Friday, 13 July 2012

Do you show signs cognitive dissonance?

Yesterday at last, I managed to find some time to work on my project.  I am using my own interpretations of Bessler's clues, as will anyone who is trying to build Bessler's wheel, and those interpretations can be viewed as being highly subjective as opposed to objective.  By that I mean that these interpretations are in the end just an opinion whereas objective ideas are factual and provable.  But at some point my subjective opinions will become objective and true, I hope!  
Of course such opinions as I hold are biased because they are arrived at through a succession of revelations relating to the supposed clues I have found.  But because an objective piece of information needs to be factual and unbiased my view and the expression of my ideas can't be anything other than subjective.  So until I can either produce a working model or publish a complete explanation of my ideas, I can't give out any objective information until I've finished building my wheel.

Obviously I think I'm right or I wouldn't bother building the wheel, but discussing them here does not seem advisable as it would take too long to explain how I got to where I am. If I did try a shortened explanation it would miss the sequence of discoveries which confirm my interpretations are correct.  Some months ago I began to write a detailed document and I planned to put out a video with pictures and some filming to explain my reasoning, but sadly I haven't had time to continue with this but I shall get back to work on it as soon as possible.

As I have continued along this path I have discovered numerous additional clues which confirm what were previously just my interpretations of some clues.  When the full explanation comes out in due course I think people will amazed at the number of unarguable clues, found everywhere within his works, and I'm not only referring to the number 5.

An acquaintance who is a psychologist, told me that I exhibited typical signs of cognitive dissonance because on the one hand because I had been taught that gravitywheels were impossible and I believed it, but on the other hand I was trying to prove that they were possible and potentially valuable machines and this was causing me some conflict.  I had to look it up to understand what he was getting at.

Apparently if you hold two or more opposing ideas or beliefs it causes you discomfort.  Mountain climbers know the risk of death is ever present but they continue to climb; smokers continue to smoke even though they know it may kill them eventually.  To relieve the discomfort caused by these conflicting beliefs, we all attempt to reduce the dissonance by altering existing beliefs, adding new ones to create a consistent belief system, or alternatively by reducing the importance of any one of the dissonant elements.

That psychologist made me feel as if I was someone who suffered from some kind of weird rare psychological delusion and might be a step away from the madhouse!  But the fact of the matter is that I don't feel any discomfort with my apparently dissonant beliefs, so either I have succeeded in altering my existing beliefs or I've reduced their importance.  

I think the former has occurred, but it shows you what a load of old tosh these so-called experts spout from time to time. According to him we all show signs of cognitive dissonance! Of course there are some who think my attic's a little dusty....  

JC

10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.

62 comments:

  1. John,

    do you still believe that the bi-directional wheel used 2 separate systems, since your discovery ?

    P 47.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I think there was a duplicate system of mechanisms designed to turn the wheel the other way, and it was a mirror image of the other one.

      JC

      Delete
    2. How can you possible believe that? Can you please elaborate and list your reasons, sir?

      I firmly believe the opposite as the poster before me apparently also does.

      I perceive Bessler as a genuine craftsman that would never stoop to anything of what you're saying above.

      Delete
  2. dear john collins, I love reading what everyone thought but stop! first of all due respect to people who CORRECTLY believe in perpetual motion is required the wheel works the weights are 8 "Report of Race" is 5 for two-way must be rotated 180 degrees, the control system ... I can confirm! I have chosen to write in English for you, the wheels are linked together the two wheels, forming the drum and must be offset by 45 degrees to reduce the overall dimensions and to position the weights to 45 degrees from each other ... the weight of the masses affect the centrifugal force which is produced .....

    is the so listen carefully ....

    choose the number of revolutions of the wheel ... (in your projects certainly do not know yet how many laps can do and if it works) such as 50 (up to 70 to reach the physical limits)

    choose wheel size you want to accomplish ..... ie 940mm ......

    determined the weights that are used to balance the system of levers ...... small weight in front of and behind 2 weights more ..... these 2 weights must not vary their position relative to the axis of rotation but transmit their resistance in such a way that with a small touch the front weight can 'move without resistance because' balanced by the force of 2 mass centrifga rear.

    add the rider ................

    and repeated every 45 ° ....

    you will see with surprise that will turn ....

    do not want to go but if the levers are balanced in rotation ...... move them becomes easy in all directions .... then just control them at the right time with "Kepler" and you're 'done


    ITL...

