Recent comments about Bessler's two portraits caused me to review my thoughts about them. The second portrait appears to show someone in front of an organ along with a number of instruments which could belong to the organ-building industry or an alchemist or heaven knows what else. The reason why I tend to favour the organ-builder as the intended subject is because Bessler built organs and attributed much of his success to his knowledge of their construction.
What ever the intention, it is clear that the hole which has been cut so precisely in the second portrait to permit his face in the first portrait to show through with such startling accuracy, seems to me at least to indicate two things. Firstly the second portait already existed, or was commissioned by him; and secondly the first portrait was deliberately designed and executed to allow the precise positioning of his face to match that of the second portrait.
[EDIT - I forgot to say that I think the second portrait was not comissioned by Bessler because it has some text underneath it which has been carefully altered to convey a different meaning. So in my opinion the picture had already been produced some while before Bessler decided to use it.]
[EDIT - I forgot to say that I think the second portrait was not comissioned by Bessler because it has some text underneath it which has been carefully altered to convey a different meaning. So in my opinion the picture had already been produced some while before Bessler decided to use it.]
There are only six examples of the double portraits known to date and they are all produced with the same precision. This suggests that both portraits were designed to appear together and the first one was deliberately drawn with the subject's head an exact match to both size and position of that in the second one. Presumably Bessler wished to present himself in two lights, firstly as the persona in the first portrait and then as an alternative one in the second. The two personas (or personae if you prefer) being different ones.
Now I have commented before on the slightly odd look to Bessler's left arm and hand in the first portrait; it appears to be almost a disembodied part of Bessler himself. Also there is the impression that the arm originally was intended to come down from his left shoulder at a higher angle, meeting near to his right hand at approximately the same level. Bessler's coat or cloak shows slight rumpling along the higher line as if it originally contained the arm.
In my opinion the arm was later corrected to its current lower position to allow the inclusion of the alignment with the pentagram as shown in my web site at http://www.theorffyreuscode.com/html/bessler_s_portrait.html
There are further speculations about the portrait at http://www.theorffyreuscode.com/html/2nd_portrait.html which may be of interest in considering the meaning of the symbols in the first portrait.
The main question in my mind is this; what information do people think the symbols in the first portrait are intended to convey? A jar or gourd, a skull and a book. Any suggestions?
JC
10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.
Dual qualification
ReplyDeletemedicine,craftsman
Yes you may be right, Vincent. Sometimes I look for more meaning than is actually intended.
ReplyDeleteJC
All wrong sounds cocky of me but I have definitely figured out how he come to have his wheels at the width they were the portrait in which he is in he is saying circles within circles drawn within the circle the lenses he holds means the weights acting in pairs the old portrait and the new ones he is saying that one may be a old portrait but consists of the same method to build as the later wheels he built and u have to totally disregard newton bullshitlaws they just limit us from creating anything that is not symmetrical that works against itself and it’s very easy to work around Newton’s third law and that is by making the wheel andmarchanism symmetrical but not y to hard all il say sorry but if people came to see in person I can show you that I’ve nailed path of method ge used as I’ve figured out how his wheel was so skinny in width and worked outright why his weights where as heavy as they were all I will say is the wheel tell you how to design it if you go about it outside of using Newton’s third law fix nothing somewhere it can give equal opposite reaction
DeletePART I:
ReplyDelete"The main question in my mind is this; what information do people think the symbols in the first portrait are intended to convey? A jar or gourd, a skull and a book. Any suggestions?"
A THOROUGH explanation of ALL of the symbols in the two DT portraits and their CORRECT meanings would require an entire website by itself! However, I will briefy explain the 1st portrait table symbols to finally eliminate their mystery.
The book represents the weighted lever at the 10:30 position of a CW rotating drum. Note that it is angled somewhat like the hour hand of a clock when the time is 10:30.
Bessler's LEFT hand represents the 9:00 weighted lever because the curling fingers of that hand point to the word "Orfyrreus" below the portrait which contains 9 letters. Note that his left hand only lightly touches the book with its thumb. This indicates that the 10:30 lever is easily lifted into position by the 9:00 weighted lever. This is only possible because the counterbalancing that it experiences greatly reduces its weight.
The skull represents the 3:00 weighted lever because it is a death symbol and the most famous death in history was that of Jesus which, as most Christians know, took place at 3 pm in the afternoon (actually, the "9th hour" counting from sunrise which is assumed to have been at 6 am). A vertical line drawn upward from the empty eye socket of the skull will intersect the THIRD button on Bessler's jacket cuff which further verifies that the skull represents the 3:00 weighted lever. The skull provides all of the support for the book and its large curving top edge indicates that the 10:30 weighted lever is, via a series of interconnecting cords, connected to and counterbalanced by the 3:00 weighted lever.
