the Conservation of Energy Principle will always remain valid. Energy, defined as "the capacity to do work", can not just suddenly be created out of nothing or, on the other hand, suddenly disappear. To be used, it must first be extracted from something, via transformation, and then be made available to begin moving weights or raising temperatures in a certain location.

    That then brings one to the next big mystery of Bessler's wheels: Where did the energy they supplied to "outside" machinery come from? To truly be PM wheels that energy had to come exclusively from inside of the wheel or, as Bessler wrote, "The wheel must simply run from its own inner force" which I interpret as a mistranslation of "...from its own inner torque".

    So what ultimately was the source of the energy produced by his PM wheels? (And, please, no answers involving gravity vortexes, "Offyrean bearings", or tanks of compressed air!)

    He tells us that all of his "timbers are solid", that nothing is "stationary on the axle", and that there are no "cymbal weights" inside of his wheel's drums. (Note that a "cymbal weight" is another name for the large round dish-like brass weights used at the end of a clock's pendulum. Thus, he specifically tells us his wheels do NOT use pendulums.)

    So, what else is left to act as a source of energy?

  50. My apologies again for not taking part in these fascination discussions, I am so busy at this time but I hope to get some time to myself next week.

    I have finally rewritten and published the whole website at I hope it works properly now. If anyone wants to tell me about any further faults I'd really appreciate knowing. BTW my wife tells me the yellow on the first page is too intense so I may have to tone it down!

    Interesting (I hope!) new blog being posted today or tomorrow.


  51. What's up, yeah this piece of writing is truly pleasant and I have learned lot of things from it on the topic of blogging. thanks.

    Also visit my blog post pod coffee makers

  52. Tremendous things here. I'm very satisfied to peer your post. Thanks a lot and I am having a look forward to contact you. Will you please drop me a mail?

    Also visit my webpage;

  53. Very good blog you have here but I was curious about if you
    knew of any discussion boards that cover the same topics discussed here?
    I'd really love to be a part of community where I can get suggestions from other experienced individuals that share the same interest. If you have any recommendations, please let me know. Appreciate it!

    My web blog ... dergelijk

  54. I'll right away take hold of your rss as I can not in finding your e-mail subscription link or newsletter service. Do you've any?
    Kindly permit me recognize so that I may just subscribe.

    my weblog

  55. Hi, i think that i saw you visited my site so i came to “return the favor”.
    I am attempting to find things to improve my site!
    I suppose its ok to use a few of your ideas!!

    Have a look at my blog:

  56. I love your blog.. very nice colors & theme. Did you create
    this website yourself or did you hire someone to do it for you?
    Plz respond as I'm looking to construct my own blog and would like to know where u got this from. many thanks

    Look into my page ::

  57. A person essentially assist to make seriously articles
    I'd state. This is the first time I frequented your web page and up to now? I surprised with the analysis you made to create this particular publish incredible. Magnificent process!

    My web site -


The True Story of Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Machine - Update

At the end of March we sold our house and moved in with my daughter, son-in-law and granddaughter, expecting to be there for no more than tw...