    ReplyDelete
  3. WATCH THE PENDULUM OF Bessler massively images .... MANY HAVE WEIGHT??

    ITL...

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think i have cognitive dissonance .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think when i trying to figure out how thinks work , does it work this way or that way ! causes cognitive dissonance .

      Delete
  5. Have your psychologist friend read your gravitywheel.com page.
    http://www.gravitywheel.com/
    That is clearly CD, not a load of old tosh.
    And, by this criticism of the "so-called experts" - to reduce the dissonance in your mind about CD - you're displaying another example of CD!
    The mind can boggle the mind.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Replies
    1. Well, sorry, but as the proverb goes, if the cap fits...
      Your friend is right: the cap fits everyone. And it *definitely* fits anyone seeking perpetual motion.

      Delete
    2. Well Doug, I don't really want to get into semantics here, but as you will know, probably, I don't believe Bessler's wheel was an example of PM, so I'm not seeking PM.

      JC

      Delete
    3. I know, you think gravity is the source of energy.
      But, no offense, that forms the basis of the cognitive dissonance.

      To rationalize your belief in B's wheel, you add the belief that gravity (by itself!), is energy - to circumvent the PM of the first kind definition: "Motion that continues indefinitely without any external source of energy" - placing it in a category with machines that draw energy from their environment: windmills, dams, etc. And I don't want to get into the 'gravity is like the wind' debate, I'm just connecting the cognitive dissonant dots.

      Doug

      Delete
  7. @ JC

    I don't think you "suffer" from "cognitive dissonance". You are reasonably certain that Bessler did, in fact, achieve a WORKING OB PM wheel and you are, slowly to be sure, progressing toward verifying that fact belief with a wheel based on YOUR interpretation of the clues. YOU will, however, develop a MASSIVE case of cognitive dssonance IF the clue based design you come up with does NOT work. Then you will realize that YOUR interpretations of the clues were NOT correct. That will be a very stressful time for you and since you've previously stated that this "pentagrammatic wheel" of yours is your LAST build, it would mean that you are ending your career as an ACTIVE Bessler mobilist WITHOUT the triumph of having personally solved the mystery. That will certainly be depressing, but not fatal and at least your efforts in providing the English translations of Bessler's works will help others with their research and, most importantly, keep interest in Bessler alive from generation to generation.

    I am exactly in the same boat that you are in. I am reasonably certain (actually 100% so!) that Bessler did, in fact, achieve WORKING OB PM gravity wheels, especially since I KNOW EXACTLY from whence came the energy / mass that they outputted in order to accelerate and perform "outside" useful work. I also have my "right track" design based on MANY clues that I can point to (none of which has ever even been discussed on the internet!) and whose interpretations seem to me to be the ONLY ones POSSIBLE. Again, like you, IF my current design fails to work, then it will mark the END of my decades long search to reverse engineer Bessler's wheels and, finally, solve this ANNOYING 300 year old mystery. Yes, that will certainly depress me, but at least I'll know that I gave it good solid try and I believe I will then be able to go onto other more attainable goals...like maybe solving the Asa Jackson wheel mystery! LOL! Just kidding. If my present model fails, then it's time for me to PERMANENTLY hang it up and wish others better luck than I had.

    So we should never worry about the various labels that the psychologists of this world may hang upon us. Such "diagnoses" are TOTALLY irrelevant as far as solving the Bessler wheel mystery is concerned. Most of the great men of science in the past were deemed by others to be "foolish" or even "mad" at some point in their lives, yet their ultimate SUCCESSES helped pave the way for the modern world that we now enjoy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TG,

      Can you tell us where these clues "none of which has ever even been discussed on the internet!" came from (AP, DT, MT, ...)?

