Although I was unable to comment from Spain, I read all your posts and it seemed to me that there is some uncertainty about whether or not Bessler intended to leave clues for us after his death, in case he was unable to sell his wheel.
The following quote seems to imply that there is information in Apologia Poetica which answers certain questions the reader may have. It also says that the answers will not be revealed soon:-
"Those who are keen to ask questions should ask them of this little book. My work will not be revealed prematurely." (Chapter XLVI page 295 Apologia Poetica)
Also there is the comment on the front of his Maschinen Tractate, "I burned and buried all papers that prove the possibility. However, I have left all demonstrations and experiments since it would be difficult for anybody to see or learn anything about a perpetual motion from them or to decide whether there was any truth in them because no illustration by itself contains a description of the motion; however, taking various illustrations together and combining them with a discerning mind, it will indeed be possible to look for a movement and, finally to find one in them." (Front page of Maschinen Tractate).
That also supports the idea that he intended that people should learn how his machine worked.
Elsewhere he bemoaned the fact that no one took his claims seriously and if he failed to find a purchaser for his machine then he would be content with post humous recognition. One can infer from this that he had left some means of showing us how his wheel worked.
There is of course, my own work on decoding what seem to me to be obviously clues, and I don't think there can be any doubt that that is what they are meant to be. But I understand that many will feel that those that I have published may seem of little help, but there is a much more to come which reveal a lot more information. Having said that, I am unaware of anything in Bessler's portraits other than what I have posted on my web site at www.theorffyreuscode.com and I shall be very interested to learn what it is that TG believes he has discovered within them.
JC
10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.
"Elsewhere he bemoaned the fact that no one took his claims seriously and if he failed to find a purchaser for his machine then he would be content with post humous recognition. One can infer from this that he had left some means of showing us how his wheel worked."
ReplyDeleteOf course, he left clues behind, VERY precise clues, in fact. IF he did NOT, then there would be NO way of KNOWING if some future mobilist's wheel was the same as Bessler's and that, indeed, Bessler had priority to the design and was therefore worthy of "post humous recogition"
"Having said that, I am unaware of anything in Bessler's portraits other than what I have posted on my web site at www.theoffyreuscode.com and I shall be very interested to learn what it is that TG believes he has discovered within them."
IF you are NOT using the DT portrait clues in the design of your latest wheel, then, quite frankly, IMO, it is most probably NOT the design that Bessler used! That, however, does not automatically mean that it will not work, a matter which can quickly be determined once its details are revealed.
What's in the DT portrait clues? Oh, not much, just enough MATHEMATICAL information to reconstruct the "magic" levers used in Bessler's wheels AND the manner in which they were interconnected to each other so as to maintain the OB of a PM gravity wheel! BUT, it takes a hell of a lot of work to CORRECTLY decode those clues. As I've said previously, only 1 in a 1000 mobilists will be able to do it and, even then, he will still have to be VERY lucky. So far, my luck seems to be holding up!
NB that NONE of the items in those portraits is actually used as a physical component in his wheels (the sole exceptions being the helical SPRING contained within the screw barrel microscope and the CORD attached to the carpenter's plumb bob.) What is important in them is the various angles and ratios that are depicted for these ARE used within the design of his wheels and are CRITICAL to making them work. IF one's wheel does not incorporate these particular numbers, then it will NOT work!
These two portraits are, IMO, Bessler's true legacy to humanity. I consider all other "clues" in the Bessler literature, with the exception of a handful of the text clues, to be largely irrelevant, ESPECIALLY the "little book" chapter of AP.
Of course, I try to keep an open mind about all of this and am willing to read what someone else has to say about the other clues in the literature, but I'm not an easily persuaded individual. So far, none of them has suggested the design that Bessler used or any design for that matter, IMO. That is why I am curious to see how you, John, are using the "obviously clues" you've found to "justify" the design that you intend to present (hopefully, BEFORE this Christmas!).
JC
ReplyDeleteThere is absolutely no uncertainty in my mind ‘about whether or not Bessler intended to leave clues for us after his death’
You succinctly list the most important passages where he makes that absolutely clear. It seems to me that Bessler knew posthumous recognition was his ‘best bet’ and the most likely outcome of his endeavour. In addition to his written statements there are all his visual statements, a hell of a lot of time and hard work went into producing his engravings and woodcuts. How anyone could look at MT83 with its two types of letter A or at MT62 (where Bessler shows himself capable of carving a perfect circle small scale at B & D but incapable of it at A) and then not think we are talking clues is simply beyond me.
Like you, I too struggle with TG’s Portrait Theory, but then, he also believes in cords and springs so we don’t need to take too much notice of him.
JW
One serious problem I have with TG's Portrait Theory is that they appear not to have been drawn by Bessler, as the artists signature in the bottom left corner of each indicates.
DeleteThe artists name appears to be C. Frikzch or C. Frikzchle?
If these portraits are as TG says Bessler's 'greatest gift to humanity' it would be good to know if Bessler actually designed and executed them. We need to know are they portraits or self-portraits? there is a very important difference.
JW
John, the guys'name was Christian Fritzsch, and the 'sc' after, stands for sculpter. He came from a famous family of engravers, all confusingly called Christian! Although the second portrait is signed apparently by the same artist, I have a suspicion that it was not one he wished to acknowledge as his, because of the poor execution of the figures within it.
ReplyDeleteAs you say, it seems to me to be unlikely that it would contain anything of value if it had been finished sometime before Bessler used it. I'm not even sure that the same man did the two portraits, the styles seem different to me.
What about the odd positioning of Bessler's left hand and arm in the first portrait? It looks to me as though they were originally placed higher up and were subsequently lowered so that the pentagram I show in theorffreuscode web site could be incorporated.
Having said that, I do not have the information that TG is working with so I may be wrong.
JC
JC
ReplyDeleteSo the two images are portraits and not self-portraits, thanks for clearing that point up.
I do agree that the two pieces of work appear to be by a different hand, and from what you say that they were probably made by brothers, both called Christian Fitzsch!
In my mind since Bessler was not the artist who made them it seems rather unlikely that they contain very much in the way of clues (if any). I note that you add an additional doubt about this regarding the timing of the production of these works compared to the Bessler-made images.
I don’t find anything particularly odd about Bessler’s left arm and hand in the first portrait, anatomically and perspective wise its fine. His right arm and hand look more awkward to me, though this is mostly due to the foreshortening of the forearm and is again within acceptable limits (in drawing terms). It is not possible to make the kind of alteration you imply on a copper plate, in order to reposition the arm you would have to draw the whole thing again on a fresh plate.
JW
Yes I realised that after I'd posted it John - that you couldn't make that kind of alteration, nevertheless it could have been altered in the original hand-drawn (if there was one) version and then copied by the engraver?
