Wednesday, 23 May 2012

'I found the solution where every other intelligent person looked.'

The Third clue expanded upon.

Bessler said in Apologia Poetica, "These foolish ravings of my enemies will be held up to total ridicule by all intelligent people, who, with true understanding, have sought the Mobile in a place no different from that in which I eventually found it."

I would paraphrase the above and reduce it, as 'the words of my enemies will be ridiculed by all clever people who have already looked for the solution where I found it.'  Or to put it another way, 'I found the solution where every other intelligent person looked.'

I described this a clue, but it seems almost no clue at all, it is so innocuously presented.  Bessler must have had a piece of information in mind when he wrote the sentence, so what would he have found useful for his wheel in the previous designs which had never worked?  What possible feature might he have been able to take advantage of?  The most obvious fact is that the wheels did not rotate. Regardless of how the weights were arranged and could move, the wheels remained stationary.  How might he have found the answer with that knowledge?

JC 

65 comments:

  1. By using more than one principle c.q. combining several mechanisms, IMHO. I think he used:

    - overbalancing (to get things started)
    - parametric oscillation (to "amplify")
    - torque storage and release
    - synchronization (timing the release of stored torque)

    The latter at precisely timed intervals to overcome otherwise "dead spots" or punctum quietus. Also significant here is the well-documented fact that the wheel with or without load maintained more or less the same RPM. This implies a not only powerful but also well-regulated, synchronized prime mover mechanism. If not, the wheel should have accelerated to destruction without a load.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In the note to MT 9, Bessler writes:

    "In all places where I have found figures showing weights, these weights are seen to be simple and none are attached to belts or chains." [Note: this is my translation]

    Here Bessler is emphasizing that ONE of the main differences between his WORKING OB PM gravity wheels and everyone else's "non-runners" was the use of flexible interconnecting structures such as leather belts or metal chains between the wheel's weighted levers. In the MT 9 note he names his use of such interconnections as his "Connectedness Principle" and even suggests that the 12 weighted lever wheel designed by Leupold could run IF it used the Connectedness Principle!

    I have constructed MANY wheels that used cords to interconnect their weighted levers and NONE of them ever "ran of itself". The reason is because they lacked the THIRD critical principle necessary to make such a design work: the "Secret Principle". This principle deals with the use of spring tension within a wheel to temporarily store and then later supply energy / mass in order to enable the wheel to overcome its "sticking" points and become a RUNNER!

    There are only two true clues in ALL of the Bessler literature as to exactly what the Secret Principle was, but they are carefully hidden amongst a collection of, perhaps, a dozen or more false clues! To find the true clues, one must make like a person panning for gold nuggets. You have to go through ALOT of mud before you find those very precious nuggets! Bessler knew that discovering this principle was the LAST obstacle to replicating his design and that is why he hid it so VERY carefully.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think the fact Bessler only mentioned springs once is telling (he said they were used in his wheel), and that was in response to a question and not volunteered, no other mentions of springs makes me think he was avoiding the topic as its too much to give a way.
    regards
    Jon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think he generally avoided the entire topic of springs because he knew his detractors would latch onto any comments he made about them and use them to explain away his wheels as hoaxes powered by mainspring driven clockwork type mechanisms. Indeed, when Wagner tried to duplicate the performance of Bessler's wheels with one he actually built, that is exactly the kind of design he employed.

      But, that "accident" that happened during the testing of the Merseburg wheel is a VERY important clue. While reinstalling one of the weights after the wheel had been transported to another set of upright supports, the lever on whose end the weight was to be attached slipped out of Bessler's greasy hands and made a loud cracking noise as it hit an internal stop inside of the drum. It's obvious that the levers were under CONSTANT spring tension.

      I think that, aside from providing a reserve of energy / mass to help the wheel through the 8 "sticking points" per drum rotation, these springs also served the purpose of keeping the levers aligned with the radial supports when the weights had been removed. With 48 cords per one-directional wheel or sub wheel, it was important to immobilize the levers when the weights were out of the drum so that all of those cords would not become tangled up with the levers if they were allowed to swing freely about.

      Delete
  4. I think it can be done without springs .
    - Ealadha

    ReplyDelete
  5. Springs are in MT60

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have no problem with differing translations / interpretations of Bessler's writings if they seem logical to me. In light of what I now know about Bessler's wheels, I've even found it necessary to reinterpret some passages myself.