      Delete
    2. They are mostly in the two DT portraits which give COMPLETE instructions for reconstructing the Merseburg wheel. Unfortunately, those instructions will only become clear to someone who is VERY ACTIVELY building. They take the form of subtle angles, ratios, and proximities of parts that correlate with the internal mechanics of the wheel. It took an ENORMOUS amount of work for me to CORRECTLY interpret the clues there, but I finally did and they ALL point to a SINGLE design which I call the "right track" design. I am now working on the last of the clues Bessler encoded into these portraits which describe his "Secret Principle". It deals with the use of spring tension within the wheel and is CRITICAL to achieving PM.

      Delete
  8. There's no conflict in my heart and mind about the possibility of Perpetual motion when someone speaks the truth and when not.Besides I have the answer which will be revealed soon.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I know that the bessler wheel was genuine , i won't say how i know , but i know .

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fella's - it's fine to have complete confidence in your subjective opinions ultimately proving to be objective fact - we have heard this many many times over the years from equally dedicated & earnest people.

    What is disappointing is when their ideas come to nothing - I mean, we get the parade before winning the game - very few, very few, actually have the balls & integrity to retrospectively put up their research & findings after they have failed - don't be like them though I'm not hopeful.

    That's the time that prior CD becomes rather obvious, when reality cancels the parade.

    -f

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am trying to cure my cognitive dissonance .

    ReplyDelete
  12. Excuse me Fella,..I have declared my failure.
    What have you done or not done?

    ReplyDelete
  13. A bit OT, but I've recently gone over my schematics for the Merseburg wheel (not including the vertical axle supports, of course) in an attempt to obtain a more accurate estimate of its gross weight. Here it is: 323.6 lbs. Once the sixteen 4 lb weights were removed, it would have weighed 259.6 lbs and, conceivably, two strong and VERY tall men (whose SHOULDERS were over 6 feet off of the floor!) could have lifted it on their shoulders and "translocated" it by carrying to a nearby set of vertical uprights during an official examination of the wheel (each man would have to carry 129.8 lbs which, for a short distance, sounds "doable"). However, two shorter men could have just lifted it off of its uprights, placed its rim gently on the floor, and then rolled it slowly over to the new uprights after which it would have been lifted and its axle's pivots reseated into the brass bearing plates in the second set of uprights.

    The heaviest component in the Merseburg wheel was the axle which, according to my calculations, weighed in at about 108 lbs...1/3 of the total weight of the two-directional wheel when it contained its 16 weights! One way to have lightened the load for those who would have to translocate the wheel would have been to use a HOLLOW axle. BUT, Bessler assures us that ALL of his timbers were SOLID. So, I'll stick with my estimate of 323.6 lbs for the gross weight of the Merseburg wheel when containing its 16 lead weights.

    I also have to disagree with anyone who claims that the Merseburg wheel's drum was only between 11 and 12 inches in thickness. Using the most compact, yet structurally adequate enough design that a skilled carpenter would have used, I get a MINIMUM thickness of about 14.25 inches.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also just rechecked my calculations concerning the torque of the Merseburg wheel.

      At start up, the CoM of its driving sub wheel was displaced, horizontally, about 0.852 inches onto the drum's descending side (note that the CoM weighed 32 lbs because there were 8 active weights in a sub wheel x 4 lbs per weight). That 32 lb CoM's displacement would have delivered 27.264 lb-inches of torque to the axle and this would have been the maximum CONTINUOUS torque that the axle could have delivered. This means that, if the axle was exactly 3 inches in radius, then a very thin cord wrapped around it would have allowed the axle to continously lift a weight if its mass did not exceed about 9 lbs. A weight exceeding 9 lbs would have stalled the wheel.