ReplyDeleteJC
JC
ReplyDeleteYes, it could be that Bessler did a self-portrait drawing and asked an engraver to copy it. It could also be that the portrait was commissioned by Bessler and drawn by the brothers Christian Fitzsch, do we know?
I don’t know a great deal about Art, I was only at Art College for six years and studied it to post-graduate level.
I do however recall attending lectures on the compositional devices used by artists to construct their pictures and that many innovations in this area began with the Renaissance Masters; the employment of perspective, the golden section, triangles and other implied shapes or lines that link elements across (and unify) an image.
These implied underlying construction lines or shapes hold the picture together, they give a picture balance, structure and harmony.
They are also just under the surface, doing the same job, in abstract work.
In my opinion TG has latched on to these elements of the portraits, whether or not drawn by Bessler himself, read far more into them than actually exists and gone flying off on a wild goose chase. He is even crazier than you, with all your OTT number 5 stuff.
JW
But the more I reflected upon the daring, dashing, and discriminating ingenuity of D——; upon the fact that the document must always have been at hand, if he intended to use it to good purpose; and upon the decisive evidence, obtained by the Prefect, that it was not hidden within the limits of that dignitary’s ordinary search — the more satisfied I became that, to conceal this letter, the Minister had resorted to the comprehensive and sagacious expedient of not attempting to conceal it at all.
ReplyDeleteEdgar Allen Poe, The Purloined Letter
I like that, Doug!
DeleteJC
Do you see? B---- had nothing to hide. No mechanism; no angles or ratios. Your're all looking for something he wasn't hiding.
Delete"It will indeed be possible to look for a movement, and finally to find one in them".
"a" movement".
Not "the" movement.
"The" movement is hiding in plain sight.
Very good . In plain sight ... however not shrouded in riddles and code . It's our understanding that is insufficient , and when we develop it ( our understanding of extra weight or overforce or a force than grows instead of inhibiting " movement " ) we will have arrived . I believe I understand it , have defined the movement and it's mechanical specifics ...but am still however unable to build it due to " real life " difficulties I am having as of late . I have explained it to several laymen mechanic friends of mine and they grasp the concept for the most part . So to me it's just a matter of time because in one way or another it will come to be . I do not have the same access to the internet , funds , time and a few other things that I have had for the last ten years any longer . That's why my posts are fewer and farther between .
DeleteI have good an idea for PM(gravity motor). Where to find good craftman without leaking out your secret. Anybody on this blog from Chicago USA.
ReplyDeleteThank you for helping hand. W
I don't want to point you straight at them but if you put your request on Besslerwheel/forum, there are a couple of guys from Chicago who might be interested in helping. If they don't wish to, then you won't get a response, but if they do then....
ReplyDeleteJC
It's quite obvious, upon routine inspection, that the two DT portraits were NOT done by the same engraver. The second one is far coarser, especially in terms of the lettering beneath the portrait.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this issue is TOTALLY irrelevant as far as the information content of the TWO portraits in concerned. IMO, Bessler made sketches of what he wanted done for the two portraits and those sketches specified that the engravings HAD to contain certain COMMON precise angles, numbers, and ratios (and, no, I am not "read[ing] far more into them than actually exists and gone flying off on a wild goose chase"). From my extensive work with the computer modeling of the Merseburg wheel, I have found that these values are CRITICALLY necessary in order to construct a Bessler style OB PM gravity wheel. IF one is unaware of them or even disputes their very existence, then he is in that sad and VAST catagory of mobilists who will NEVER find the design that Bessler used!
Apparently, after the first portrait was completed, something happened that prevented the original Christian Fritzsch from completing the second portrait. Possibly, he assigned that task to one of his students and that accounts for its cruder execution. However, he still allowed his name to be used on the second portrait.
JW writes:
"Like you [JC], I too struggle with TG’s Portrait Theory, but then, he also believes in cords and springs so we don’t need to take too much notice of him."
Without the cords and springs, it is NOT possible to construct a WORKING OB PM gravity wheel. There are MULTIPLE clues in the DT portraits that indicate this FACT. So, if anyone wants to dispute this, then fine. However, if they do, then they or anyone who believes them will NEVER duplicate Bessler's design!
The "connectedness principle" would seem to imply some type of cording.
ReplyDeleteDEFINITELY!
DeleteBessler mentions HIS "Connectedness Principle" when he states in the notation with MT9 that this principle would allow Leupold's weighted lever wheel to run by compensating for that wheel's LACK of interconnecting "belts or chains" between its weighted levers.
Cords are lighter and easier to work with than either belts, chains, or ropes, yet they are also very strong. It's important to make sure that no two cords rub against each other as a wheel's drum rotates because this will quickly fray the cords and cause them to prematurely fail.
Connectedness implies temporary cooperative travel and adverse travel by the same constituents .
DeleteWell TG sounds to have made a heck of a lot of progress which is more than I can say for the rest of us on this forum and all the others (JC and Chris excluded "for now"). Since there is some, albeit very little, evidence that the portraits were the work of Bessler or commisioned by Bessler, we can't exclude the possibility that the portraits contain clues meant to help. I suspect that everyone has their own unique idea on how to solve the riddle, and we are far apart from each other. TG is very vocal because he is swo confident in his approach, and he is achieving results. I say we back off on the criticism and give him some credit for all his hard work.
ReplyDeleteYes, I have made a lot of progress but I'm still not there yet at the end of the "right track".
DeleteI now believe that a have ALL of the details of the "Secret Principle"; that is, exactly how the springs were used in Bessler's wheels and the correct attachment points and k value range for them. But, just when I discovered that and thought I was 100% of the way to the end of the "right track", I found a problem with one of the cord attachment points on the weighted levers (wrong location) that prevented the Secret Principle from working properly! So, I'm still only 99% of the way there! But, that is how reverse engineering Bessler's wheels works: you take a step forward, then another step, then another and, then, all of a sudden, you slide BACK three steps! It can be infuriatingly frustrating at times.
But the secret of coping with it is to keep your eyes on the prize and keep moving! I'm now in the process of readjusting one of the attachment points on my "magic" levers and, God willing, this will FINALLY get me 100% of the way to the end of the "right track" at which point I will be viewing Bessler's secret wheel mechanism steadily completing one 45 degree increment of drum rotation after another while continuing to keep the CoM of its 8 weights "rock solid" on the drum's descending side. IF that happens, then it will be time to CELEBRATE!
Assume I have a coil spring that is completely compressed when I set a 2kg weight on it. Further assume that the weight of the spring is negligeable compared to the weight of the spring. Also assume that the height of the spring when compressed is also negligeable.
ReplyDeleteNow I set both the spring and the weight on a scale side by side. The reading on the scale reads 2kg. I remove the spring and the weight so the scale resets to 0 and then I put the spring back on the scale but this time I put the weight on the spring compressing it. Again the scale reads 2kg.
What's the difference?
The scale wouldn't be sensitive enough to measure the mass the spring gains after compression.
DeleteRight , tg?
