Wednesday, 4 January 2012

An uncovered working wheel is easier to build.

When Johann Bessler exhibited his wheels, they were of a certain depth or thickness, being covered on both sides of the wheel. I assume that the cross-bars or pivots upon which the levers or weights turned, ran across the internal depth of the wheel and each end was fixed to a piece of timber on each side of the wheel. Witnesses report that the sides of the wheel were covered with oil cloth and others that there were gaps in some thin timber planks that covered it. This suggests that the wheels were built in a skeletal framework with easy access from both sides as well as the circumferential edge, then the interior was hidden by the oil cloth or the thin wood deals - not as in my prototypes which consist of a single wood disc mounted on a removable axle.

Its hard to explain without a drawing but its a simple to understand; I call Bessler's wheel a three dimensional build having depth as well as height and width. For simplicity, my prototypes are built in a two dimensional way having height and width but not really any depth. By that I mean that the same cross-bars or pivots I referred to above are only attached on one end, in my case, to a single side disc, or back-plate, thus dispensing with the need for any kind of structure on each side of the wheel and allowing easy access and adjustment.

From Bessler's perspective his wheel had to built as a framework of pieces of timber rather than two discs because of the increased complexity of fitting the cross-bars and any associated mechanisms, in-between two discs, but I'm sure his experimental models were built in a similar way to mine because at first he only needed to make a proof of principle wheel for his own satisfaction,  and then build something that would keep the internal mechanisms safe from prying eyes.

I had thought that if I was to succeed in making a working version I would need to either rebuild it with two solid discs, one for each side, to mount the mechanisms on, or try to attach to the open, uncovered side, some kind of covering to hide the internal workings. However when I decided that I wasn't going to keep the workings secret it was obvious that I could just go with the first working prototype. But now I'm aware of what a mess the basic disc I use to mount everything on is! Its got more holes in it than a hunk of Swiss cheese! The metal levers are similarly riddled with holes of assorted dimensions. What to do! In the end not much. I might apply a little paint to the disc to make the mechanisms show up against the background of the disc..... but I'm getting ahead of myself - first I have to build that working model!

JC

67 comments:

  1. @ JC

    Your "one disc" system is certainly an "easy access" way to build a wheel. Of course, for those making 2d simulations on a computer monitor, all of their models are one disc systems!

    I don't think Bessler would have used such a system, however. He was, afterall, a clockmaker and used to working with gears fitted in between the two parallel flat plates of a movement. Most likely, his first small table top sized one directional prototype was about a yard in diameter and a few inches thick. Maybe its levers were about 3 or 4 inches from wt center to pivot. Each of the eight weights probably weighed less than a pound.

    So, John, are you making ANY progress with your wheel? That 300th anniversary is coming up fast!

    Let's see, your design uses five weights so that means you need to maintain the eccentricity of the CoM of the weights through a rotational interval of 360° / 5 = 72°. Any luck with that so far? That's almost double the 45° that I believe Bessler's wheels had to maintain CoM eccentricity through. I think I'll stick with 45° increments of rotation.

    Hmmm...there's that number again...72...which is the number of steps in Jacob's Ladder according to ancient mystics!

    A "coincidence"?

    ReplyDelete
  2. @ technoguy

    In 2d (silux) simulations you can have as many discs or anything else you like, one behind the other, provided always that they act in parallel planes. The user has total control over what objects in any plane shall interact, or not, with objects in other planes.

    @ Trevor and others

    You probably won't like this but here's a bit more about remote viewing (probably for the last time). If you had checked out the Evert/Jelinski references I gave before, you'd have seen a lot of viewers fairly obviously referring to mass-spring oscillations, e.g.

    "soft and hard up and down swinging... slinging back and ahead like slow motion"

    "essential is: time in motion runs ahead fast then slowly back."

    "ahead/back movement square small parts restless motions"

    "1. Target: is a kind of chamber, inside there is a process physically or chemically.
    2. Mode of operation: surplus of mass, pulsation, effect of trampoline [i.e. springs?], controlled reaction, starting impetus by men..."[etc]

    "pulsation..."

    "at start hesitant & braked, movement downward, goes ahead fast then slowly back, like by slow motion... when certain point is achieved, time runs backward like slow motion, thus stretched/bended, is decisive factor..."

    And so on.

    ReplyDelete
  3. @ Arktos

    I think in Wm2d you can overlap two discs, but you can not connect parts attached to one disc with parts attached to another disc. I don't consider this a problem, however, because I believe all of the weighted levers within one of Bessler's one directional wheels were in the same plane.

    As far as the remote viewing material is concerned, it sounds like a bunch of psychic gibberish to me. Be nice, however, if someone could remotely visualize one of the levers Bessler used so I could test it out in a model. I'd gladly trade a mountain of mechano babble for just one 15 second peek at one of his levers. If you have that, then you have 95% of his secret! The other 5% involves putting in the cords and springs.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'll write a brief accoutn of my experience in remote viewing - it may be of interest to those who are still curious. I'll add it as a blog in a day or two.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  5. Arktos,..I don't know where you got that little ryme but it is an amazingly apt description of my present wheel.
    I thought somebody has been reading my mind.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Okay, after a couple of shots of whiskey while staring at the DT wheel illustrations, I began to experience temporal displacment remote viewing of their hidden mechanics. Here are the verbal descriptions that my voice activated audio recorder picked up which I found when I sobered up enough later to review them:

    "Hollow drum with eight compartments"

    "Eight levers with multiple arms"

    "Four dozen cords of different lengths forming a round cut diamond's top pattern between the levers"

    "Cords arranged in several layers so that no two cords touch each other...no cord rubbing takes place"

    "Some cords tight...others loose"

    "Only 3 weighted levers touching rim stops...all others shifted"

    "Ascending side weights swing in toward axle from 6 to 9 and then rise back to rim from 9 to 3"

    "Each lever has its own spring"


    That's all I got after waking up hours later with a throbbing headache! Damn, that remote viewing stuff is powerful...but, then again, maybe it was just the effects of the booze! LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  7. @ Trevor,

    Not sure if you're serious, but in case you are, the references once again are http://www.evert.de/eft704e.htm and http://www.evert.de/eft782e.htm.