      Delete
    2. I made an error above. I gave the weight of the Merseburg wheel's axle as 108 lbs. That was just for the 6 ft x 6 in diameter cylindrical piece of oak used to make the axle. For the actual weight of the axle, one must SUBTRACT from that weight the weight of the two 4 in long x 0.75 in diameter bored holes at the ends of the axle into which the steel end pivots were pressed, which weighed 0.2 lbs, and then ADD to the resulting reduced weight of the axle piece the weight of the two 8 in long x 0.75 in diameter, slightly tapered on one half of their length steel pivots which was about 13 lbs. That then adjusts the COMPLETE axle weight UP to about 120.8 lbs.

      By deducting the weight of those two plugs of wood that have to be removed to make room for the steel pivots, the gross weight of the wheel, which includes its sixteen 4 lb weights, then comes to 323.4 lbs. This is only 0.2 lbs less than what I originally stated. The wheel's weight, AFTER its lead weights were removed, then becomes 259.4 lbs and each of two men would, to perform a translocation, have to lift 129.7 lbs. No, it's not a big difference, but I hate "bookkeeping" errors.

      Delete
    3. He probably meant he built a hollow axle out of solid timbers; I think he said "all out of solid timbers" because the supports were suspected of being hollow, not the axle.
      There's no reason for a solid axle, a hollow one would be strong enough, and also easier for him to construct, and move around the room, by himself. It would also be easier to cut holes for 4 radial supports to pass through. Or, he could have built a hollow axle around the radial supports.

      Delete
    4. The actual quote is:

      "I'll tell you with great pride that my timbers are all solid."

      Certainly sounds like he's saying that the axle was one, solid piece of wood to me.

      A hollow axle would have been strong enough! I don't think so, Doug. Remember the Merseburg wheel's drum, when containing its 64 lbs of lead weights, weighed over 200 lbs. That's a lot of weight to place on a hollow axle. I don't think that Bessler would have risked having the axle shatter while it held a 200 lb, 12 foot drum spinning at about 50 rpms! That would have resulted in the destruction of the wheel when it hit the floor.

      Delete
    5. That's the thing about B's quotes; their ambiguity.
      He could have meant it the way I said.
      The quote about the axle: "reach in and feel it; it's pierced all over with various holes.", or whatever. But some think he meant the wheel covering had holes, not the axle. Some think he meant the axle, and the holes were from reusing the axle.

      A hollow axle, constructed like a coopered barrel, would support the weight, no problems at all. The iron pins were what had to take the punishment of the full weight. If you want to find a weakness in the wheel, it would be the pins in the wood.

      Delete
    6. Also, your estimate of the wheel weight could be way off, you've given no references for anything. And since no one saw the thing, it could have been much, much lighter, which has always been my opinion.

      Delete
    7. My estimate of the Merseburg wheel's weight assumes it had the lightest, flimsiest design possible which would, IMO, still hold up to the various forces that the wheel would experience. IF, as you suggest, the axle was hollow and consisted of a group of pieces like the staves of a coopered barrel, then why do we not see anything like the METAL bands found on a barrel that hold its staves together? From the illustrations, the axle appears to be a single piece of wood. One would expect to see these bands at the ends of the axle which contained the steel pivots since these would have been the weakest sections of the axle. But, they are not there and, again, that is consistent with the idea that the axle was a single, solid piece of wood.

      Delete
    8. The illustrations could have left the bands out. The bands could have been under the canvas, inside the drum.
      If it was solid wood, then it probably was a softwood.
      Don't overestimate the forces the wheel experienced, or where; they weren't as much as you seem to think.

      Delete
    9. The bands that I am talking about would have had to have been placed on the ENDS of the supposedly hollow axle and in the middle and they are NOT shown being there. In fact, on the right side of the axle in the side view of the Merseburg wheel one sees the rope wrapped around the axle and there appears to be a peg inserted into the axle there to attach the rope to it. That peg is right near the very end of the axle. One would think if there was a metal band around the axle there to reinforce it, then it would not be possible to insert a peg into the axle there...unless one wants to suggest that Bessler drilled a hole in the band so that the peg could pass through it.