The assumptions for the spring are meant to convey their irrelevance in relation to their usage.
DeleteShould have said "... in relation to the springs usage".
DeleteYou're preaching to the choir in my case. I was giving the answer tg would give to your question.
DeleteBut, springs may be irrelevant in your scale example or in a magic wheel, but they do serve a purpose in real machines.
@ Anonymous 00:05
DeleteWhen you drop a weight onto a spring and the spring compresses, there is a momentary "flow" of energy / mass from the weight to the spring as the weight sinks a bit in the Earth's gravity field and loses gravitational potential energy while the spring compresses a bit and gains tensional potential energy. The energy / mass content of the weight / spring "system", however, remains CONSTANT before, during, and after the compression takes place. Well, not exactly since the spring will heat up a bit during the compression and then transfer a very tiny amount of its gained energy / mass to any surrounding air molecules that come into contact with its coils. This loss of energy / mass by the spring will be in the fraction of a picogram range so you can forget about measuring it with a conventional scale.
Springs are an excellent and highly efficient way of temporarily storing energy / mass so that it can be tapped later to perform a bit of necessary work (which raises the energy / mass of the object being worked on). Bessler made extensive use of this principle in order to allow the weighted levers within his wheels to overcome their "sticking points" and thereby remain perpetually OB.
My latest modeling indicates that each of the Merseburg wheel weighted levers only required spring tension in the 4 to 8 lbs per inch range (less than the previous range of 8 to 16 lbs per inch I estimated). If, as I now believe was the case, Bessler used TWO springs on each weighted lever, they each would have been in the range of 2 to 4 lbs which seems "reasonable" to me for a spring that was 6 inches long and 1.5 inches in diameter. This redundancy, aside from lowering the k value needed per spring, might also allow a one-directional wheel or sub wheel to continue to operate (but with decreased average torque) in the event that one of its dual lever return springs failed during drum rotation.
If a weight is going to land on a surface, and a spring is placed in its path, and the weight compresses the spring so that the weight still ends up sitting on the surface (the spring collapses completely), then what you have done is gain potential energy in the spring.
DeleteThat spring had better be some sort of conical type that can completely collapse to form a spiral shape when the weight lands on it! Even so, if the coils have any physical thickness, the weight will not reach the surface and will, therefore, not transfer all of its gravitational potential energy / mass to the spring. But, it might be able to transfer, say, 99% of its energy / mass to the spring.
DeleteJustsomeone says : TG, two things and sorry to burst your bubble. FIRST, Bedsore said his wheel would work without weights or SPRINGS! Second, there are NO clues in the portraits! :) Enjoy the wrong track.
ReplyDeleteSorry phone typing. ' Bessler ' Said.
DeleteThose "weights" and "springs" Bessler said that his wheels would work WITHOUT only refer to the kinds of power sources used in CLOCK movements (which he was very familiar with); that is, it refers to weights whose attached cords would be wrapped around the internal axles of wheels or to tightly wound spiral mainsprings that would power clockwork mechanisms hanging from the internal axles of wheels in order to make their drums rotate (which is how Wagner did it with his fake version of Bessler's wheel).
DeleteObviously, being GENUINE WORKING OB PM gravity wheels, Bessler's wheels did NOT use THOSE types of weights and springs. However, his wheels DID use lead weights (remember how he removed one and wrapped it in a hankerchief so the examiners of the Merseburg wheel could feel its weight?) AND helical springs (remember the incident when the unweighted lever slipped out of his hand and made a loud cracking sound as it hit an internal stop inside of the drum?).
My "bubble" remains intact and CONTINUES to inflate with each small step closer to the end of the "right track"!
@Justsomeone,
ReplyDeleteI think you are misstating Bessler's comments about the springs. I don't have JC's book handy but I think the comment was more about how they were used. I will see if I can find what I am thinking about and reply later.
Bedsore ... I thought you were referring to Bessler as ole Bedsore ... hehehe
I see TG replied with the answer I was looking for.
ReplyDeleteMy point above about the spring and the weight is that gravity can compress the spring for you by pushing/pulling the weight down, and it is up to you how you want to use the energy stored in the spring.
ReplyDeleteGravity does NO work. The spring was compressed by the weight which sacrificed some of its own energy / mass to do the work of compressing the spring. Gravity only served to "enable" this process to occur.
DeleteSo, on the one hand TG says gravity does NO work. On the other hand no less an authority than the Massachusetts Institute of Technology says it does (W = mgΔh), see http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-01sc-physics-i-classical-mechanics-fall-2010/potential-energy/MIT8_01SC_coursenotes13.pdf.
DeleteI wonder who could be right and who wrong?
TG, I would like to run something by you.
ReplyDeleteI know Bessler stated his wheel did not contain weights and spring like in a clock (something to that effect). However I don’t think he said anything else about his wheel behaving or not behaving like a clock. What I am wondering is if you have uncovered any information that may indicate the internal wheel (or weight carrying structure) may have moved like a clock. That is, it would stop at each crossbar, the weight reset would occur, then due to the overbalance of weight, the wheel would advance to the next position, and the process would repeat itself. Gearing could have been added to produce a smooth running outer wheel, like the hands on a clock. Let me know your thoughts.
Thanks, Rick
No, the motion of the weighted levers within a rotating Bessler wheel was smooth and continuous. There were no pauses taking place. The "resetting" happened CONTINUOUSLY THROUGHOUT each 45 degree increment of drum rotation. The CoM of an active wheel's weights was ALWAYS OB as a consequence. Forget about any gears being inside of his wheels. All they contained were weights, wooden levers, brass bearings, steel pivots, steel springs, and, of course, CORDS. That's it.
DeleteOn page 265 of Apologia Poetica Bessler says “And so, amongst other skills, I gradually learned how to make clocks, blow glass, paint pictures and do copperplate engravings”
ReplyDeleteIf the copperplate portraits of Bessler are not portraits commissioned by Bessler himself or say someone like Karl, signed by the artist who drew them, according to custom and in the usual manner, as I suggested they might be, will someone explain to me why Bessler paid the brothers Christian Fitzsch to do something he could do himself?
TG perhaps you’d like to?
TG
DeleteAre you saying Bessler was capable of producing a self-portrait in pen or pencil on paper and taking it along to an engraver to copy, but he was incapable of doing the same drawing on a copperplate and taking that along to the printers to be printed?
JW
TG
DeleteI think you will find Bessler’s ‘greatest gift to humanity’ is in fact the work of Christian Fitzsch
Sorry
JW
Yes, Bessler learned how to paint and do copper plate engravings. However, that does not mean he was able to do portrait work. I can paint very nice landscapes (one of which hangs in my living room and shows a dazzling mountain "mirror lake" scene). However, when I try to do portrait work, the results are rather disappointing.
DeletePerhaps Bessler had this same problem and decided to let a professional artist to the portraits of him. Or, maybe Bessler did just the background / foreground work in the two DT portraits and then let Christian Fitzsch add the hands and face and then put his signature on the work.