    I give John's translator / interpreter credit for producing something that reads far more easily than a straight verbatim translation ever would. Not only did he have to translate from a particular early 17th century German dialect into modern English, but he had the extra obstacle of making sense of POETIC imagery as well. I don't expect it to be "flawless". Only the simplest of text can be. We should be thankful for what JC has provided. I'm sure that, in the future, IF we manage to find the design Bessler used and replicas of it are working again, then we will see additional translations coming out. I mean, look at all of the translations we have of the Bible and the Koran!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correction:

      "...from a particular early 17th century German dialect..."

      should, of course, read:

      "...from a particular early 18th century German dialect..."

      Sorry about that.

      Delete
  7. While you sparrows are quarreling over the bits of grain someone else is building a working wheel!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How did you know i am building a working wheel ?
      - Ealadha

      Delete
  8. I deeply regret getting into a silly spat with Chris, and I have deleted all our comments. As someone said, we should be getting on with finding the solution.

    Only twelve days to go!

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  9. Where else did intelligent people back then look for a mobile if not gravity driven overbalancing wheels? In the sky?
    Why state the obvious over and over again as he does in his books? Perhaps his wheels weren't OB wheels; the weights might have been the essential parts, but does he ever say they are OB wheels? Not to my knowledge.
    It doesn't seem to be a clue; it was another statement meant for his critics; and he could have meant it to lead us (and them) in the wrong direction.

    ReplyDelete
  10. @ Doug

    "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."

    It certainly sounds like Bessler is describing a wheel whose weights are OB and, despite a 180 degree wheel rotation, REMAIN OB. Mobilists have been trying to perfect such a design since ancient times and, perhaps, 90+% of the designs for PM machines that Bessler would have found in the mechanology texts of his time would have been OB designs.

    What dooms ALL other constant torque rotary OB wheel designs to failure other than Bessler's? Simple, they try to maintain the OB by a sudden and drastic lifting of the ascending side weights that requires far more energy / mass be regained by those rising weights than can be supplied by the remaining weights in the wheel. Such a design can NEVER work. It is the same type of problem encountered by one putting a 10 lb. and a 5 lb. on a balance beam such that each is 1 ft away from the fulcrum and then expecting the 5 lb. weight to lift the 10 lb. weight! It can't happen because the 5 lb weight just can not deliver the amount of energy / mass that the 10 lb weight would need in order to rise.

    Bessler's solution to this inherent problem with OB wheels was ingenious. During any 45 degree increment of rotation of his 8 weighted lever design, only 2 of the weights rose while 4 dropped (all with respect to their rim stops) and as a result the CoM of all 8 weights would always stay on the wheel's descending side as long as this process took place smoothly THROUGHOUT the ENTIRE increment of rotation so that no "sticking points" were created.

    "Sticking points" during wheel rotation occur because the design allows the CoM of its weights to travel from the wheel's desending side, pass its punctum quietus location directly under the axle, and then continue to rotate up onto the wheel's ascending side where it creates counter torque. Bessler overcame the sticking point problem that usually dooms to failure other OB designs by carefully employing SPRINGS in his wheels. Those springs would gather in and store energy / mass during a certain portion of the drum's rotation where weighted levers were losing it in excess and then release that stored energy / mass throughout a much larger later portion of drum rotation where it could give the ascending side weights just enough EXTRA energy / mass so that the weights lifting them would be able to do so.

    Hmmm...let's see now. In the last 300 years there have only been two PM wheel designs that worked: Bessler's (a constant torque type design) and Asa Jackson's (a pulse torque type design). What ADDITIONAL feature did they use that no one else used in their OB wheels? Hey, the answer is SPRINGS!!! Remember that 5 lb weight lifting a 10 lb weight on a balance beam example I gave earlier in this comment? Guess what? It CAN be done if one uses SPRINGS!

    ReplyDelete
  11. But he never says they are overbalancing wheels. He only makes it sound like they are.
    Where else did intelligent people look for a "mobile"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the laws of nature . One thing leads to another . You cannot have one thing without the other . Joy after sorrow , flood after barrenness , etc . Basically natural cycles are seen as perpetual . We know through reason that things have a beginning and an end but as mortal creatures we don't ever experience those beginnings or ends but we assume they exist .

      Delete
  12. It is definitely an over-balancing wheel as you will see soon on completion.
    Hoping to have my wheel working by the 6 June.
    In Bessler's wheel there is actually no lifting to be done.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Primemignonite25 May 2012 at 06:28

    Ever the provoker of thought, our distinguished author/moderator, J.C., reminds us that

    * * * * *

    "I described this a clue, but it seems almost no clue at all, it is so innocuously presented. Bessler must have had a piece of information in mind when he wrote the sentence, so what would he have found useful for his wheel in the previous designs which had never worked? What possible feature might he have been able to take advantage of? . . ."

    * * * * *

    and ends with the resulting question as nicely preset.

    Yes.

    Exactly.

    I, as well, have suspected the very same.

    So, what possibly might it be?