The vase (which you call a "gourd") represents the 7:30 weighted lever because its axis is angled somewhat like an hour hand when the time is 7:30. It does not directly touch the book and, therefore, is not actively participating in the raising of the 10:30 weighted lever into its position. On the shelves behind and to Bessler's right side there are five levels that can hold four items each for a total of 20 items on the shelves (some of these items are hidden by the curtain). Note that the 20th item is missing and, presumerably, is the book Bessler has on the table. The highest point on the lip of the vase's opening (which contains the axis of the vase) touches the right edge of the 19th item on the shelves which is a book. That right side edge of the book's spine can be thought of as being HALFWAY between the 19th and 20th items on the shelf. Thus, the vase's axis points to a location BETWEEN the 19th and 20th items on the shelves. Halfway between 19 and 20 is 19.5. On a clock dial this corresponds to the position of an hour hand when the time is 19:30 hours or 7:30 pm!
the vessel/body
Deletethe dead
the book
the "book of dead"
turn the pictures upside down
Deletealso copy each on copy paper then transposed over the other
what do you see now
PART II:
ReplyDeleteBessler's RIGHT hand represents the 1:30 weighted lever. The extended index finger represent the number 1 and the tip of his bent middle finger only shows HALF of that finger protruding out from behind the index finger. The visible half of the middle finger represents 0.5 fingers. Thus, the index finger and the visible half of the bent middle finger represent 1 + 0.5 = 1.5 = 1:30 in clock dial time. This right hand's index finger only points to the book and does not physically touch it. This indicates that there is no direct cord interconnection between the 1:30 weighted lever and the 10:30 weighted lever, but the "beckoning" gesture of Bessler's right hand (such gestures are often used by stage magicians performing levitation illusions!) indicates that the 1:30 weighted lever does play a role in lifting the 10:30 weighted lever into position (through the 12:00 lever, of course).
As an exercise in the analysis of DT portrait symbols, the ambitious reader might try finding the symbols that represent the 12:00 weighted lever.
All of this, of course, only BEGINS to scratch the very surface of the VAST number of clues hidden in the two DT portraits!
On reflection, Vincent, I'm not convinced that the first portrait's symbols indicate medicine. The Asclepius staff was a familiar symbol for medicine as was the pestle and mortar and even the serpent, and there was no reason for Bessler to use something more vague since he always stressed his talent in medicinal activities.
ReplyDeleteAcording to wikipedia, since the 16th century, the use of both the staff of Asclepius, and the caduceus of Hermes, were consistently used in printing books concerned with medicine.
So I'm still hoping for other suggestions.
JC
Bessler earned much of his income being what, today, we would call a
Delete"compounding pharmacist". Those various bottles and jars on the shelves behind him in the first portrait would have been filled with the raw ingredients that he would have been combining to make the "medicinals" he was selling. Most of his sales would have been to local doctors so they could hand them out to patients, but, on occasion, "Doctor" Bessler would have prescribed and provided them to his own patients or even to himself.
@ TG
ReplyDeleteI have now had several more days to consider your proposal, indeed your assertion that Bessler ‘must have’ executed the foreground and background to his portraits and then taken the unfinished copperplates along to the brothers Christian Fitzsch to complete (because he was incapable of capturing his own likeness).
Frankly, your contention is preposterous; both to me and to every artist friend I have consulted on the matter. When I have presented your argument to them, they have, to a man and woman, and I might add without a moment’s hesitation, responded with “No, that didn’t happen”. Artists simply don’t work like that, I should know, I am one.
When you guys (and Mimi!) start banging on about the various merits of computer programmes or the calculation of frictional losses or whatever, I bow to your superior knowledge. I haven’t studied it; I don’t know what you are talking about. However, when it comes to the study of pictures you are on my patch, in my area of expertise. I have two degrees in the subject, at one stage in my life I lectured undergraduates on the subject, and I have lived and worked as an artist for 35 years.
Anything of course is possible. It might be the case that our Johann and the brothers Christian were the greatest of pals, getting together in the evenings to sing a few hymns and swap bible stories, planning artistic adventures together, scratching out a few engravings together now and again. It is equally possible that Bessler always had fish and chips on a Friday, always wore long cotton socks (because all the others were ‘itchy’) and that he had a dog called Fred. All such speculations are however, (at least in my mind), beyond the usual guiding principles of research.
A far more likely scenario than the one you propose is that the engravings are ‘of the studio’ of Christian Fitzsch, signed by him but executed by an apprentice. This is convention; this is art history; this is known to have occurred. I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but it remains a distinct possibility that you may never know the name of the true author of your Bessler Portrait Theory.
JW
I think you may have what was done to create the portraits reversed.
DeleteBessler may have had Christian Fitzsch or his student FIRST engrave Bessler's face and hands onto a sort of generic figure in the portraits, THEN Bessler executed the remainder of the engravings and added various back and foreground objects in precise locations. He would also have added the clothing that he wears in both portraits.