    @ technoguy,

    I'm sure you're not serious; even if you were, you're trying to be the questioner, monitor, viewer and even psychic defender(?) all at once -- an almost certain recipe for failure! Just in case anyone is serious about correct protocols, the first hit on Google for "Remote Viewing Protocol" is probably as good as any.

    Now I'm going to shut up about RV, at least until John writes his account about it (to which I look forward). But I'll say this: I tend to agree with Trevor that oscillation will have some part to play in a successful Bessler wheel.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @ Arktos well then you might be interested in reading up on some of Jim_mich 's work.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Here is the first hit for remote viewing protocol:

    http://www.viking-z.org/r08i.htm

    My favorite line:

    It is advisable to have a psychic defender to check people in, act as manager and make the coffee.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @ Arktos

    Yeah...I was just poking fun at the results of remoting viewing experiments...at least those that might claim to be able to view a centuries old invention. However, I do believe remote viewing is real, but only in the here and now. There was an ancient class of priests and priestesses in Hawaii called the "Kahuna" who, alledgedly, were VERY adept at remote viewing. They could tell when ships were approaching an island days before they arrived and even describe a ship and its crew in minute detail. Yes, it is a real phenomena.

    As far as my "viewings" of Bessler's wheels are concerned, however, they are not meant to be a joke, but, rather, a 100% accurate description of the internal mechanics the used. I did not derive them by remote viewing, but by a VERY careful analysis of the available data.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Okay TG,.. So where's the working wheel?!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Arktos, interesting remarks about remote viewing. I am too old, too ugly and too experienced NOT to believe in the fact that there's more between Heaven and Earth than meets the eye. There is definitely something to it; I've seen too many examples of people with amazing gifts. And trust me, I was very skeptical.

    Two things caught my eye about the "mode of operation": surplus of mass, and pulsation. I don't know if anybody saw my post about John Worton's armature mechanism and my tinkering with it (in the previous New Year thread) but I am, especially after som tests, more convinced than ever that oscillation ("pulsation") is a "key ingredient" in Besslers wheel - just as this remote viewer stated.

    Looking forward to John's article about his experiences with it.

    ReplyDelete
  13. BTW John, how about a nice transparent model once you've got it working? Made from acrylic or lexan or some other strong clear material. Would be very impressive to see the interactions!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Doug have you ever played pool?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'll believe in time travel remote viewing when someone can visualize the next jackpot combo to be drawn in a state lottery! LOL! (Hmmm...come to think of it, didn't someone once dream the numbers, play them, and win?! Probably just dumb luck.)

    I think that while there is definitely a reality to various psychic phenomenon on the one hand, OTOH, about 999 out of 1000 people that think they have some "special" powers really don't. They are just deluded and hoping that if they try hard enough, then those "latent" powers they are convinced they possess will surely emerge to bring them attention, status, and, hopefully, some $$$'s. For example, they think that if they just keep trying to remote view or read palms accurately or try to move objects with their minds, then, eventually, it will happen.

    But, that's not the way it works. The Kahuna of ancient Hawaii were carefully selected as children for the paranomal priesthood. They were already showing unmistakeable signs of strong psychic abilities at an early age and then had them further hightened with special mind training after joining the priesthood. In other words, there is a definite genetic component involved and certain people either have that genetic "gift" or they don't. The vast majority don't and just wishing to have it won't give it to them..


    @ Trevor D.

    While the description I gave is 100% accurate, IMO, it is, unfortunately, not 100% complete...yet.

    I am having impressive success working with partial wheels ("partial" in the sense of not using all of the ropes or springs) that do, in fact, make it through a 45° increment of rotation while continuously keeping their weights' CoM on the wheel's descending side. However, I still do not have the optimum lever design (the "magic" lever) or all of the details of the Connectedness Principle. With constant effort, I am hoping this situation will change. I have already seen enough, though, to convince me that I am definitely on the "right" track. I am also aware that I am not the only one on this track.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Good show,..Go for it!

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'm familiar with pool. Why do you ask?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I would draw everyone’s attention to the fact that today, the 6th of January, is MT 137 Day. The twelve-pointed star represents amongst other things Epiphany: the festival commemorating the manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles in the person of the Magi: on this very special day, this very special symbol comes to life; it is in use.

    Therefore, to my fellow Bessler Clue Enthusiasts, I pose two questions regarding this very particular and powerful image clue:

    1. What do you think this image has to do (if anything?) with the mechanism’s structure?

    2. Why did Bessler draw his version with a solid black centre?

    JW

    ReplyDelete
  19. The symmetry of the image is the reason he included it.
    My approach follows this idea. His wheels weren't asymmetrical. They were balanced to begin with, and he found a way to turn them where everyone else looked. A difference of some kind. The sounds of weights falling were there for the impression they gave that gravity was doing the "work".

    I am making progress.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @ John Worton

    Using a twelve pointed star can, religously speaking, represent the 12 tribes of Israel, the 12 apostles, etc. Bessler's star, however, joins points together from opposite sides of the wheel and also contains 12 lines.

    I suspect that those "lines" actually represent cords and show what the Connectedness Principle cord interconnection scheme would look like in a wheel with 12 levers which are not shown in MT 137. We must remember that in MT 9 Bessler tells us that his Connectedness Principle could be used to make Leupold's weighted lever wheel work. I think that MT 137 is the Connectedness Principle to use with Leupold's wheel since Leupold's wheel also contained 12 levers! However, one will have to do alot of work to figure out how to modify Leupold's levers so that the MT 137 connection scheme will make it work (that is, one will have to find the "magic" lever for a 12 lever wheel).