    If pressed really, really hard, and on some really, really lucky day, this prickly observer/commenter might report back something like as follows

    'it is where reaction should be observed but is not (nor actually ever could be), but is where the thing itself might be found, IF but only rightly sought!'

    But since none of those are, nor have I been, then I will not. (Just pretend it was not put.)

    And now, matters turn to the slightly off-topic but oh-oh-oh-so-necessary:

    For their near insufferable-to-all mouthy hubris, certain of big-mouthed, pushy, repetitious boors can not perceive because of it all, and resultantly, do chase endless impossible schemes of pseudo-connectedness, and riotous myriads of strings, strings, strings, and evermore strings, as well as very much of else that is too reaching nonsense!

    Whereat might offended minds to such interminable overbearance be found at some merciful end, finally? (This is not merely a 'rhetorical' but rather is a queriance vitally in need of an answer, for relief from outrage must eventually be had.)

    Let us observe the at-least minimal options available:

    Well, possibly after eleven days and twenty hours (i.e. at 6. VI 12.) might the big break come?

    Probably no luck there. Too soon.

    Or, after all the offending, professing gas in the bag just runs out, maybe?

    This last seems a good bet or, at least one better.

    I'll take it!

    (Most good outcomes are but only matters of enough time as-spent, combined with good observing.)

    Now . . . let us naughtily see what might be the catalog of OUT-SHOUTS, as done by incommunicado Ken (aka @technoguy), for this particular page and time:

    23 May 2012 10:01

    "ONE"; "WORKING"; "MANY"; "NONE"; "THIRD"; "RUNNER"; "ALL"; "ALOT"(sic); "LAST"; "VERY"! The usual.

    23 May 2012 22:49

    "VERY"; "CONSTANT". Here, a tad of self-control seems intrusive.

    24 May 2012 11:00

    "POETIC"; "IF". The intrusion seems to be holding, but, will our luck?

    24 May 2012 11:04

    And in this styled "correction", the greatly needed control of self does hold! Matters seem improving; our seeing ears now being thankful, happier things.

    25 May 2012 02:09 Obviously the tranquiizers have now failed and it is back to old, so-so-la-la patterns. (Ho-hum!)

    "REMAIN"; "ALL"; "NEVER"; "THROUGHOUT"; "ENTIRE"; "SPRINGS"; "EXTRA"; "ADDITIONAL"; "SPRINGS" and finally, as if we could not guess, it is to be "SPRINGS" yet again for a flash-finish.

    And so, general forbearance must still come to our rescue, pending one of the greatly-hoped-for ends - possible antidotes to our daily, boorish mistreat.

    CHEERS!

    James

    ReplyDelete
  14. @ Doug

    In several places Bessler makes mention of his "Preponderance Principle". This means one side of an active wheel or sub wheel was always heavier than the other despite the rotation of the wheel. This condition could only exist if the dynamic equilibrium that existed between the weighted levers always kept the CoM their weights on the descending side. Since there was always an equal number of weights on each side of a wheel (4 on each side for at least the Merseburg and Weissenstein wheels), then that means that the weights on the descending side had to always be a bit farther from the axle than the ones on the ascending side.

    It certainly would have been nice if Bessler had just flatly stated that the above was the case, but we must remember that he was in a somewhat awkward position. On the one hand, he wanted to convince his readers who had not personally seen his wheels that they were genuine (and perhaps induce them to pay a visit to a public demonstration of one and then, of course, pay a thaler for an admission ticket!) while simultaneously refuting the various criticisms of his "no track" detractors. Yet on the other hand, he did not want to give TOO many details away to his many rival "wrong track" mobilists, anyone of which, if given too much information, might have been able to successfully duplicate his "right track" wheel design and then proclaim that he, NOT Bessler, was the "true" discoverer of a WORKING OB PM gravity wheel. This predicament, I believe, is the REAL reason his writings tend to be "less than satisfactory" concerning most of the details of his wheels' internal mechanics.


    Primiginonite (James) wrote:

    "...certain of big-mouthed, pushy, repetitious boors can not perceive because of it all, and resultantly, do chase endless impossible schemes of pseudo-connectedness, and riotous myriads of strings, strings, strings, and evermore strings, as well as very much of else that is too reaching nonsense!"

    You FORGOT to mention the SPRINGS! They are CRITICAL to making the design Bessler found work. Yes, his eight weighted lever, one directional sub wheels required a total of 48 cords each. That IS alot, but they were evenly distributed around the interior of a drum and carefully arranged into separated layers to keep them from rubbing against each other. I believe that Bessler even dyed the cords with bright, highly visible colors in order to allow them to be readily identified when one inevitably snapped and he had to reach in through an inspection hole in the cloth side of a drum to manually replace it. I can just see him now. "Damn it...looks like I broke an orange cord between the 1:30 and 3:00 levers. Good thing I made some extra ones up last night! Now where did I put them? Oh, yes, they're with the red cords. Or was it with the yellow cords?"