We may never know any of this for certain and it's really not that important in terms of reverse engineering Bessler's wheels. I focus on the information content of the portaits, not their aesthetics.
Some points I take to be fact:
ReplyDeleteBessler admitted his wheels had springs, but not wound for clockwork drive.
I agree 'connectedness' does not have to be cords.
I believe Bessler said the wheel 'motion' (its continuing rotation, to my mind) can be gleaned by combining drawing elements to find a 'movement' , that is a kick or swing or jump etc. of an internal part/parts thats unexpected/unforseen/counter intuitive/or novel to the viewer. And of course useful.
I also think it may be the portrait(s) link to the books/writings in that they have a pointer/key/clues to the resolution they contain, but not the 'secret' itself.
Regards
Jon
As you say, "Connectedness" does NOT have to be made using cords (and apparently wasn't in the case of Asa Jackson's wheel), but in the case of Bessler's wheels, it was.
DeleteTo make a wheel's continuous power output as high as possible, one wants to keep as much mass as far from its axle as possible. This is why the weights in Bessler's wheels, when resting on their rim stops on a drum's descending side, were practically right up against the inside wall of the drum's periphery. I estimate an air gap of only about 1 inch between one of the 4 lb lead weights of the Merseburg wheel and the inner wall surface of its drum's periphery.
That is somewhat tight, but would allow enough space to assure that the weights would not rub against the inner surface and that the rim stops would not have to extend too far out into the interior of the drum which would then begin to compromise their stability as a 4 lb weight applied its weight to them.
I believe that most of his drums' wooden frame components were simply glued together. Such a structure, AS A WHOLE, can be very strong and rigid, but INDIVIDUAL joints, if not reinforced with nails, screws, or pins, can be sensitive to the shocks of sudden impacts. This is yet another reason to believe that Bessler's wheels did not use impacts to achieve their motion.
Another disappointing setback for me.
ReplyDeleteIn my comment of 28 August 2012 04:58, I mentioned that I believed that I had "ALL" of the details of Bessler's "Secret Principle" which governs the use of spring tension within his wheels. I then said that, despite this, the principle was not working because my "magic" lever probably had a misplaced cord attachment point on it.
I was WRONG! Further testing showed conclusively that my lever's shape is fine and the problem is that I STILL do not have "ALL" of the details of the Secret Principle! That mistaken belief was based upon an interpretation of a newly discovered DT portrait clue which, obviously, I did not CORRECTLY interpreted.
This typical incident illustrates the extreme difficulty of working with the DT portrait clues and why, as I've previously said, one should ALWAYS distrust his INITIAL interpretations of ANYTHING in them! I need to start following my OWN advice! LOL!
So, it's back to more analysis and modeling for me. Just because I don't have "ALL" of the details of the Secret Principle, does not mean that I don't have ANY them yet. The FULL description of the principle is there and, indeed, it MUST be IF Bessler left COMPLETE instructions for duplicating his wheels in those two portraits as I believe he did.
If one interpretation does not work, it's time to move on to the next and so on until one is "reasonably" confident that he has made some progress. How does one "know" he has made REAL "progress" absent a working wheel? Not an easy question to answer. At a minimum, what he has will remain in agreement with a GROWING number of clues and just have a "right" feel about it. But, expect there to be MANY twists, turns, reversals, and dead ends along the way! The "right track" approach to reverse engineering Bessler's wheels is, quite unfortunately, NOT a short and straight line as some might hope it would be!
Remember, if it was actually easy to analyze Bessler's many clues and duplicate his wheels from them, then it would have ALREADY been done LONG ago and we would not need to do any of it now!
Those with a more discerning mind (as Bessler would say) may have noticed an apparent contradiction in my last contribution concerning the potential creator(s) of the two portrait engravings of Bessler. Firstly I suggested that Bessler may have commissioned the works himself (to go in his book DT?) and then asked why would he pay others to do something he could do himself? I will dispel the apparent contradiction by answering my own question.
ReplyDeleteIf Bessler was the commissioner of these works whilst also being an accomplished engraver himself then it was because he was not capable of ‘capturing a likeness’. Portraiture: getting a good likeness, is a very particular skill, a knack or perhaps even a gift? I know many very accomplished artists who simply can’t do it.
The signature on portrait number one has an ‘Sc’ after it, which JC informs us meant that he was a sculptor; he considered himself first and foremost as a sculptor. I suggest that this artist was good at getting a likeness, probably in both 2&3D. This would explain why the background of the image is rather dull and uninteresting; as a portrait artist he spent little time on that, getting a likeness was what counted, to him and his clients.
The signature on portrait number two does not have an ‘Sc’ after it, which strongly suggests that this artist was not a sculptor and a different person to the artist who created portrait number one. I suggest that this artist was not so good at getting a likeness, which would explain why the rest of the image is much busier and more interesting, perhaps by way of compensation? This would also explain why the face in the second portrait has been carefully torn out. Bessler removed the face because the likeness was no good.
@ TG after writing this piece and before posting it I see that you have already made the very point I was about to make and that you too are an artist of the non-portrait type yourself.
Given that, as you say ‘we may never know any of this for certain’, you seem surprisingly certain.
JW
I, too, have often wondered why there is a hole in the face of the second portrait so that we can see the face of the first portrait through it. One obvious reason that makes sense to me is that the second face must have looked so different from the first that it would have been quite obvious to a viewer that the two portraits were done by different artists despite the same artist's name attached to both.
DeleteBut, then again, maybe this was done on purpose by Bessler to deliver some sort of symbolic message to his readers. By using the exact same face on both portraits, perhaps Bessler was saying to his audience that he was equally "comfortable" in the world of the wealthy intellectual (denoted by the books and rich clothing) as he was in the world of the craftsman (denoted by the tools and drafting implements). In other words, he was taking the opportunity with the publication of DT to express his personal opinion of himself.
I wish we had all of the details of Bessler's life and the times that he lived in. Sadly, our knowledge is and, most likely, will remain "fragmentary" unless and until JC can uncover some more details about him. At least at this point we have the minimum amount of information that is needed to duplicate his marvelous self-moving wheels. HE made sure of that and it's now up to us to carry through with his desire and restore his reputation to that of being an honest person with a genuine working wheel.
I'm confident that this will eventually happen either through my or someone else's efforts. My "right track" model wheel is now about 99% complete and only learning the last few remaining details of the "Secret Principle" stands between me and final success. But, obtaining those final details to complete the remaining 1% of the journey will require climbing the last and STEEPEST portion of the mountain of work required. I'm almost on my knees PRAYING for success before this Christmas and I'm not really that religious!
JC, finally you return!
ReplyDeleteWhile away, because you did not close the blog, the kindly mice of it ran-riot!