      IIRC, the wood Bessler used was OAK which is one of the hardest and strongest of woods. With a SOLID 6 foot long, 6 inch diameter axle, one could probably have placed a maximum load of around 500 lbs in its center before it cracked. With a hollow axle, I doubt if it would have held the 200 lb weight of the drum.

      Delete
  14. The bi directional is a single mechanism , not a duplicate system of mechanisms .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it is very unlikely anyone will ever discover the bi directional mechanism .

      Delete
    2. I did not discover it , i actually re( CENSORED ) . ;)

      Delete
    3. At last you have said something that makes senese.One set of mechanisms is responsible for both directions.
      There is no space for more than that.

      Delete
    4. On that bi-directional mechanism as one weight comes in another comes out , all the quotes are there in the Bessler boooks regarding that .

      Delete
    5. Trevor wrote:

      "One set of mechanisms is responsible for both directions.
      There is no space for more than that."

      Not true! The weighted levers inside of the Merseburg wheel were only 6 inches wide! There was enough room within its drum to house two complete, but separate, side by side one-directional wheels. However, the arrangement of weighted levers and radial drum supports was "tight" with only 1/4" clearances between the levers and the supports (in the 4:1 model I work with, the clearances are only 1/16"!).

      Delete
  15. By the logic of your psychologist friend, just about every brilliant inventor, engineer and scientist is subject to some form of cognitive dissonance. After all, these are all "seekers of the truth" (against the odds) as the old Greeks used to say. Most NASA scientists and engineers I know had often to come up with solutions to things that "everybody knew" were impossible - or at the very least extremely unlikely. Especially during the glory days of rocketry such as during the Apollo program, when politics had not yet poisoned this extremely important endeavor. So, for example, how do you control and balance a 3000-ton rocket the size of a skyscraper on the thrust of 1 billion horsepower engines using 1960's technology? How about a 55.000 horsepower fuel turbopump for just one engine? How do you fit a 1960's computer the size of truck in a tiny box?

    The answer to such "impossibilities" (or cognitive dissonances) was the same as it always has been: creative intelligence. Thinking out of the box we would say these days. CI has very little to do with IQ, that's also why it is the hardest form of intelligence to measure. Doing things in different ways, from unusual approaches, is what has brought mankind the most effective solutions and progress.

    Citing hallowed laws and impossibilities never has.

    So, John, if you "suffer" from anything it's creative intelligence - and that's nothing to be ashamed of. To the contrary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Someone once said "Where there's a will, there's a way." The major reason, IMO, that most beneficial things are NOT achieved in this world is because of a simple lack of will.

      People lose their will to accomplish something after listening, without question, to a handful of "experts" who have decided that it CAN NOT be done. Politicians lose their will to grant money for certain types of research because they are afraid of having their proposal used against them in an election by an opponent and, consequently, losing the election. Children who start to "think outside of the box" are branded as "troublemakers" or "slow" by teachers and lose their will to continue their creative behavior. In the business world, anyone that begins to display too much will can be branded as not being a "team player" and be passed over for promotion or raises.

      To solve the mystery of PM, the inventor will have to have the maximum amount of creativity and will power possible for a human being to possess. In each millenium, there are probably only a few that will truly possess what is needed.

      Delete
  16. Thanks Andre, I think we all do.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  17. John ,
    You have something that a lot of us have and that is the inability to reason why a man would make such a fuss and effort to publicize a (supposed) impossible device (a man, by the way who had the required credentials to create such a device if anything at all that he said about himself is to be believed). Your dilemma has little to do with what Bessler did and more to do with what you are doing every day . I'm not buying into it because I believe that your psychologist is prejudice toward the IMPOSSIBILITY and supposes that you are driving yourself toward futility instead of success . Everything has a cost ; time , money , emotional anguish , criticism and even mocking perhaps . Wouldn't it be nice to have a few tangible signs for you effort ? Wouldn't it be nice to set your wheel into motion for the world to marvel at ? All of this ( much time , money , emotional anguish , criticism and even mocking perhaps )is what we must ask of ourselves before the fact . Is it any wonder that Bessler acted and said the things he did because the actual device (God Forbid)is truly a reason for all of the scorn and such to reach a fever pitch .