    Here's a little engineering problem to ponder for those very clever squirrels who are switching over to the "right track" after spending way to much time on those dead end "wrong tracks". If you wanted to connect a cord to a wooden lever so you could attach and detach it as quickly as possible while using only one hand, HOW would you do it?

    ReplyDelete
  15. What date is the tricentennial on ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. June 6th, 2012, high noon, local time, Gera, Germany. That's 11 am in Britain and 7 am in New York City, USA.

      Delete
  16. There was a round - about which had a stick on it with a tilt point on the other edge , you pull the stick in and let it swing back out , as its swinging back out it pulls the round-about around . Its works exactly like a flail .
    I worked out a ship from ducks on a lake .
    - Ealadha .

    ReplyDelete
  17. The example of PM most think of is Drebbel's clocks. Rather than consider atmospheric pressure or temperature changes too weak to lift a few pounds, consider that not only is gravity conservative, it is the weakest force of the four by very far.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anyone care to elaborate on Bessler's principle of "excess weight" ? Seems like you all have all of his other principles down pat .

    ReplyDelete
  19. I've always assumed that it referred to the excess weight needed on one side of the wheel to cause it to overturn. There is a similar expression used in Das Tri in the Latin half which probably gives a better idea of what he intended. I'll try to find it and post it.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  20. It's okay John it was a rhetorical question .

    "for you have granted to them above all others the ability to discover and demonstrate the true character of things, of your great and wondrous creations, according to their differing amounts, dimensions and weights, propensities and properties."

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Give to them" ... "an understanding of Your principle, vouchsafed to me alone, of eternal mechanical motion, and how to apply it in countless good and useful ways."

    ReplyDelete
  22. "the arrangement has been designed in such a way that the rotational movement of the entire vertically suspended wheel can be slightly modified by the application on each side of small weights"

    ReplyDelete
  23. All this being said I wonder what the purpose of the small weights he refers to was . It must have been , as he implied , to raise heavier weights .
    "Saturn, Mars and Jupiter are ready to join in any battle. Even the things we eat do not lose their elemental influence - for it spreads itself through every limb and sinew of our bodies."

    ReplyDelete
  24. Was Drebbel intelligent? I'd be inclined to think so.
    At least that principle (running a clock on a pressure and temperature gradient) was proven. Besser's "principles" aren't proven.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Surely they are proven but added is the burden of building a device which embodies them .

    ReplyDelete
  26. He didn't prove OB wheels. He might have proven a PM principle similar to Drebbel's clock. If there is a solution to his wheel, rather than writing him off as a fraud, then it would be in that category of PM. Since he phrases his writing with ambiguous wording, it's open to interpretation as to what he meant by the quote "I found "it" where everyone else looked".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I never said he proved OB wheels . That is most everyone's view but not mine . There is a word in German for overbalance and if Bessler had invented an OB wheel he could have described the device a lot simpler than what he described . Excess weight is a dynamic idea of weight that is both constituent and non-constituent at the same time . It is a concept of a driven wheel rather than one that is just falling on one side due to OB . If you don't get it , hey , join the club ...neither does anyone else .

      Delete
  27. Chris wrote:

    "Anyone care to elaborate on Bessler's principle of "excess weight" ? Seems like you all have all of his other principles down pat ."

    On page 357 of AP, Bessler states:

    "I don't want to go into the details here of how suddenly the excess weight is caused to rise. You can't comprehend these matters, or see how true craftsmanship can rise above innate lowly tendencies (as does a weight above the point of application of a lever)"

    The "excess weight" Bessler refers to in this passage are the weights on the ascending side of a CW rotating drum; in particular, the weights that are moving between 9:00 and 12:00. It is these weights which will, after 90 degrees of drum rotation, eventually find themselves on the drum's descending side where they become part of the group of four weights there that are a bit farther from the axle, on average, than are the descending side levers. As I've stated before, the levers that these ascending side weights are attached to must begin rotating CW about their pivots (thus moving their attached weights closer to their rim stops and farther away from the axle) just as soon as the pivots pass the drum's 9:00 position IF the CoM of all 8 weights is to be kept on the drum's descending side. This is a CRITICAL condition necessary to achieve PM. IF this is not happening in a wheel, then it is NOT the design Bessler found and it will NOT work!