    Why the dark circle in the center? Simple. that represents the wheel's axle and shows that none of the cords pass through it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. @ Technoguy

    To return to our earlier discussion

    Are you really telling me that from your interpretation of the clues that you ‘know’ that several “skeptical members of the public” for “a few ducats”, slipped their arms up to their elbows in through the axle inspection hole(s), and after running their hands along a completely smooth axle from side to side inside the wheel, then all exclaimed “There’s nothing attached to or anywhere near the axle!” I hope you are not Technoguy, because if you are then I’m going to have to say RUBBISH! This will cause me considerable distress since as I have already made clear we stand shoulder-to-shoulder on many other clue-interpretations and related issues.

    On a more positive note, it seems that we more or less agree about ‘The Rim Holes’. You correctly highlight their probable roles in the inspection and repair of the wheel, but however completely miss their most vital function, THE reason for their incorporation as an integral part of the design: their role in the stopping and relocating of the machine. The ‘inner structures’ are much more stable or ‘dormant’ with the smaller weights taken out, and these are most conveniently removed when they are in their peripheral position.

    JW

    ReplyDelete
  22. @ John Worton

    At the risk of having my opinions labled as "rubbish" and causing you distress, I must say YES, that is EXACTLY what I am telling you! If it's any consolation, it took me years to finally realize that the "action" in Bessler's wheels took place exclusively near the rim with NOTHING going on at or even near the axle. Often getting off of a "wrong" track and onto a "right" one can be a long and difficult process...

    Bessler was probably constantly heckled by visitors who thought they could quickly dismiss his wheels as fakes with a few clever suggestions such as that their drums were powered by trained cats running along the inner bottom surface or that they contained a heavy descending weight which was attached to the axle through a gear train of some sort. For a few ducats he would permit them to approach wheel and place a hand through a small hole near the axle so that they could manually grasp the axle. Once that was done he might have had them turn toward the remaining visitors and proclaim that, indeed, the axle inside of the drum was just a solid cylindrical shaft of wood with nothing attached or even near it.

    I believe that the holes in the cloth covering of the Merseburg and Weissenstein wheels were strategically placed between the radial drum supports on one side of the wheel near the drum's periphery and, perhaps, about a foot in diameter. They were probably circular in shape and covered over by circular patches that were a few inches greater in diameter. These patches were held in place by straight pins and could be quickly and easily removed in order to inspect a wheel's internal mechanics or make repairs.

    Yes, these holes were used during the translocation of a wheel to remove and install its weights.. For a two directional wheel there would have been two sub wheels' weights located near the outermost ends of each parallel set of radial drum supports. To remove those two weights, Bessler would have had to have used two inspection holes: the one above and the one below the end of a radial support. This is because it was necessary to pull the two levers away from their stops in OPPOSITE directions in order to access their ends so that a lever's weight could be removed or reinstalled.

    While pulling these levers either up or down away from their stops, they would have been under constant spring tension. We've already discussed what happened during an inspection of the Merseburg wheel when one of these levers slipped out of Bessler's hand so I won't repeat it here.

    I have pondered long and hard about the role of the springs in Bessler's wheels and reached the conclusion that they served two distinct functions. First, they were CRITICAL to the shifting processes taking place inside of a wheel and an OB PM gravity wheel will NOT work without them! Second, BEFORE weights are installed on the ends of the levers, the springs keep the lengths of the levers lined up with the drum's radial supports and in contact with either the rim stops or an additional stop inside of the wheel. Why the need for this alignment? Well, it insures that the unweighted levers will not hang loosely and begin swinging about and thereby tangling up all of the interconnecting cords between the levers. It that was allowed to happen it would make a real mess and require too much time to straighten out during an examination of a wheel. Such an unnecessary delay would only further strain on the patience of witnesses who already had to be present during the translocation and also wait for the 16 weights of a two directional wheel to be removed and reinstalled.

    ReplyDelete
  23. John Worton wrote;
    "Are you really telling me that from your interpretation of the clues that you ‘know’ that several “skeptical members of the public” for “a few ducats”, slipped their arms up to their elbows in through the axle inspection hole(s), and after running their hands along a completely smooth axle from side to side inside the wheel, then all exclaimed “There’s nothing attached to or anywhere near the axle!”

    Tech...wrote;
    " I must say YES, that is EXACTLY what I am telling you!"

    "For a few ducats he would permit them to approach wheel and place a hand through a small hole near the axle so that they could manually grasp the axle. Once that was done he might have had them turn toward the remaining visitors and proclaim that, indeed, the axle inside of the drum was just a solid cylindrical shaft of wood with nothing attached or even near it."

    Cripes Tech... do you read the material or do you have selective memory? This is a serious question, for,

    Bessler writes;

    "Ask any of those who have groped inside my Wheel and grasped its axle" - "Rather, it has many compartments, and is pierced all over with various holes."

    "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."

    ReplyDelete
  24. @ Anonymous 01:18 quotes:

    "Rather, it has many compartments, and is pierced all over with various holes."

    Once again, I must emphatically repeat that the word "it" in this line does NOT refer to the axle, but rather to the DRUM! IF there were ANY holes in the axle, then that would have been IMMEDIATELY obvious to anyone who had paid Bessler his ducats and reached inside to "grope" the axle. Much of the ambiguity in Bessler's writings disappears when his statements are properly contexted.

    Once one eliminates a whole catagory of designs that depend upon using the drum's interior portion of the axle, he will then be freed to finally get onto the "RIGHT TRACK" and might just find that he is starting to make some REAL progress in finding the ACTUAL design that Bessler used.

    Changing one's "mindset" when it comes to Bessler's wheels is certainly NOT an easy thing to do and it wasn't easy for me either. But, if one is SERIOUS about solving this mystery, it is a change that he will inevitably HAVE to make if he wants to make any progress.

    Consider my rambling here as the "catalyst" to help you switch tracks before you waste even more years (or decades!) going down wrong tracks. I wouldn't want anybody visiting here to even have to endure a fraction of what I went through in the last few decades of my "quest" for PM. NOW I am finally 100% CERTAIN that I am, at long last, on the right track. I welcome others to join me...when and IF they are ready, of course...