Now, things will be back under the crack of your gentle whip, and not a moment too soon; and thus (excepting for that one case-peculiar) SANITY will again reign!
=======================================================================================
Honorable contributor John Worton, in direct reference to "technoguy", opined in-part as follows:
John Worton 27 August 2012 19:47
* * * * *
"In my opinion TG has latched on to these elements of the portraits, whether or not drawn by Bessler himself, read far more into them than actually exists and gone flying off on a wild goose chase. He is even crazier than you, with all your OTT number 5 stuff.
JW"
Naturally, to my mind (excepting fully for the last half of the last sentence) this is really good stuff indeed!
The ". . . He is even crazier than you, . . ." part being particularly delicious to this writer, what with his most low and apt opinion of it's primary target.
Yes, he does read far more into them than he likely should and, as well, does go off onto flying wild goose chases, after what is far more than that within-cited.
Very fine and well-put but, it only goes so far which is insufficient prima facie because addressing but a minute fraction of the actual, terrible reality, i.e. that 'unendurable' by sane, self-respecting minds, and of which HOW MANY might be left still, I ask? (This being non-rhetorical, it is requiring of A PERCENTAGE as a guess.)
THE PENDULUM SWINGS
Johnny-on-the-spot as usual, matters began with that expect-able from our resident, impudent croaker:
"IF you are NOT using the DT portrait clues in the design of your latest wheel, then, quite frankly, IMO, it is most probably NOT the design that Bessler used! That, however, does not automatically mean that it will not work, a matter which can quickly be determined once its details are revealed."
As usual, coming-up-short as to humility.
And, fittingly, we went from that and much of the silly-like, to this as a tail (so-far!)
* * * * *
"I was WRONG! Further testing showed conclusively that my lever's shape is fine and the problem is that I STILL do not have "ALL" of the details of the Secret Principle! That mistaken belief was based upon an interpretation of a newly discovered DT portrait clue which, obviously, I did not CORRECTLY interpreted."
* * * * *
It is so this time as before, that he "did not CORRECTLY interpreted."
At least there seems to be some honesty of a kind coming from our insufferable, quarter-peculiar.
Clues?
Details of same?
"reverse engineering Bessler's wheels"? (If you had the G-D thing in-hand, THEN you would be able to reverse engineer the thing.)
This FLATULENT WIND has now abated some, but, it will be back a blowing fiercely (and without apology nor any class, as usual), so for it let us trim our sails.
=======================================================================================
continuing from above . . .
ReplyDeleteNow, if I myself might wax somewhat opinionated (and therefor necessarily semi-offensive), according to my little experience and observation???
I will presume the answer to be of the affirmative more-than-less and so, here goes:
Bessler was up to INDUCING nothing!
What are taken by very many as being 'clues', are but informing bits he put here and there, for use by any needing such information after DEDUCING a specific need.
Bessler is teaching us nothing. Such was not his intent; this I hold passionately, provisionally.
All that he left in truth was meant to be but confirmatory, and this strictly after-the-fact of the found need.
(These statements of belief are not meant to pertain to possible encoding, as might be speculated to be found within words; only physical drawings. As to these others, I've no notion. To the experts themselves, I shall leave the matter.)
With each and every new thread, the @technoguy continues his offensive offensive.
All the Best(s)!
James
My obligatory responses are:
Delete"The ". . . He is even crazier than you, . . ." part being particularly delicious to this writer, what with his most low and apt opinion of it's primary target."
YOU found that comment "delicious"? I found it offensive and I'm sure JC was not amused either.
"Yes, he does read far more into them than he likely should and, as well, does go off onto flying wild goose chases, after what is far more than that within-cited."
YOU have absolutely NO idea of exactly what I have discovered in the DT portraits or other images in the Bessler literature and are in NO
position to express ANY sort of valid opinion on my research methods.
"Clues? Details of same?"
The amount of data I have gleaned from the two DT portraits ALONE could almost fill a small volume and is FAR too much to try to release through a blog's comments section. Indeed, releasing the clues I have would have little value to anybody unless he was a 99% "right track" Bessler mobilist (such as I currently am) or had the schematics for
Bessler's wheels in front of him so that he could see what portions of
Bessler's secret wheel mechanism were "justified" by particular clues. Something like that requires a dedicated website or, at a minimum, several webpages the production of which, as I've stated before, will NOT be happening until and UNLESS I am successful in reaching the end the "right track" approach with a WORKING computer sim that I can present along with the schematics. I don't want my work to just become yet more wasted server hard disc space and bandwidth like ALL of the many, many other "wrong track" Bessler designs have become.
"Bessler is teaching us nothing. Such was not his intent; this I hold passionately, provisionally."
Then you and he have much in common! Making a statement like that shows everyone how really IGNORANT you are of the Bessler literature! Bessler did NOT spend months of effort "grinding out" the illustrations of MT because he did not wish to teach people about how his wheels overcame the problems of other "wrong track" designs. He did not put HUNDREDS of hours of effort into encoding the various angles, numbers, and ratios into the DT portraits because he did not want the secret of his wheels eventually being rediscoverd.
"With each and every new thread, the @technoguy continues his offensive offensive."
And with each and every new comment of yours we learn...ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING of value!
"This FLATULENT WIND has now abated some, but, it will be back a blowing fiercely (and without apology nor any class, as usual), so for it let us trim our sails."
I consider this a PERFECT description of YOU!
@Primemignonite
DeleteI looked back at your posts and you seem to offer nothing of substance.
There is a saying that applies here. Those who can, build, those who can't criticize.
At least he does not claim to be the only one on the right track!
DeleteAgreed, but TG's "right track" does not mean right (versus wrong). It is his way of saying "in the direction of Bessler's design" per the interpretation of the clues as he seems them. I also had a problem with this until TG defined the meaning. Since it appears that he is the only one doing extensive clue research with the portraits, I think he can safely make this claim. I don't see why we have to continue to criticize those who make claims about their work. It makes many of us not want to post any details at all, and in the end, we all lose. Who knows when someone's comment might spark a thought with someone else. I don't mean to belittle Primemignonite in any way, and if I did, I sincerely apologize to him.
Delete"Primemignonite" is a classic example of what I call a "psuedo intellectual type" of troll. He believes that using his tiring "eloquence" somehow gives him permission to dump his particular brand of vitriol on whomever he wishes without fear of contradiction or reprisal. As I suggested above, he brings nothing real value to a discussion and is only noise without light. IF this was my blog, he would have had his first few offensive comments deleted as a warning to clean up his act and then, if they continued, his IP address would have been blocked to permanently exclude him from the ongoing discussion!
DeleteIf I read you correctly James, you think that Bessler's clues were designed to confirm that the design of his wheel matched some other later production by someone else and therefore could prove his priority. I agree, but I also think there is more to it than that. I think it had both purposes but without revealing more clues prematurely, I cannot prove it.
ReplyDeleteJC
I think Primemignonite's good natured objective criticism is a breath of fresh air.it helps us get a good look at ourselves so we stay sobour minded.