    Rather than explain exactly HOW an ascending side weight could immediately begin moving back toward its rim stop just as its lever pivot passed the drum's 9:00 position, Bessler just states that his readers would not be able to understand the mechanics involved. In reality, the method he found was the MOST important discovery he had made in his efforts to achieve PM and he wasn't about to reveal it with all of the "greedy eyes" of his rival mobilists ready to drink in the information. Bessler dispensed many "tasty nuts" to the "wrong track" mobilist "squirrels" of his time, but that was the MOST delicious one he possessed and for his use EXCLUSIVELY or, at least, until someone pushed the cash equivalent then of a TON of gold his way for the privilege of possessing that particular "nut".


    Doug wrote:

    "The example of PM most think of is Drebbel's clocks. Rather than consider atmospheric pressure or temperature changes too weak to lift a few pounds, consider that not only is gravity conservative, it is the weakest force of the four by very far."

    Drebbel clocks are, indeed, a marvel of clockmaking, but, when all is said and done, the energy / mass per unit time they outputted was only in the MILLIwatt range and came from a source OUTSIDE of themselves. Bessler's wheels outputted TENS of watts and did so from an INTERNAL power supply which was the energy / mass contained within their lead weights. One probably could use Drebbel's design to produce a machine that would constantly output tens of watts of power, but it would have to be a REALLY HUGE machine! How big? Probably the size of a barn!

    I accept that Bessler and Asa Jackson "proved" that PM is possible. Final verification, however, will come just as soon as one of their wheels is successfully replicated. It will probably happen in the coming year!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Then he was a fraud. And obviously, so was Jackson.
    At least we know for sure Drebbel was honest.

    But keep trying, Ken! If it hasn't worked by next year, more cords and springs might be the answer!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is NOT a SINGLE shred of evidence that Bessler was a fraud. You KNOW that as well as everyone else here does. Bessler was just as "honest" as Drebbel except that the latter eventually released the design he found for his barometric clock movement whereas Bessler's perpetual movement design went to the grave with him.

      The design I now have has gone as far as it can, partswise. It will have 8 weighed levers, 8 springs, 48 cords and that will be it (the two-directional version will require 8 additional gravity latches to lock up its weights against their rim stops when the wheel undergoes retrograde motion). Considering how many of the clues were used in its derivation, I would say that the probability of it NOT working is about 1 in a MILLION! That means that there is a 999,999 in a million probability that it WILL work or 99.9999%! I LIKE those odds!

      All that now stands between me and final success is my finding the complete details of the "Secret Principle" that Bessler used to turn his wheels into "runners". Yes, it involves keeping the levers under constant spring tension, BUT the matter is FAR more complicated than just that. Bessler found a VERY unusual way to apply spring tension to his wheel's weighted levers. Even though I've found the few clues that point to that method, still my continuing progress is slow.

      Delete
  29. But we have clocks Doug . It's not just about perpetual motion for the sake of it anymore . In his day Bessler's device was more or less trivial but now we could really use something like that .
    Let me remind everyone of something Bessler said concerning his device and the future
    "Dear Orffyreus, what will you do, then? Will you keep your skills to yourself, and grow old with the secret?"
    "No, my friend," I reply, "no need for that, for a man who has some commonsense, and also God's helping hand, can make the proper
    arrangements in matters of great importance such as this."
    "No matter how defiant Wagner is, my device remains one of great usefulness. If God is pleased so to do, He will allow the world
    ample time to get to know its advantages, and no thanks will be due to Wagner!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "No, my friend," I reply, "no need for that, for a man who has some commonsense, and also God's helping hand, can make the proper
      arrangements in matters of great importance such as this."

      Another interesting quote. Bessler's "proper arrangements", while LIVING, obviously consisted of his trying to use his relationship with Count Karl to market his invention. However, while DEAD, those proper arrangements would have consisted of the various clues he left behind in his writings as to the internal construction of his wheels. The two MOST important places that you find those clues are in the two DT portraits. They are very, very, VERY important, especially the second one, and any serious ACTIVE Bessler mobilist should be studying them DAILY as he continues to build and modify his designs. He will be slowly guided by their symbols toward a successful replication of Bessler's design!

      Forget the idea of just looking at the portraits and having the secrets of Bessler's wheels pop right out at you. Trust me, that WON'T be happening. It will, literally, take you MONTHS of study just to BEGIN to decode the clues there. IF you seriously want to solve the mystery of Bessler's wheels yourself, then you will have to make the commitment, otherwise just sit back and let some other mobilist do it for you while HE gets the credit!

      Delete
  30. Hey TG ...do us a favor and take this approach :
    If you presume to teach then graduate first yourself . Stop using everyone's points to rebound yourself into yet another flood of paragraphs that I for one am tired of reading .
    You sound as if you must have had a wheel running years ago . And if you must use the posts of others to go on and on about your ideas then don't use mine . These are subtle things that we are discussing and if you don't know at least that then you know nothing .