    ReplyDelete
  25. Tech...I am seriously wondering if your mentally stable, and I'm not trying to insult you. Two things. First if all, how can you possibly say you are 100% certain when you don't actually know? Secondly, how can you get a quote all messed up? This is an EXACT quote ( John I hope you are all okay with me posting this ), with the context all intact;

    "Now look, Wagner, just listen carefully if you want some information from me. People say that, in your writings, you claim to have devised a Wheel which has a divided axle, held together in the middle only by a peg. Am I reporting you correctly? But people will continue to laugh until you actually produce such a machine! You further claim that my wheel is the same, but you're lying through your teeth! Ask any of those who have groped inside my Wheel and grasped its axle - and you will be assured, in no uncertain terms, that my axle is not like that. Rather, it has many compartments,"

    How can you possibly think he is not talking about the axle? I can understand how you can get a quote messed up if you don't actually own any of the books and are just reading cut and pasted quotes from the internet. But then that begs the question, if you haven't gone and purchased the material, what gives you the gall to say you know what's going on?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Yes,that's what Bessler said,unless Bessler was liar,which I do not believe.

    ReplyDelete
  27. @ Anon 03:19

    I am not offended in the least. As a mobilist, I am quite used to having my "mental stability" questioned and your insinuation is far less vitriolic than some of the things that I have ALREADY been called on this blog for daring to contradict the opinions of a few others!

    I claim to be "100% CERTAIN" of what I write because of the results of MANY simulations that I've personally made which are based upon previously unsuspected clues in the Bessler literature and their interpretations. I can understand why you or anybody else reading my comments would have their doubts about what I am saying. All I can say at this point is that I have access to information that is NOT on the web and which, IF I was to divulge it at this time, would, literally, make the hairs stand up on your collective heads. All I can say at this point is that you will not find me stating anything here that I do not have VERY good reason to believe to be true and which I do not base my own CURRENT research upon. Of course, everyone is free to accept or reject what I say and I will not be offended. My only goal is to try, as best I can, to get as many on the "right track" as possible so that 6/6/12 will not come and go like any other day has in the last 300 years.

    As far as the line:

    "Ask any of those who have groped inside my Wheel and grasped its axle - and you will be assured, in no uncertain terms, that my axle is not like that. Rather, it has many compartments,"

    is concerned, notice that the word "Rather" is capitalized and begins a NEW sentence. A new sentence was begun because the topic of the SECOND half of the previous sentence was, indeed, Bessler's axle and Bessler had FINISHED discussing that topic and was then discussing something ELSE in the new sentence which he refers to with the pronoun "it".

    What was that something else? It was the topic of the FIRST half of the previous sentence which was "...my Wheel". Thus, "it" does not refer to the axle, but rather to the wheel or, more specifically, to its drum which did have 8 compartments and at least 8 inspection holes in it that were normally covered over with pinned on patches of cloth.

    I would agree with those that erroneously think Bessler's axles contained actual holes and compartments in them IF that quote read as:

    "Ask any of those who have groped inside my Wheel and grasped its axle - and you will be assured, in no uncertain terms, that my axle is not like that BECAUSE it has many compartments,"

    But, Bessler did not write it that way and he could easily have IF that was what he actually wanted to say.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I've grown tired of you Tech...and the silly little games you play when you happen to be absolutely wrong. Will you take this as a lesson learned? I doubt it.

    ReplyDelete
  29. To add. I'll prove that you don't have any of the material. What are the next four sentences after the text I copied? Where I ended with,
    " in no uncertain terms, that my axle is not like that. Rather, it has many compartments,"

    ReplyDelete
  30. Further to my comment about my experience with Remote Viewing, I have requested permission to publish the report I was given. It was completed by six remote viewers and took place in 2008. At the time I dismissed it as not relevant, however upon re-reading it I have discovered some interesting features which seem inexplicable.

    I still remain strongly skeptical about the possibility of remote viewing back in time, but I remain open to the possibility of some remote viewer picking information from my own brain or from books or digital media. If I get permission I'll place the documents on one of my web sites and link to it from here.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  31. Tguyness said:

    "Ascending side weights swing in toward axle from 6 to 9 and then rise back to rim from 9 to 3"

    "but, then again, maybe it was just the effects of the booze!"

    I'd have to agree with you there.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anon 08:34 wrote:

    "I've grown tired of you Tech...and the silly little games you play when you happen to be absolutely wrong. Will you take this as a lesson learned? I doubt it."

    Spoken like someone FIRMLY stuck on the WRONG track! But, PLEASE don't listen to me and stay right where you are! That shall be a fitting fate for you! :(

    The next line after your quote is "Anyone with a bit of understanding will see that my machine works in quite a different manner." Which is exactly correct since NOTHING was on the axles of Bessler's wheels or even near them as was the case with the axle of Wagner's dual mainspring driven wheel. As for the remaining text, I won't quote it verbatim, but just state that Bessler continues to berate various of Wagner's opinions concerning the sounds the wheels would emit.

    If anyone still erroneously thinks that the portions of the axles inside of Bessler's wheels had many "compartments" and were "pierced" all over with holes, then ask yourself what the portion of the axle inside of the Gera wheel's drum must have looked like. It was only about TWO INCHES in length. Does that sound big enough to fill with "compartments" and holes?! I don't think so.


    @ JC

    I think I vaguely recall that remote viewing material about Bessler's wheels you mentioned and, as you say, it was largely irrelevant. However, I would certainly like to read it again in light of my present understanding of the inner mechanics of the wheels. That should prove to be VERY interesting.


    @ Doug

    The weighted levers inside of Bessler's wheels had to part company with their rim stops for about 75% of their trip around the axle in order to keep the CoM of the weights on the descending side of the drum. The clock coordinates I gave should be considered to be VERY reliable and will not change depending upon the blood alcohol level of a mobilist which, considering we just made it through another New Year's celebration, might have been at a maximum! LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  33. Ok Tguyness, I've had a glass of wine.