ReplyDeleteI like humor as much as the next guy and don't mind occasionally being the "target" of such humor. But, even I have my limits and what you consider a "breath of fresh air" I am starting to perceive as a "foul stench" which I associate with the, fortunately, still only occasional visits of "Primemignonite" to this blog.
DeleteYes, truly "good natured" humor is fine with me. But, make no mistake about it. Solving the Bessler wheel mystery will not be accomplished with humor or vitriol disquised as humor. It will take a LOT of dead SERIOUS effort. Anything less than that and the "free energy scene" will look pretty much the same ten years from now as it does today and as it did ten years ago and even one hundred years ago: ABSOLUTELY NOTHING of any real value to show for all of the sincere effort expended.
That would, indeed, be a very tragic outcome and would only serve to strengthen the position of the "no track" skeptics out there that mobilists are all a bunch of misguided fools wasting their time because they have nothing better to do. I'd really hate to see that happen.
@ TG
ReplyDeleteI most certainly do not post anything on JC’s Blogg with the intention of offending anyone. If I have, then here and now I apologise to them unreservedly.
Perhaps I got hold of the wrong end of the stick?
I have the greatest respect for JC and have told him so privately several times. I have also dedicated my website to him. He knows that I agree with him about the importance of The Clue number 5, but that I disagree with him about some of his interpretations of that clue. YOU TG were the one who started the leg-pulling of JC’s obsession with pentagrams calling it, very amusingly I thought, his Pentamania.
TG you will recall that I complimented you on your posts, that I found many of your ideas thought provoking and interesting, that I found myself in agreement with you on many Bessler issues and that I liked your writing style.
I thought the deal was that I was ‘with you’ and against (as it were) JC over the Pentamania and ‘with JC’ and against you (as it were) over the issue of whether springs are vital or not for the functioning of The Gravity Wheel.
I understood that we were engaged in a little banter, a little leg-pulling of the kind so commonly found in the workplace or indeed any gathering of males (are there any females on this Blogg?) I thought we were all taking the rough with the smooth, rolling with the punches, man enough to take criticism and rejection of our work and ideas: You promote and defend your corner; I’ll promote and defend mine. I sincerely believe that you are wrong about Bessler drawing or designing any part of the Christian Fitzsch portraits of him: crazy to believe that.
A short while ago I was advised by one of the anonymous contributors to this Blogg that I was a laughingstock; that all my hard work, my website, is apparently a joke to many. That was a hard one to take, but I took it on the chin. And you TG intimated not so long ago that my Bessler Gravity Wheel website wasn’t even worth a visit, rather patronising! I think you do need to understand that your tone is rather preachy; that you set yourself up to be knocked down. Sometimes James and others do a good job, sometimes they are schoolboy-silly and unnecessarily offensive.
Personally, I enjoy the displays of intellectual pride, yours, mine and everyone else’s – they’re funny!
JW
This question is , of course , based on the assumption that Bessler's device was complicated , encoded , hidden , impossible , unlikely to be rediscovered , etc. The Better question is will I credit Bessler or just pretend that I never saw or read anything that he published . I think most of you already know the answer .
ReplyDeletePART I:
ReplyDeleteHmmm...well if when you wrote that I was "crazier" than JC when it came to my Bessler research, then I guess I would not be offended if, by that term, you meant we were BOTH zealously devoted to the subject rather than mentally unbalanced because of it! Actually, with that definition I would consider myself complimented and, therefore, would realize that you were NOT actually trying to insult us as appeared to be the case in your 27 August 2012 19:47 comment to this blog entry. If that was the way you meant the term to be understood, then no apology is required.
I'm sure that Bessler was routinely described as "crazy" or, more likely, "mad" in his day during his long and truly obsessive search for a self-moving wheel design. His critics, however, were not using that term as an admiring description of his dedication and zeal, but, rather, to label him as a "nut case" for "normal" people to be wary of! "Normal" people being, of course, all of the "sensible" people that KNEW PM was physically impossible and that they should, therefore, not waste any precious seconds of their lives pursuing it when they could be doing "honest" work to support / enrich themselves and their families.
Yes, I am guilty of referring to JC's pursuit of 5 "perpetual motion structure" wheels as "pentamania" in the past. I only did this because, according to my present "right track" approach, such a design is clearly not indicated. I'd like to see him eventually switch over to the 8 weighted lever design of my "right track" approach because I TRULY feel that is the ONLY way he will have ANY hope of success. To compensate him for any slight he may have felt as a result of my descriptive "diagnosis" of his design approach, he should feel free to refer to my approach as "octamania" whenever he wants and I will not be offended because that is EXACTLY what it is! LOL!
If I stated that your Bessler Gravity Wheel website was not even worth a visit, then I do apologize for that remark. I probably went there and realized that it was not in sync with my own "right track" approach and therefore declared it as "wrong track" and not worthy of taking seriously. I do apologize for that and will try to avoid doing so in the future.
I have recently refined my definition of what does and does not constitute "right" and "wrong" track designs. Mainly, after reviewing the evidence in support of the genuiness of the Asa Jackson wheel, I can now fully accept that a design that MY research requires me to label as "wrong track" may, indeed, be "right track" as far as obtaining a WORKING PM device OTHER than the one that Bessler found is concerned. So, while I might still have to reject your approach as "wrong track" as far as Bessler's wheel design is concerned, that does not mean that it would be "wrong track" in a "universal" sense of the term and, therefore, could NEVER lead to ANY kind of working device. IF your design is now complete, then that determination can be quickly made via precise physical construction or glitch free computer modeling.
Well said TG.
DeleteTG, can you give me your opinion on this.
ReplyDeleteI proceed on the basis that all weight shifting designs (such as MT9 thru MT16) have a net zero gain. The energy gained thru overbalance is equal to the energy required to set/reset the shifting weights. These types of wheels may or may not self start, and if they are spun by hand, they will at best, rotate until friction brings them to a stop.
Let us assume that by adding springs in some way will allow a wheel to rotate continuously and have a net gain of energy to perform work.
I say that the net gain in energy of this type of wheel must come entirely from the released energy of the springs. One could argue that the springs merely give that little extra impetus at the right time to allow the wheel to rotate and produce more energy than what is provided by the springs. First, this logic violates the first law of thermodynamics, and second, if this were true, then you should be able to remove the springs and manually start the wheel and take some of the energy produced and feed it back into the system to shift the weights and keep the wheel running.
I am in no way attempting to discredit the use of springs. I am only attempting to ascertain the real source of the energy in this type of design. If springs are the source, then we might want to explore simplistic non "right track" designs as well.