    ReplyDelete
  31. John,
    As the milk has turned yet again feel free to delete my posts without regard as to whether I care or not .

    ReplyDelete
  32. Thank you Chris, but I don't usually delete any comments unless I think they serve no purpose or are excessively irritating to others. My email inbox supports this practise.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  33. Actually, the "evidence" as everyone likes to call it, as I've said before, is missing just enough of the right details to keep the "mystery" alive. The evidence shows only that he was a fraud, and the count empathized with his plight when he was in too deep to get out.
    We have to accept the fact that gravity driven OB wheels aren't physically possible. Science (and math and common sense and experience and observation) has shown it several different ways, not the least of which is that gravity does zero "work", i.e. it's a conservative force.
    We can take any quote from Bessler we care to argue about as evidence or proof, but we have to remember we're dealing with a man who may have had a psychological illness(es). He was paranoid, narcissistic, socially inept, and obsessive. He said the "solution" came to him in a dream, and he was alone in receiving it from God. That's not how scientific discoveries are made, so I don't give his quotes any credence, nor his alleged clues, unless you want to discuss them within the boundaries of nature and her laws, including the ones in the infamous portraits that TG clings to like a lifepreserver. After years of failing, he was probably desperate to show something for his effort, and he rationalized it in his own mind and pen.

    Chris, I know we have clocks, so we don't have a need for a drebbel clock. I mentioned the Drebbel clock as an example of (nearly) perpetual motion that could be used to explain how bessler's wheels might have worked. Drebbel's clock was trivial, but it was "magic" to people that didn't understand how it could work. I remember reading that Drebbel let (most) people think that it was magic. If bessler's wheels ran on a similar principle, it would seem to be magical, and a great illusion.

    We would benefit more from improvements in technology that actually works.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes , the bessler wheel was a hoax . The maid was turning the wheel from the adjoining room .

      Delete
    2. For 54 days straight? She must have been on a almighty powerdiet.

      Delete
    3. I consider myself to have ALREADY "graduated" when I finally stumbled upon the "right track" approach that I am currently on. WHEN I finally reach the end of that track with a WORKING OB PM gravity wheel, then I shall consider myself to have earned the equivalent of a PhD in Mechanology!

      I wish that I NOW had THE design that Bessler found and could share it with everyone. There are alot of good people out there in PMland who have devoted much of their lives to finding PM and all, with the exception of only Bessler and Jackson, came up empty handed. They need to see that PM is possible TODAY. Hopefully, the solution of the Bessler mystery will provide insights that MIGHT make other types of PM devices possible.

      I'm sorry that you find my promotion of the "right track" approach to solving the Bessler mystery to not be to your liking. It is not for everyone. Please feel free to ignore my comments in the future. However, I reserve the right to comment on any and all things related to Bessler, whether you or someone else provides them. Blogs are supposed to be about the free and open sharing of facts, ideas, and opinions. Not about trying to censor what each other may discuss.

      Delete
  34. It seems to me that in the event of an arrest or other circumstances where Bessler would be in no position to guard his device he could have wanted the maid to lie so that nobody would be interested in inspecting his device .

    ReplyDelete
  35. Don't be phased John,it's a set up!
    Success is going to be so sweet and all these critics are going to be caught with egg on their face,..especially when I show them it is pure gravity that is the cause of the energy output.
    Actually,it starts with gravity,then velocity,then inertia,then centrifugal force,and ends up with over-balancing to turn the wheel.
    Enough said,..if I say any more I'll give the game away.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why not give it away, Trevor? I would, if I was convinced I had a viable design. All this bickering (not meaning you) doesn't solve anything either. I may sound like a broken record but we should work together.

      Delete
    2. I have given it away Andre,in past posts I spoke of the secret principle but it has fallen on deaf ears.
      It is frustrating when your comments are passed over as too trivial but actually they are extremely relevant.

      Delete
    3. "It is frustrating when your comments are passed over as too trivial but actually they are extremely relevant."

      Don't let it bother you. Most "no trackers" and "wrong trackers" are so locked into their "pet" mindsets that they become deaf, dumb, and blind to ANY alternatives. Only after they've banged their heads against a solid granite wall for a few years to decades do "wrong trackers" finally realize that the wall is not going to crack open and that their heads are REALLY starting to hurt. (I'm STILL nursing my OWN headache! LOL!) ONLY then do they become "receptive" to a new approach.

      I look eagerly forward to the revelation of your "secret principle" and the interpretation of the Bessler clues that led you to it.