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bessler's humble estimation of himself :
    " Now there's a secret here which I'll freely disclose - if Wagner, the great scholar, had come up with the Mobile, God wouldn't have been given any credit, as it would all have been put down to scholarship. But God designed instead to turn to a poor peasant who's hardly worth a charge of gunpowder, who amounts to nothing! And yet from nothing, God has created something! " JC AP 337-338

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think God has a great sense of humor which is why TRUTH is often STRANGER than FICTION!

      Delete
    2. Truth can also be expressed in art... or at least attempted and often it is very convincing .

      Delete
  19. Everyone "suffers" CD at some point, it's one of the things that makes us mortal. Cognition covers a wide range of human experience: ideas, beliefs, values, emotional responses; it is involved in literally everything we might possibly do or say. We are just simply irrational beings.
    CD is important to a child's development; the conflicting messages lead to resolution and maturity ( in most). So, CD doesn't always have negative connotations, i.e., i'm a smoker but i'm going to die anyway.
    Hobbies are important. They relieve stress and make us feel good, and teach us things along the way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The function of a "properly" working human mind is to eventually ELIMINATE any cognitive dissonances that arise during the course of one's life. This is part of the "Pleasure Principle" which makes organisms seek pleasure while avoiding pain and, in the case of humans, applies to mental as well as physical pleasure.

      I do not currently pursue the solution to Bessler's wheels because of any CD that the so-called "experts" have created in my mind. I long ago eliminated that CD when I realized that their denial of the very possibility of PM was based upon erroneous and, therefore, INVALID arguments. Rather, I pursue the solution because I simply want to know, as exactly as possible, HOW Bessler did it and NOTHING MORE. I am not expecting to get famous or rich or be pursued by "super" models in the process (although I certainly wouldn't reject any of that IF it was to happen, especially that LAST part! LOL!). My main goal is achieving the pleasure of UNDERSTANDING HOW he managed to build a WORKING OB PM gravity wheel. Wasn't it Leonardo DaVinci who described understanding as "the noblest pleasure of all"?

      Delete
    2. Yes, most people try to be perfect like you.

      Delete
    3. I'm certainly not perfect, haven't been, and probably never will be. But, I can live with that.

      Indeed, every time I think I've properly decoded one of Bessler's hidden clues and later, after A LOT of effort, find out that it doesn't work (either because it is a useless "decoy" clue or it is a valid clue that I was not able to properly decode at the time), I experience an annoying bout of CD. That then makes me acutely uncomfortable and actually serves to make me even MORE determined to get it right the next time!

      This process of experiencing and then finally successfully eliminating CD (really a simple process of positive and negative feedback) DOES work, but it is a slow and arduous process. In today's world everyone is EXPECTING instant results and, unfortunately, that means NOTHING when it comes to elucidating Bessler's secret wheel mechanics. One must be determined, systematic, and, most importantly, an ACTIVE builder or modeler to do that. If he does not have these prerequisites, then he might as well not even waste his time.

      Delete
  20. So what will you say to someone who has success in this particular "hobby" Douglas ?
    Will you have the excuse that you "never really thought about it" in order to succeed or fail ?

    ReplyDelete
  21. I suppose i would say congratulations.
    I don't understand your other question.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Hobby implies something trivial and unproductive in a sense , stamp collecting is a nice hobby , search for P.M. is a noble effort that could benefit everyone if found . The second question was aimed at your skepticism .

    ReplyDelete
  23. We are grossly out numbered and outgunned Captain. We must surrender, negotiate and fight another day.