    If your weights are keeping company with their rim stops for 25% of their trip from 3 to 6 o'clock, and they each have a multiple armed lever connected with slightly-more-than-string-diameter cord which only weighs a few pounds itself ( tough cord!) to 3 (12 pounds!) other weights, then these three (actually, only two are in the "power" quadrant at any one time), 4 lb weights touching their rim stops at 3 to 6 are:

    Pushing a huge, 12 foot by 18 inch oak wheel weighing hundreds of pounds.
    At the same time, lifting at least 4 pounds on the other side of the wheel, toward the axle (more if you count the 3 cords, any imbalance between the lever arms' weight, and the partial (unknown) weight of the other two weights they are attached to for part of the rotation, while the cords are taut),
    And finally , at the same time, lifting boxes of stones or bricks weighing up to 60-70 pounds from the axle.

    This is accomplished with cords that somehow become taut (this must be the magic part), from the 3 to 6 o'clock positioned levers, counterclockwise around to the the 6 to 9 o'clock positioned levers, without the need for pulleys to redirect the cords' force or passing them anywhere near the axle.
    ?¿?

    ReplyDelete
  34. You won't quote it tech...because you can't quote it. My point is proved, you don't own the material. If you did it would be quite plain to you that the context of the beginning half of that paragraph was how Bessler's axle differes from Wagner's supposed one. I asked for something specific, the next four sentences and you couldn't provide. And it took you long enough to respond. Have trouble tracking down the little information that you could? Or if you do own it, you won't post it because you know you don't have any ground to stand on. Second proof of point, you wrote;
    " As for the remaining text, I won't quote it verbatim, but just state that Bessler continues to berate various of Wagner's opinions concerning the sounds the wheels would emit."

    There is nothing in that paragraph at all where he talks of sounds coming from the wheel. You know, the same paragraph where I asked for the next four sentences! Further, the axle size for the Gera wheel is unknown. Your making that up, as usual. And if it was known, the outer dimension says nothing of the inner dimension anyway. But as I said it is unknown. I believe you to be an attention seeker.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Doug wrote:

    "If your weights are keeping company with their rim stops for 25% of their trip from 3 to 6 o'clock..."

    Noooo! The weights are in FULL contact with their rim stops from 3 to 6. They are shifted away from their rim stops from 6 back around CW to 3 again. Thus, the weights are parted from their rim stops for 75% of the time for each drum rotation.

    Don't underestimate the tensile strength of the cords in Bessler's wheels. However, their main function was mainly to coordinate lever shifting during drum rotation. Any serious lifting done by a wheel was due to the angular momentum that accumulated in the wheel as it was allowed to accelerate to its maximum terminal rotation rate before a lift.


    Anon 00:07 wrote:

    "Or if you do own it, you won't post it because you know you don't have any ground to stand on. "

    I did not post all of what you requested because I did not have it handy at the time. However, now that I think about it, I probably would not have posted it anyway because, based on past time wasting experiences, I've learned not to "dance to the tune" of trolls or anons! It only encourages them and ultimately adds nothing of value to a discussion.

    However, I AM in agreement that Bessler is telling his reader's that his wheels' axles are not like the split one held together with a peg as was found in Wagner's dual mainspring driven wheel. BUT, he is doing this to reinforce the fact that his wheels' axles are SOLID and do NOT contain any "compartments" or holes. I stand steadfastly by my assertion that the word "it" in the last line of your quote refers solely to his wheels' drums and not their axles.

    You seem to be conveniently forgetting that in other places Bessler proudly proclaims "all of my timbers are solid". Those "timbers" he is refering to are the vertical upright axle supports AND, most importantly, the AXLES of his wheels.

    The Gera wheel's drum had a diameter of about 4.6 feet and its axle's diameter was about 4 Leipzig inches which is equal to about 3.7 British inches. I don't dispute these figures.

    However, I was not talking about the DIAMETER of the Gera wheel's axle, but rather its available LENGTH inside of the wheel's drum. I've seen various estimates, but a length of about 2 inches seems reasonable once one subtracts off the width of the radial support members and outer wooden casing slats from the outside width of the drum.

    Maybe I should be the one to question the "mental stability" of anyone who would even think that the 2 inch length of axle wood inside of the Gera wheel contained many "compartments" and was "pierced" all over with holes?!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Tbaby,
    If your weights are in full contact with their rim stops for 25% of their trip from 3 to 6 o'clock, and they each have a multiple armed lever connected with cord to 3 other weights, then these two 4 lb weights contacting their rim stops at 3 to 6 are:

    Pushing a huge, 12 foot by 18 inch oak wheel weighing hundreds of pounds.
    At the same time, lifting at least 4 pounds on the other side of the wheel, toward the axle (more if you count the 3 cords, any imbalance between the lever arms' weights, and the partial (unknown) weight of the other two weights they are attached to for part of the rotation, while the cords are taut.

    This is accomplished with cords that somehow become taut (this must be the magic part), from the 3 to 6 o'clock positioned levers, counterclockwise around to the the 6 to 9 o'clock positioned levers, without the need for pulleys to redirect the cords' force or passing them anywhere near the axle.

    I can't dance to that tune.

    ReplyDelete
  37. tbaby wrote,
    "You seem to be conveniently forgetting that in other places Bessler proudly proclaims "all of my timbers are solid". Those "timbers" he is refering to are the vertical upright axle supports AND, most importantly, the AXLES of his wheels"

    Solid as in, aren't a split axle held together with a single peg as in Wagners example, duh.

    ReplyDelete
  38. @ Doug

    Is English your first language? I'm starting to wonder...

    Once again, the weights are RESTING on their rim stops from 3 to 6. They shift away from their rim stops starting at 6 and remain away from them all the way around CW until they reach 3 again.

    Once a weighed lever's weight lands on its rim stop, it no longer participates in helping to shift any of the other weighted levers. Only a weighted lever that is shifting can contribute to the shifting of another weighted lever. This is what the Connectedness Principle is all about.

    A one directional Bessler's wheel (or the NON retrograde rotating sub wheel of a two directional Bessler's wheel) was not accelerated by the action of one or two shifting weighted levers, but rather by the COMBINED effect of ALL of its eight weighted levers (only 6 of which could be shifting at any moment) whose weight's CoM was maintained on the active wheel's descending side at all times.