      Delete
  36. Doug,
    You are like a parrot . There is nothing that says Bessler was mentally ill . Passion and zeal can be construed as signs of illness by the uninspired . If I had a working wheel how far would you go Doug to expose it as fraud in your disbelief ? How many lies would you tell about it never having seen the interior ? Could it be that of all the great men who imagined that something could continue to move on it's own lacked something that Bessler had ? Have you seen any of his surviving craftsmanship ? When anyone builds a wheel (hoax or not) that outperforms Bessler's then I will listen , and so will everyone else . Doug . i am certain you imagine that , for instance , my understanding could not exceed your own and that almighty science ( which admits that it doesn't have the answers to everything ) has the last word .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not almighty science. It's not lies. It's not anyone's understanding exceeding another's.
      None of his craftsmanship survived for inspection(surprise!).
      It's common sense, experience, experiment and observation that back it up. Almighty science simply summarizes all of the above into formulas and statements (laws) that apply to the most general circumstances possible. The physics we are talking about is some of the most fundamental there is in the universe. If gravity is shown to perform work, it doesn't just change that fact, all the laws are interconnected; it would change EVERY other law. The universe would be completely different.
      Don't blame me, science or physics laws for any of your own shortcomings.
      All we have about Bessler's life shows symptoms of psychological problems; it's right there in the books.

      Delete
    2. Actually Doug if you were a little more knowledgeable you'd know that some piece of his craftsmanship did survive and has been represented by John Collins not too long ago on this very blog .

      Delete
  37. The real engineers drop gems,but the academics can only waffle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope that you are including me in the former group . I'm not an academic . Maybe I should be considered just the most passionate of Bessler's followers .
      That would not make me blush .

      Delete
  38. I can't make up my mind which wheel to build , will i build the bi - directional , the uni - directional or the one that throws water up in the air .

    - Ealadha

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ealadha,

      I will decide for you. Please, PLEASE, build the one that WORKS! (lol)

      Hutch

      Delete
  39. Oh but it does have to do with someone's knowledge exceeding another's . To someone who has the right knowledge the possibility at first becomes possible , then probable , then likely and finally definite. Someone who holds on to the impossibility obviously doesn't have the correct knowledge . Don't you see that it doesn't matter how much you say no ? I know I for one am not listening . Was this not a sufficient answer to your question above ? :
    "In the laws of nature . One thing leads to another . You cannot have one thing without the other . Joy after sorrow , flood after barrenness , etc . Basically natural cycles are seen as perpetual . We know through reason that things have a beginning and an end but as mortal creatures we don't ever experience those beginnings or ends but we assume they exist ."

    ReplyDelete
  40. Ok. Good luck with your compound pendulum/ flails design.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "My design" was a dual central pendulum design that looked a lot like MT 137 and had four weights in it that leapfrogged over each other as the wheel turned due to the change in angular resistance . The outer leading weights would move toward the rim just ahead of their "trackers" thereby keeping the wheel in an overbalanced state . Each weight had it's own track so to speak and an interesting aspect was that the heavier and lighter weights would switch positions each time they were drawn to the center alternately . Funny you would mention it though as I hadn't discussed it with anyone .

      Delete
    2. So you think it was an overbalanced wheel, then?
      A few posts up you said:

      "I never said he proved OB wheels . That is most everyone's view but not mine . There is a word in German for overbalance and if Bessler had invented an OB wheel he could have described the device a lot simpler than what he described . Excess weight is a dynamic idea of weight that is both constituent and non-constituent at the same time . It is a concept of a driven wheel rather than one that is just falling on one side due to OB ."

      Whatever.

      I mentioned it because you posted the concept on the forum at besslerwheel. Good luck again.

      Delete
  41. This blog is acting quirky again. My reply to Chris' 26 May 2012 07:18 comment
    showed up in the Replies box for Doug's 26 May 2012 14:02 comment! Hopefully JC can untangle this mess. Below is the reply I intended for Doug's 26 May 2012 14:02 comment:


    As usual, just more "no tracker" "talking points" in this one! Here are my rebuttals:

    "The evidence shows only that he was a fraud...

    The "evidence" offered in his fraud trial was insufficient to prevent the case from being dismissed. That means the "evidence" WAS not and is STILL not credible.

    "We have to accept the fact that gravity driven OB wheels aren't physically possible."

    By "we" you are ONLY speaking for the "no trackers" out there, NOT for the "wrong tracker" or "right tracker" mobilists.

    "Science (and math and common sense and experience and observation) has shown it several different ways, not the least of which is that gravity does zero "work", i.e. it's a conservative force."