    NO, I will beam across and meet the fleets commander face to face and stall for time until they all run out of fuel.

    But Captain, di-lithium crystals have a half life of 100,000 years and you will be their prisoner.

    It'll give you time to think of something Spock.

    Cognitive dissonance is illogical Captain.

    ReplyDelete
  24. As one comes in another comes out and then the one that went in comes out and the other in .
    So they pull the stick or pendumn in and then let it out when they switch positions .
    On the merry go round i posted on the bessler wheel forum about a year ago , you pull it in and then let it out .
    I have revealed the correct principle .
    This is my last post .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is a link to the most pertinent post in all the history of the bessler wheel forum :

      http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=85694#85694

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. History has been made here today on this blog as the correct principle has been revealed .

      Delete
  25. The search for PM will always be fruitless; that's why I call it a hobby.
    The search for a "gravitywheel" is a search for PM, most people recognize that.
    I've thought about it and come to the conclusion most people do.
    The real skeptics are the ones who think PM is possible.
    They are skeptical towards conservation laws, and use logical fallacies to try to prove the possibility.
    If I succeeded, it's because I looked in the place where everyone looked.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The real skeptics are the ones who think PM is possible.
      They are skeptical towards conservation laws..."

      I'm certainly NOT "skeptical" toward the conservations laws and I don't believe that Bessler's wheels violated those laws IN ANY WAY. In the "right track" design I pursue, I know EXACTLY where the energy / mass came from that the wheels outputted although, regretably, I do not yet have the full details of the mechanism involved. Also, although I use the term "PM" whenever I refer to Bessler's "WORKING OB PM gravity wheels", I've previously stated that I only write "PM" because of its popular usage and NOT because Bessler's wheels, if not subject to mechanical failure, would run FOREVER.

      Indeed, each of his wheels only contained a FINITE amount of lead which represented a FINITE amount of energy / mass that the wheel could, when running, output to overcome bearing friction and aerodynamic drag to both keep itself in motion and operate outside machinery. It might take hundreds of millions or even billions of years for one of his wheels to stop, but it WOULD eventually stop and, thus, was NOT a "real" PM wheel in the sense of being able to violate the conservation laws and CREATE energy / mass out of nothing in order to operate FOREVER. I do NOT believe such a device is possible and Bessler certainly NEVER had such a device even though, obviously, he falsely BELIEVED he did. He can be forgiven for his error because they did not know as much about these matters in the early 18th century as we do nowadays.

      Delete
    2. Your statement is flawed.Newtons law states that a body once set in motion will continue thus until an opposing force resists it.
      That is Perpetual motion.
      Perpetual motion with power is a totally different thing and is debatable simply because you cannot conceive getting somthing for nothing.
      The only way to convince you is to produce a working wheel which I hope demonstrate in the comming weeks.

      Delete
    3. TG, you have a completely different cognitive dissonance about how Bessler's wheel could have worked than John or Trevor. I've explained it to John's readers before and I think they get it.

      Delete
    4. I don't have any CD at the moment because, unlike you, I do not see ANY conflict between the laws of physics and the WORKING OB PM gravity wheel design that Bessler discovered. IF I am able to finally obtain the full details of his "Secret Principle" which is the FINAL obstacle between me and success, then it will be quite OBVIOUS to EVERYONE that, although certainly ingenious, there was really nothing physically impossible about Bessler's wheels.

      Again, let me very quickly summarize the REAL problem involved in solving the Bessler wheel mystery:

      During every 45 degree increment of CW drum rotation, the weighted levers whose pivots pass the 9:00 position of the drum have to reverse their swing direction around their pivots (from CCW to CW) so that they can begin quickly rising back toward their rim stops again (they do not make final contact with their rim stops until they reach the 3:00 position of the drum). This action is CRITICALLY necessary IF the CoM of the 8 active weights in a one-directional wheel or two-directional wheel's sub wheel is to REMAIN fixed on the descending side of the drum as it rotates. There is NO way of getting around this requirement.