    Now THAT"S a tune I'll GLADLY dance to! LOL!



    @ Anonymous 04:30

    Your comment is so incoherent that I will not even waste time trying to respond to it.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Now,now Guys,this is getting ugly!

    ReplyDelete
  40. This is quite a feat, ladies and gentleman. Pay attention..
    The 2 weights in the 3 and 4:30 positions aren't lifting, they are resting and pushing the wheel around. The 3 weights in the 6, 8:30 and 9 positions are being lifted by the 3 weights in the 10:30, 12:00, and 2:30 positions.
    This is where it gets interesting.
    The weights that are in position to lift the ascending weights are ABOVE THEM in the gravitational field.
    I'll need another glass of wine to dance to that tune.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @ Doug

    Well, at least you got a small part of it right!

    Think of it this way. The weights that move from 3:00 to 6:00 sit on their rim stops and are therefore inactive. However, the weights that move from 6:00 to 9:00 fall AWAY from their rim stops while those that move from 12:00 to 3:00 also fall but TOWARD their rim stops. The weights which move from 9:00 to 12:00 are the only ones that are actually RISING toward their rim stops.

    This means that during EACH 45° increment of drum rotation, the two weighted levers moving from 9:00 to 10:30 and from 10:30 to 12:00 were being lifted toward their rim stops by the other four weighted levers (initially at the 6:00, 7:30, 12:00, and 1:30 positions of the drum) which were falling with respect to their rim stops. This process was then repeated with each 45° increment of drum rotation and would continue to maintain the CoM of ALL of the wheel's eight weights on the drum's descending side. The wheel would therefore continue to turn and output energy / mass until either it experienced a critical part failure or it eventually depleted all of the energy / mass content of its weights.

    Now all one has to do to solve the Bessler mystery is to find the correct lever design (the "magic" lever) and interconnecting cord scheme to make the above process take place (and don't dare omit those CRITICAL springs from your design!). Bessler found them and so can we!

    BTW. Just so there will no confusion in my future comments on this blog, I consider anyone following the above design approach (such as myself) to be on the "right track" and anyone whose designs deviate from it IN THE LEAST WAY to, quite unfortunately, be on the "wrong track". Sorry if that statement causes anyone "distress", but I'd feel even more distressed if I did not tell you what my years of research finally convinced me was the ultimate truth of the Bessler mystery.

    ReplyDelete
  42. But, that doesn't look like half wheel, light and empty,the other half, full and heavy.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Ok, I've had some coffee. It gets even better, folks!
    Tness says:

    "the weights that move from 6:00 to 9:00 fall AWAY from their rim stops"

    And

    "The weights which move from 9:00 to 12:00 are the only ones that are actually RISING toward their rim stops."

    And these weights are being risen by?

    "the other four weighted levers (initially at the 6:00, 7:30, 12:00, and 1:30 positions of the drum) which were falling with respect to their rim stops."

    So we have two weights in the 6 to 9 position falling toward the axle and leveraging the two weights in the 9 to 12 position away from the axle, which are simultaneously being leveraged by the two weights in the 12 to 3 position.

    Let's pause for a minute to let that sink in.

    The weight at 6, which has just pushed the wheel to there, somehow, someway, stops itself from pushing against the rim stop, and then gravity is free to reverse its direction. There is a lever sticking out from the pivot/fulcrum at some angle towards the rim, say 90ยบ, so as the weight reverses its direction, and FALLS UP (!) towards the axle, it pulls down on the lever and helps raise the weights above it in the 9 and 10:30 positions via the cords running to other levers sticking out at the opposite angle, towards the axle.
    Meanwhile, the weight near 12, having just been lifted there, can begin to fall. But it has to fall in a special way: it has to fall through its magic rim stop to allow it to leverage the weights behind, and BELOW it (!), at 9 and 10:30. Then after it has fallen through its rim stop, it makes the trip back up through the rim stop so it can then resume falling through its rim stop again at 1:30 and provide more leverage for the weights behind it, then, it can finally fall towards its magic rim stop at 3 and begin pushing the wheel.

    Questions?

    ReplyDelete
  44. @ vincent

    Bessler's remark refers to the location of the CoM of his weights. It is located on the descending side of the drum which he calls "full and heavy" and NOT on the ascending side which he calls "light and empty".

    As a result of the distribution of the eight weights around the drum's periphery, for a CW turning drum the ascending side weights would still provide a CCW torque, but it would be slightly less than the CW torque provided by the weights in the descending side of the drum. It is the constant maintenance of this difference in torques that allowed Bessler's OB PM gravity wheels to accelerate themselves and perform outside work.


    @ Doug

    You were doing just fine until you began discussing the 6:00 weighted lever.

    That weighted lever is pendant at the 6:00 position and just starting to part company with its rim stop. It then "gravitates" toward the axle as the drum sweeps its pivot from 6:00 to 9:00. In the process this shifting lever helps to lift the two weighted levers which are simultaneously moving from 9:00 to 10:30 and from 10:30 to 12:00 and are "climbing" back toward the rim (but don't reach it yet). At no time does the weight on this lever that starts from the 6:00 position "FALL UP"!

    The 12:00 weighted lever continues to draw closer to its rim stop as its pivot is swept along by the drum toward the 3:00 position. At that location its weight finally makes contact with its rim stop (producing a "gentle" impact sound) and rests on it. It does NOT "fall through" its rim stop! This weight then remains in contact with its rim stop until its lever's pivot reaches the 6:00 position

    I think, perhaps, you are beginning to switch tracks. It's a "good" feeling...sort of like opening a window and breathing cool fresh air after having spent too much time in a stuffy room!

    ReplyDelete
  45. You were doing fine until you began discussing the weight at 6.
    "Hanging pendant"? "Just starting to part company with its rim stop"?