    True, gravity does no work. It was the descending side WEIGHTS within Bessler's wheels that did the work. "Common sense, experience, and observation" told the pre-20th century physicists that mass and energy were SEPARATE entities. They are NOT and the "math" of Einstein eventually established that. The WEIGHTS inside of Bessler's wheels contained ENORMOUS amounts of energy and he figured out a way to USE gravity to unleash that energy at a slow rate.

    "He [Bessler] was paranoid, narcissistic, socially inept, and obsessive. He said the "solution" came to him in a dream, and he was alone in receiving it from God. That's not how scientific discoveries are made..."

    Finding great discoveries often requires one to be "paranoid, narcissistic, socially inept, and obsessive"! The chemist who discovered the molecular structure of the benzene molecule found it after a bizarre dream that he had. When one is totally immersed in finding a solution to a problem, his unconscious mind will continue to work on it while he sleeps and, indeed, it may give him the solution in the form of dream symbols.

    "...including the ones in the infamous portraits that TG clings to like a lifepreserver."

    Practically all of the latter stage progress I've made in resolving the Bessler wheel mystery is due to my CORRECTLY interpreting the DT portrait symbols. YES, they are a "life preserver" and were PURPOSELY left behind by Master Bessler so that his discovery would not be lost for all time and remain yet another interesting tale to read about on the internet. Without them our chance of rediscovering Bessler wheel design would probably be about 1 in a BILLION!

    "We would benefit more from improvements in technology that actually works."

    I agree with this observation, but improvements to current technologies should not be used as an excuse to avoid research into NEW technologies even if, at the moment, they are not practical. I'm sure that when automobiles were first being developed and were unreliable, there were those saying that they should work on making horse drawn carriages more comfortable and reliable despite the fly covered messes horses were leaving on the streets of cities. Now, the idea of going back to horse powered vehicles for personal transportation seems ludicrous. The day may come, hopefully soon, when the same will be said about gasoline and electric motors!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The "trial" was most likely a farce. Everyone knows how women were treated in the 18th century.

      I speak for anyone who understands simple physics.

      Weights don't lose mass or energy.

      You can all be sure scientific discoveries are made according to the laws of physics, regardless of the state of mind of the scientist.

      "Clues" left in a painting are not science.

      We'll wait for your technology. In the meantime, we'll use the technology that actually works.

      Delete
    2. So much erroneous "information" in this one that I do not know where to begin!

      I agree that the trial was a "farce" because it was concocted covertly by Bessler's enemies in an effort to brand him as a fraud and thereby make sure his wheel design would NEVER be sold. They really wanted to prevent its sale, NOT because they were trying to protect some future investor(s), but because WHEN the wheel proved to be GENUINE, they would then be held up to ridicule for having doubted and slandered Bessler and, most importantly, because of their alleged mechanical skills, for not having invented the wheel FIRST themselves.

      The physics of Bessler's wheels is fairly simple. The mechanism needed to demonstrate that physics is a bit more complicated.

      When one lifts a weight against the pull of gravity, it GAINS both energy AND mass simultaneously. When a falling weight in a gravity field does work on something else, that falling weight loses BOTH energy AND mass. Gravity only facilitates these changes in energy / mass, it does not actually provide any of the energy / mass involved. Did they skip 20th century physics in all of those physics courses you claim to have taken???

      Scientists are no different than anyone else. They have their behavioral quirks, dreams, dumb ideas, and fears just like anyone else. However, the best are obsessively curious people who almost always make their discoveries through a combination of simply trying more things than others do and good old fashion luck. This is exactly how Bessler did it.

      The clues in the DT portraits (not paintings, but engravings) are the product of an OB PM gravity wheel design that WORKED. They do not represent new science, but, rather, a new DESIGN. ANYONE trying to replicate Bessler's wheels had better know EVERY detail of those portraits like they know the backs of their hands.

      I DO use the technology that works; mainly, the various sim programs that allow me to very quickly determine if I am making progress down that "right track" or not. So far, I AM making steady progress!

      Delete
  42. Sorry about the comments arriving in the wrong place or even just disappearing, TG. It has happened to me too, and there is little I can do about it. The best I can suggest is to do what you have done and try to correct errors when they appear.

    I can delete comments but I can't alter them and if I post them in their correct place they will seem to have been made by me. I guess we just have to work with the tools at our disposal and live with their occasional hiccups, but I apologise for their quirkiness.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No problem, John. But, just to guard against the occasional one of my comments that gets lost in the blogspot.com "Black Hole", I keep a backup copy of my longer comments in a Desktop folder. If I don't see a comment appear within a "reasonable" amount of time (like 24 hours!), I just try to repost it again.

      Delete

Bessler’s Clues Here and on Besslerwheel forum

I’ve decided to go back to my original plan which was to share everything I’ve discovered and know, or believe about Bessler’s wheel.  It ha...