      Raising those ascending side levers' weights back toward their rim stops requires that they be supplied with energy / mass and that energy / mass is delivered to them via a system of cords from 4 other weights which, during that same increment of drum rotation, are falling with respect to their rim stops. Unfortunately, by themselves, those 4 other weights are not quite able to supply the required amount of energy / mass. Another source, something "extra", has to be tapped in order to do that.

      That other source is a small supply of energy / mass that has, previously, been stored within certain stretched springs inside the drum. Bessler found a simple and VERY unique way of using spring tension so that, during each 45 degree increment of drum rotation, the SUM of the energy / mass that was RELEASED by the 4 weights dropping with respect to their rim stops AND the contracting springs attached to them was enough to begin lifting the 2 ascending side weights back toward their rim stops (these would be the weights mounted on the levers approaching the 10:30 and 12:00 positions of the drum).

      This then allowed the CoM of the drum's 8 active weights to remain FIXED on the descending side of the drum during its rotation. That MAINTAINED displacement of the weights' CoM then allowed the drum's 4 descending side weights to continously output more energy / mass to the drum than was extracted from it by the drum's 4 ascending side weights. This small EXCESS in outputted energy / mass from the drum's 8 active weights during each complete drum rotation could then be used to accelerate ALL of the structures of a wheel and even move "outside" machinery.

      Right now I am doing MANY experiments with various types of springs and learning MUCH about them of which I had only previously been vaguely aware. They are, indeed, difficult to work with and often do quite unexpected things. Fortunately, as the hidden clues in the DT portraits assure me, there were only 8 springs in each of Bessler's one-directional wheels or two-directional wheel's sub wheels. That makes finding the "Secret Principle" a bit easier.

      But, there are MANY different ways of attaching the springs to the levers and the interior of the drum and many different spring tensions that can be used depending upon the mass of the wheel's weights. Only ONE of them is the correct one that will keep the weights' CoM on the drum's descending side during drum rotation. I have much work ahead of me as I continue to progress down the "right track" toward eventual success!

      Delete
  26. Here's another way to think about this problem of maintaining a fixed CoM on the descending side of your rotating PM wheel.

    In effect, you are trying get the weights within your wheel to continously LIFT their own CoM from instant to instant so that the CoM remains fixed in space DESPITE the wheel rotation which is always trying to rotate and drop the CoM below the axle (to the "punctum quietus" as Bessler might have said). ONLY such a stabilized OB CoM will then allow the wheel's descending side weights to output MORE energy / mass from instant to instant TO the wheel than is TAKEN FROM the wheel from instant to instant by the EQUAL number of its ascending side weights. That slight EXCESS of energy / mass that is outputted by your wheel's descending side weights will then be available to both accelerate ALL of the structures of your wheel and even the moving parts of any machinery you've attached to your wheel's axle so long as that machinery does not draw off the excess energy / mass faster than your wheel produces it.

    The continous AUTOMATIC lifting process of the CoM of your wheel's weights during wheel rotation requires that SOME of the weights at any instant are dropping with respect to their rim stops so that a LESSER number of others can be lifted with respect to their rim stops. One might understandably expect this to be an easy matter to achieve. In practice, however, it becomes VERY difficult, but NOT impossible, to do. Ultimately, you MUST use springs to achieve the effect because, like the mechanical equivalent of an electrical capacitor, springs have the unique ability to efficiently store energy / mass (by stretching or compressing) that can then be released during wheel rotation so as to "assist" in the process of continously lifting and thereby fixing in space the CoM of all of the weights as was described above.

    It took Bessler a decade to realize this. It took me SEVERAL times as long to finally realize it! Hopefully, you Bessler mobilists out there in PMland who SERIOUSLY want to get on the "right track" so you actually begin to make some REAL progress in duplicating Bessler's wheels will realize it AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. This simple realization (actually more of a revelation!) will save you MUCH wasted effort in the future.

    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...