    These are indeed magic levers that can stop the motion of the weight at 6, thus allowing gravity to LIFT THEM UP TO A POSITION CLOSER TO THE AXLE, THE AXLE NATURALLY BEING HIGHER THAN THE 6 O'CLOCK POSITION.
    They not only achieve this, they help lift the weights above them.
    It's almost 5 o'clock here. Time for a drink! Here's to remote viewing!

    ReplyDelete
  46. @ Doug

    No. The weight at 6:00 is hanging straight down. It begins to swing away from its rim stop and a bit closer to the wheel's axle as the drum continues to rotate its lever's pivot toward the 9:00 position. The weight never actually reaches the axle. Remember that all of the "action" in Bessler's wheels takes place near the rim. Nothing of consequence is happening in, on, or even near the section of axle inside of the drum.

    ReplyDelete
  47. No, the weight at 6 can't be hanging straight down or begin to swing away from its rim stop because its inertia, from falling through 12 to 6, is pinning it to the rim stop. It can't swing away from its rim stop (or help leverage weight above it)until its acceleration is equaled by the acceleration of gravity.
    Nothing of consequence is happening in this approach.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Doug, that's not true. A weight can swing to a shorter radius. As I've been saying.

    ReplyDelete
  49. When the weight is in motion, its inertia, its tendency to continue in a straight line, holds the weight at the longest radius.
    At 6 o'clock, the weight would have maximum inertia, a condition which would require the greatest amount of force to change its path to a shorter radius.
    Gravity is not going to force it to a shorter radius, it's pulling on the weight at an angle away from the axis of rotation, and a shorter radius.

    ReplyDelete
  50. @ Doug

    The CF acting on the weight at 6:00 is a problem, but is not strong enough at LOW drum rotation rates to prevent the weighted lever there from swinging in toward the axle as that lever's pivot is swept along to the 9:00 position.

    This is probably the main reason that Bessler's wheels had a maximum terminal rotation rate. As drum rotation rate increased, so too would the CF acting on weighted levers passing the 6:00 position. This increasing CF then delayed the swinging of this lever's weight toward the axle until the drum had rotated somewhat past the 6:00 position and this would also have the effect of interferring with the shifting of all of the other shiftable weighted levers..

    In the meantime, however, this delay would cause the CoM of the eight weights to rotate toward a position directly under the axle and that, of course, would decrease the torque driving the drum. At some maximum terminal drum rotation rate, the torque driving the drum would be so low that it would only equal the small counter torque provided by air resistance and bearing drag. At that point the drum would continue turning at a CONSTANT rotation rate.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Doug, you have the weight swing in just before 6 oclock.

    ReplyDelete
  52. When the weights reach 6, or even just before, even at low rpm, they are being forced to change their straight line motion by the lever connected to the radial support turning around the axis.

    If we suddenly cut the weight loose from the lever as it reaches 6, the (fictional) centrifugal force disappears along with the centripetal force that was acting through the lever on the weight. The weight doesn't continue toward the ground; it continues its straight line motion and flies out parallel to the ground:
    This is easily proven, and no matter what the rpm is, this simple fact DOES prevent the

    (Tguy quote)
    "weighted lever there from swinging in toward the axle as that lever's pivot is swept along to the 9:00 position."

    If Bessler's wheels were genuine, there is absolutely no way they could have worked by this method of weight gravitating, or swinging, toward the center, or climbing back up to the rim. That's a red herring.

    ReplyDelete
  53. @ Doug

    Actually, if Bessler's wheels were genuine (and I certainly believe they were!), then this is the ONLY way they could have worked and those pursuing it are, IMO, finally on the "right track".

    Yes, admittedly, CF IS a problem as weights are swept past the 6:00 position, BUT it is a manageable problem as long as drum rotation rate does not get too high and the weights are not too massive. This is probably why the Merseburg weights were only 4 lbs each and the Weissenstein weights only about double that.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Centrifugal force isn't the problem, since it doesn't even exist.

    The problem, which has nothing to do with rpm, or the massiveness of the weights, is the inertia of a moving object.

    It is not a manageable problem. It is simply a fact. A fact that shows weights cannot stop themselves and reverse their direction.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Doug, if you were to drop a weight from a given height, and fire a bullet from the same given height horizontally, both objects would reach the ground at the exact same time if you didn't include air friction. A weight released at the 4 oclock position wil continue at a tangent line from there as it's being pulled by gravity downward. If it is on a lever it will swing in and accelerate the wheel at first.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Seriously do you think a lever arrangement is the secret? Come on...

    ReplyDelete
  57. I'm not sure where you're going with the bullet example, other than to show that gravity acts equally on all objects.

    I'm not sure where you're going with releasing a weight at 4, either. If the weight is on top of a radial support, pushing the wheel down, there isn't anywhere for it to be released. If it's mounted under a radial support, pulling the wheel down, then the wheel is going the same speed as the weight, and to "release" the weight from the wheel would require a force to accelerate the weight above the speed of the wheel.

    ReplyDelete
  58. @ Doug

    CF is the result of inertia. CF must be countered by an equal, but opposite centripetal force if a mass is to be kept moving along a circular trajectory. As Bessler's wheels accelerated, ALL of their weights would have been feeling CF that was directed away from the axle. This force would have been countered by the increase in the tension inside of the portions of a wooden levers between its pivot and the attachment to the weight since the weights did not directly touch the rim of the wheel (that is, there was a gap between the outer surface of the weight and the inner surface of a wheel's rim)..

    Weights arriving at the 6:00 position of a CW rotating drum would, aside from the CF acting on them, also have their normal gravitational weight tending to stretch their levers downwards away from their radial pivots. Fortunately, the levers were strong enough to withstand this combined force.

    As a weight moved farther and farther passed the 6:00 position of a CW rotating drum, it would then be feeling a force that was the combination or resultant of two forces that were NOT in alignment: the CF tending to pull the weight directly away from the drum's axle AND the gravitational force which tried to pull the weight down vertically toward the Earth's center. At low drum rotation rates, that second force would be more than sufficient to cause the weighted lever to begin swinging inward toward the axle. However, as rotation rate and weight mass increased, the drum would have to rotate the lever farther along toward the 7:30 position before this would happen.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Jeesh Doug. If a weight is released what do you think is going to accelerate it?