Think of the "right track" approach this way:
DeleteANY OB wheel, because its descending side weights drop faster ON AVERAGE than its ascending side weights rise, will output excess energy / mass which can then be used to power outside devices (any outputted energy / mass is ultimately taken from the total energy / mass content of ALL of the weights in the wheel and just transfered to the outside devices). The problem is to find a way to "reset" the wheel's internal weights so that the OB of their CoM will be MAINTAINED on the wheel's descending side as the wheel rotates which, of course, will cause its weights to continuously lose and thereby output energy / mass.
Now, through cord interconnections, it is possible to recover a portion of an OB PM wheel's outputted energy / mass and use it to shift its weighted levers about so as to continuously raise its weights' CoM as it begins to fall with wheel rotation. However, in practically EVERY design I have ever seen or personally worked with, the process by which the outputted energy / mass is tapped in order to reset a rotating wheel's dropping CoM is a VERY inefficient one. This results in a CoM that does not rise at a rate EQUAL to the rate at which the design of the wheel forces it to drop. The CoM of such a wheel will, inevitably, just sink to the punctum quietus below its axle and the wheel will stop turning as the net torque acting on its axle drops to zero. (On rare occasion, I have encountered designs that did maintain OB, but had to do so by using ALL of their outputted energy / mass to reset their weights' CoM. Such designs can do no outside work and are always eventually stopped by air and bearing drag. They are useless in terms of producing any sort of PM whether or not it perform outside work.)
Bessler's design, however, cleverly compensates for that inefficiency and the inevitable results it produces. Rather than wasting precious outputted energy / mass by having its components produce a lot of useless noise and heat (this can, unfortunately, not be completely eliminated), his design uses that energy / mass to sequentially stretch springs that are attached to the weighted levers. Then, when extra energy / mass is needed to shift the weighted levers so as to maintain the OB of the weights' CoM that energy / mass is immediately available for use. There is no "sticking point" as one of his wheels rotates through an increment of its drum's rotation (an increment being 45 degrees of rotation). MOST IMPORTANTLY, Bessler's "right track" design only uses a PORTION of its weights outputted energy / mass for the continuous resetting of its weighted levers during drum rotation. There was enough left over to allow the Weissenstein wheel to output energy / mass at the rate of 25 watts as the drum rotated at 20 rpm's and operated a primitive "Archimedean screw" type water pump.
The shifting of his wheel's 8 weighted levers was a smooth and continuous one and the CoM of their 8 weights stayed FIXED in space on the wheel's descending side during rotation and would remain there until the growing CF acting on the weights began to interfere with the efficiency of the stretching spring energy / mass recovery system and forced the weights' CoM to rotate down and toward the punctum quietus.
Adding ...
ReplyDeleteRather than using springs to aid in the shifting of weights to create an overbalanced wheel, weights (and gravity) would be used to compress springs and the spring energy would be used to propel the wheel.
Something like that MIGHT be possible, but that is NOT the way Bessler did it. Such a method would require the springs to push against something that was fixed (relative to a rotating axle) either inside or outside of the drum. The drums of Bessler wheels were "self-contained" and, aside from the vertical axle supports, independent of their environment. Also, he has assured us that:
Delete"In a true Perpetuum Mobile everything must, necessarily, go round together. There can be nothing involved in it which remains stationary on the axle." (AP, pg. 361)
which eliminates the possibility of there being a fixed point within the drum for expanding springs to push against.
That cracking noise heard during the Merseburg test was due to an unweighted lever under spring tension suddenly slipping out of Bessler's lubricant coated fingers and slapping against a stop attached between two of the lever's radial drum support members. Such violent impacts were NOT a normal part of the wheel's operation, but they DO indicate his "right track" design incorporated weighted levers under constant spring tension. (See my comment above for a general description of how Bessler's wheels used spring tension.)
HOW Bessler's wheels utilized spring tension is described by his "Secret Principle" [my name for it] which I am currently struggling to rediscover. The clues which describe it are probably the most difficult to decode in all of the Bessler literature. But, I am confident that they can eventually be successfully and correctly decoded. It's just a matter of time and effort...one FINAL climb up the steepest portion of the "right track" approach for me..sort of like climbing 99% of the way up a mountain along a 45 degree grade only to discover the remaining 1% of your climb will be along a 70 degree grade!
What we need is a counterweight which vanishes from 6 to 12 o'clock ... and a primary weight that does the same .
ReplyDeleteThat would, indeed, be nice and somewhat reminds me of how Newton's PM wheel was supposed to work. He suggested using some sort of shielding to eliminate / reduce the weight of masses attached to the ascending side of a wheel in order to achieve OB and, consequently, a net torque on the axle and PM.
DeleteNot being able to do that (yet!), the best we can hope for is to find an interconnected array of weighted levers which, via careful cord interconnections and spring tension, manages to maintain its weights' CoM continuously on the wheel's descending side. Bessler found it. Now so must we!
Bessler never said he achieved P.M. via overbalance . He said he found the principle ( a virtue ) in the New Testament and built it into a wheel . This physical expression , which seems to be something simple like thrift for instance . He said a mechanic wouldn't understand it and that advanced mathematics was not required . He said if you know how to lightly throw a heavy thing high you are on the way . If your hard work is spent in the the incorrect way ( without knowing "this" ) then the result will be wasted ... and would have been much more fruitful had you known "this" . TG , I believe that you, John and many others are trapped by your ideas , by the necessity to justify your time and effort and in need of a break .
ReplyDeleteNo OB? Then how do you explain away these quotes from AP, pg. 363?
Delete"...it runs according to 'preponderance', and turns everything else along with it; as long as its materials shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord."
"On one side it is heavy and full; on the other empty and light, just as it should be."
Certainly sounds like OB to me.
When one is 99% of the way to FINAL success, that is NOT the time to take a break!
I cannot believe that you people are still defining a perpetual motion machine as overbalanced . The concept of overbalance was originally conceived by a fantasy of some very unscientific people . You simply cannot lift those weights which you think will power your wheel by their positions back up to the positions they need to be in to fall again . Bessler didn't come up with a magic lever which does this . Bessler effectively admits that there is less weight on what is supposed to be the " heavy side " of his wheel ... or that basically no matter what particular position the weights are in that they contribute to the rotation . Bessler's wheel did not need to be overbalanced because he found a way to lift a heavy weight with a lighter one . What you are trying to do is lift an equal weight with an equal weight by position . In Bessler's wheel a pound is lifting more than a pound ... either by position or velocity , but not equal weight or overbalance .
DeleteYour O.B. weights , for more than 50% of their travel are doing nothing but inhibiting your invention . When you find a way to make those rising weights contribute to the work of lifting themselves up ...well then you will be called an even greater artist than Bessler .
Delete"In Bessler's wheel a pound is lifting more than a pound..."
DeleteOh, I DO agree. However, I believe that at the start of each 45 degree increment of drum rotation, it was the 7:30 weighted lever that began lifting the FOUR other weighted levers at the 9:00, 10:30, 12:00, and 1:30 positions back toward their rim stops. This was only possible because all of those weighted levers had been VERY carefully counterbalanced against each other by a combination of their own weight AND the springs attached to them.