    ReplyDelete
  60. Tguy says

    AND the gravitational force which tried to pull the weight down vertically toward the Earth's center.

    And:

    that second force would be more than sufficient to cause the weighted lever to begin swinging inward toward the axle.

    Gravity doesn't pull inward to the axle at 6, 7:30, 9, 10:30, 1:30, 3:00, or 4:30. It only pulls inward toward the axle at 12.

    When a weight is released, gravity accelerates it.
    The problem a lot of people have:
    understanding gravity decelerating that weight.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Doug, lol, maybe you need to do this. Get a wheel. Let us say for sake of argument it is 6 feet in diameter. Draw a line through the wheel. Rotate the wheel so the line runs at an angle from 10 oclock to 4 oclock. Get a lever, say of about 8 inches. Stick a weight on one end. Put a hole in the lever on the other end. Center the weight on the line so it sits at the end and in the center of the line at the 4 oclock position. Have the lever also centered on the line and have the hole towards the axle. Put a dart through the hole. The center of the weight will measure 3 feet from the axle. The hole of the lever will measure 2 foot four from the axle. Hold the wheel steady. Now release the pinned weight/lever. Don't you agree that any place it has swung to is inside the 6 foot diameter of the wheel? Therefore, closer to the center of the wheel.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Doug wrote:

    "Gravity doesn't pull inward to the axle at 6, 7:30, 9, 10:30, 1:30, 3:00, or 4:30. It only pulls inward toward the axle at 12. "

    Once again, you have misinterpreted what I wrote.

    I never said that gravity was pulling the eight weights in Bessler's wheels toward the axle! That, as you said, only happens for a weight at the 12:00 position. I did, however, say that a weight passing the 6:00 position of a CW rotating drum will feel a combination of CF AND its own gravitational weight directed toward the center of the Earth. At the 6:00 position both of these forces are aligned (they are not aligned at the 12:00 position).

    As the weight passes the 6:00 position, the two forces go out of alignment. You think that the CF would prevent the gravitational force acting on the weight from swinging it back and down and thereby nearer to the drum's axle. IF the drum is rotating at a high enough rate, then you would be right. However, at low rates of rotation you are wrong. In such cases the Earth's gravitational pull om the weight will overcome the CF acting on it and it will swing back and down and nearer to the axle. I have seen this effect occur in many model wheels.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Lol, no, I don't.
    If you let the weight drop after three, that sort of defeats the whole purpose of overbalancing the wheel doesn't it?

    Both of you are leaving out the velocity vector in circular motion in your analyses. This is more important than (fictitious) CF and Centripetal force, which you have pointed out cancel each other out. Since they cancel, the forces that remain are the tangential, which is the real result of inertia (not from CF), and gravitational. If the gravitational force was able to overcome the inertia of the weight, the tangential direction of the weight, and pull it back down and towards the axle past the 6 o'oclock position, then just a simple pendulum would not exhibit the behavior that it does. If you can video a pendulum stopping after it passes 6 and reversing direction, I'd like to see it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_motion

    Note well, on the wiki page for circular motion there isn't any mention of centrifugal force. It's discussed elsewhere under fictitious force.

    ReplyDelete
  64. If you can video a pendulum stopping just after it passes 6, not when it reaches the top of its period, in case you were wondering if that would qualify.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Doug, I think you are one of the more clear headed guys on here but you're not following my argument very well. In the beginning I said it is easy to get gravity to swing a weight inward. And it is as I showed in the example. Even when the wheel has momentum, or a steady velocity it will do this. Even Bessler's wheel operated at a steady velocity once it was up to speed. My whole argument -up to hear was to get you to see that a weight can swing in with just gravity. I made no mention of what to do with the upper weight when the other starts to swing so it doesn't stall the wheels rotation.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Thanks anon, I do try to keep it real.
    I believe I'm following what you're saying, I know gravity can swing a weight inward at 3 or 4 or whenever. But, that means the weight has to be suspended below the support, yes? And just to be clear, we are talking about clockwise rotation.
    In order to swing in from that side, the weight can't be above the radial support, pushing down, it has no place to swing in!

    So to release the weight on the descent at 4, it has to be held in place with some sort of catch until then, mounted underneath the radial support.

    Then what happens with the weight after it's been released? If you let it swing, it's going to swing back, yes? If you let it swing back, it's going to be swinging... counterclockwise!
    If you have a catch on the other side, then you have two catch/release mechanisms. Catch release mechanisms require force to open and close, I assure you, this can't work for that reason alone, not to mention it is coming at the "overbalancing act" sort of backwards.


    It's difficult to argue about this without a picture to reference, hopefully my word-picture is adequate.

    ReplyDelete
  67. @ Doug

    Yes, it is VERY difficult to discuss any of this in detail without being able to post images. That's why I regularly say that a solution will not be arrived at online, but will require much independent offline research.

    So, to prevent further confusion from being generated that might cloud the "basic model" I've already provided for those desiring to finally get on the "right track" with their Bessler research, I will, unfortunately, be posting far less about it from now on. Those who ARE serious about pursuing the actual design Bessler used will have to see my previous posts on the subject. They will get you moving in the right direction.

    One final note, however. There is no sudden dropping of a weighed lever as it approaches the 3:00 position of one of Bessler's wheels or passes it. From 12:00 on the weighted levers slowly draw nearer to their rim stops until they finally make contact at around 3:00 and probably a bit earlier than that. Bessler's wheels were NOT driven by any sort of impacts, but solely by the system of interconnecting cords that kept the CoM of a wheel's eight active weights on the descending side of the drum during rotation. Find the correct lever design and Connectedness Principle and you will solve the Bessler mystery! But you will have little chance of doing this if you are not on the right track as you start your search.

    ReplyDelete

Johann Bessler's Wheel and the Orffyreus Code

  The Legend of Bessler's wheel.     On 6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) an...