If one could reach into the Merseburg wheel's drum when it was stationary and touch the weight at its drum's 9:00 position, he would discover that it was very light and could be easily lifted with only ONE finger! Needless to say, the single 7:30 weighted lever would have no trouble lifting that 9:00 weighted lever and all those attached to it as it was carried along to the 9:00 position of the drum during CW rotation.
Chris,
DeleteAssuming Bessler's one-directional wheels were self starting, there are only two ways I think this could happen: Either the weights shifted outward to a greater radius on the descending side (as in designs like MT9) or all the weights stayed at the same radius but more were positioned and maintained on the descending side (something along the lines of the Keenie design). If you have another theory please let us know.
Oh yes, I have another theory/design in mind ... several in fact and none of them are to be considered " overbalanced " . The main theme of Bessler's description/clues seems to me to be that the weights were kept from their resting place ( which most envision to be @ 6 o'clock position ) ... yet from certain notable texts such as when he addresses The Hobbler who is critical of his design : in a lot of places some ounce is missing and some extra ounce ...etc ... implies that the configuration of the weights (irrespective of "side" ) is inconsequential to the main wheel (which holds it's course serenely without "turning a hair").
DeleteWill we be hearing from the Hobbler:
DeleteYou folks can see, the work of law;
It's not a lot of art to it. x
Silent quiet you Gump, let thy babbling,
And do not wear miss favor.
I have speculated with power
I also thought Up such a work;
I melted away and is little time
Before I so simple eye sunbathe.
Yes, now it is in such a state,
That a bad Master's hand
Without tearing everything great head
Things will weld together;
And can (before you know it is mistaken;)
The plant manufacture happened;
It can also be felt
Not even to calculate artificial;
To which, if not everywhere,
The imbalance will not matter
So that counts for a lot of places
Also many ounce, which is missing here.
It will work however keep its course,
And make not a hair on it.
When Bessler talks about sides, I wonder if he is really talking about sides as in left/right or descending/ascending. Maybe he means inside and outside as in two concentric rings of weights. Rick
Delete"It will work however keep its course,
DeleteAnd make not a hair on it."
Hmmm...that word for word translation suggests a new interpretation of this line. Rotationwise, Bessler is telling us his wheels will turn at a steady rate and not deviate from that rate. He is also telling us that, when properly mounted and balanced (some what like a modern automobile tire!), his wheels will not wobble as they rotate.
Not saying the above ... he is saying that the position of the weights does not affect the rotation ... or what would seem to be underbalance or negative imbalance .
DeleteI can't simply block an IP address and any way I prefer to keep a light hand of censorship on my blog and trust that people will maintain normal standards of respect and politeness with each other. Having said that I have no objection to the usual banter found in everyday life appearing from time to time.
ReplyDeleteThere is the word 'logorrhoea', which may be applied to some comments and although I understand that the poster has a message he or she wishes to get across, I must admit that I tend to skip through the longer ones and perhaps miss some important details. I find my own postings sometimes have to be considerably curtailed upon subsequent reading and perhaps the advice a publisher once gave me should apply - what ever you write can usually be cut in half without losing the essential message. No offence toward anyone intended.
JC
I'm probably the biggest "offender" here when it comes to the length of my comments! And, I DO try to keep them short! But, often, I find that I can not answer someone's question or explain what I'm up to in sufficient detail unless I make my fingers "dance" across my keyboard. However, I shall try to keep my comments as short as possible in the future since I do want as many people to read my comments as possible.
DeleteYou can't block IP addresses! Now that's what EVERY troll out there LOVES to read!
Yes John I agree,..I am in favour of short logical dynamic statements,straight to the point,without the use of technical abreviations or mathematics.
ReplyDeleteThen again are we likely going to reveal our latest most treasured discovery that had demanded many hours of research!?
Probably not Trevor! :-)
DeleteJC
to John Worton
ReplyDelete"(are there any females on this Blogg?) "
yes, there are. me. am building physically and simulating as well (thanks TG for mentioning Working Model 2d, started using that lately). had been using Physion (free, get at physion.net).
agree with TG that there are definitiely some wrong tracks, as seen in Baskara Wheel, Honnecourt, etc. however, don't agree with TGs definition of right track. think that looking into torque and energy (classical physics) provides best clues. all this symbolism searching stuff you guys are into seems more fitting for an old lady like myself, but obviously we live in times where things are topsy turvy.
cheers Mimi
Welcome to Orffyreus BLACK HOLE.
DeleteWelcome to JC's blog, Mimi.
DeleteI was very pleased to read that something in one of my comments prompted you to try WM2D. It's now become my main modeling / sim program and I hope your example will get more "build only" type mobilists to give simulations a try.
The concept of "right track" and "wrong track" approaches is, as I've only recently realized, a somewhat subjective one IF one accepts that there are DIFFERENT ways to achieve rotary PM (Asa Jackson's wheel seems to prove this true). Because of the inherent and INTENTIONAL ambiguity of the Bessler clues, every BESSLER mobilist will "see" something different suggested by them and will wind up traveling down HIS or HER own PERSONAL "right track" toward what he or she hopes will be the destination of achieving a WORKING PM gravity wheel (note that I left the "OB" part out of that since some actually believe his wheels were NOT OB!). In the end, however, if Bessler only had a single mechanism that he used in both his one- and two-directional wheels (I believe this to be the case), then only ONE of these MANY different "right track" approaches will be THE one he used and the lucky Bessler mobilist who pursued it will be rewarded by being the FIRST person since Bessler to duplicate his wheels!
Once, again, Mimi, welcome to JC's blog and please do continue to contribute if you can. If you care to share the generalities or details of YOUR "right track" approach, then that would be great too! The more mobilists who contribute here, the better.
Welcome Mimi, we do get the occasional female visitor but they usually disappear after a short while. Glad to know you are building physically as well as simulating. Personally, I don't think you can beat the hands-on approach to this subject and I think it's very informative to handle the pieces and observe their actions and limitations.
ReplyDeletePlease comment freely and let us know how you are gettin on.
JC
Welcome Mimi, I am delighted to learn there is at least one female interested in this subject and following this blogg. The fact that you are building too makes it even more of a pleasure.
ReplyDeleteGood luck with your work.
JW
Vincent, John and John: thank you for your kind words of welcome. I have been lurking here for a long time, and John's question whether there were any females here provoked me to write for the first time. I would love to tell you that I am 99% done with the wheel, because that is just how it feels and I have witnessed others doing that. So far, some setback has always showed up, some unsuspected snag. So, build I will first, then crow. Yes, physical modelling is great to get a feeling for things. Computer simulation allows me to vary the parameters, and then build again.
ReplyDeleteCheers, Mimi
Welcome Mimi, from the other side of the Globe. Nice to see a "mobilistess" here!
ReplyDelete