Perhaps for the first portrait he simply stated he wanted HIS left hand to appear to be holding something up while his right hand's index finger pointed to it. For the second portrait he wanted the same face, but both hands had to be on his right side and holding something: his right hand a pair of eyeglasses and his left hand a pair of dividers. He then VERY carefully decided what the remaining objects of each engraving would be and where they would be located.
This technique is often used in modern print advertising. A model is photographed with her palm extended and holding nothing. Later, the photo is "photoshopped" and a product's image is superimposed onto her open palm to give the reader the impression that she actually used the product (which is rarely the case!).
About my order on my desk is big :)
ReplyDeleteInterestingly Bessler symbol is over the head!
K
Dear Mimi, It is good that there are women on this blog
ReplyDeletea lot of strength endurance of the experiment!
K
In the first portrait , judging from the fact that the ( back, right ) corner of the book Bessler has his thumb on is above the table ( you can see the area underneath the book )... he is saying that he has defied gravity ... the book is floating off the table apparently against the force of his thumb .
ReplyDeleteWell observed! I could go with that. I would agree with you more enthusiastically were it not for the fact that there are so many other 'floaty' and 'unfinished' parts to the image.
DeletePut that down on your list of possibilities JC
JW
I don't see the lower back right corner of the book "floating off" of the table. It looks like it is in contact with the table just as is the lower front right corner. I see the thumb and index finger of his left hand preventing the book from sliding to the right and off of the skull which fully supports it.
DeleteI can tell you are not an artist TG ... look HARDER !
DeleteI have, Chris, and the bottom edge of the book STILL looks like it is COMPLETELY in contact with the table's surface to me. I do notice, however, that it appears that Bessler messed up the engraving of the book itself (more evidence that he added the foreground images in the DT portraits)! The left top edge of the book is longer than its right bottom edge. This disobeys the laws of perspective which require that the bottom edge, being closer to the viewer than the top edge, be longer than the top edge.
DeleteI can forgive Bessler for not being the best artist in the world considering that he most definitely WAS one of the best mobilists of history (the other being Asa Jackson, of course)!
Have you ever considered that Bessler himself had no clues to go by, and still he found out how to make the wheel... The principle is: gain more energy from the torque created by the asymmetry than is needed to arrange the weights asymmetrically to create the torque. Feedback and regulation. There are probably countless ways of doing this.
ReplyDeleteBeing a true pioneer of PM, Bessler, as you suggest, would NOT have had any clues to go by. All he knew was that he wanted to find an arrangement of weighted levers that would continuously maintain their CoM on a wheel's descending side during the wheel's rotation.
DeleteHOWEVER, once he accomplished that, he DID become a SOURCE of MANY clues. About 1% of these clues can be found in the NON-DT portrait text and figures. BUT, about 99% of them will be found in the two DT portraits alone. However, they will only be visible to those that have, figuratively, put on a special pair of eyeglasses to make those clues visible. Those "eyeglasses" are put on as one makes a long and detailed study of the portrait symbols, angles, numbers, and ratios.
Yes, you are right about the general principle that must be used in ALL OB PM gravity wheels: one's design MUST use LESS energy / mass to reset its weights by the end of an increment of rotation than is extracted from the weights during that increment. IF this can not be done, then the wheel can NEVER work!
In his "Perpetuum Mobile..." (1861) Henry Dircks hints (rightly or wrongly) that Bessler's wheel was a later version of the Marquis of Worcester's wheel, which was demonstrated to King Charles I. Apparently that wheel was uncovered, and its mode of operation is "explained," see Dircks p34.
DeleteIn modern English spelling, the latter part of the account is:—
"The wheel was 14 feet over, and 40 weights of 50 pounds apiece; Sir William Belford, then Lieutenant of the Tower, and yet living can justify it with several others; they all saw that no sooner these great weights passed the diameter line of the upper side but they hung a foot further from the center, nor no sooner passed the diameter line of the lower side, but they hung a foot nearer; be pleased to judge the consequence.
@ Arktos
DeleteI have made several scale models of the Marquis of Worcesters' PM wheel and it simply does NOT work! It certainly looks like it should, but a careful analysis shows that the CoM of its 40 weights is ALWAYS located directly below its axle and it develops no driving torque as a consequence of this.
I'm sure that, due to the enormous moment of inertia of its TON of weights, giving the orignal wheel a spin would allow it to run for quite a long time on well lubricated bearings. Yes, it would certainly have been an impressive demonstration. The exact same result could have been gotten if its weights had just been fixed to the periphery of the giant wheel and not allowed to swing about during wheel rotation.
I don't recall all of the details of the story, but, IIRC, King Charles I was getting ready to execute the marquis when the latter managed to distract and delay this with the promise of building a nice PM wheel for the king. I wonder how long the marquis lasted AFTER the king realized he had been duped?! LOL!
@TG
DeleteAs I see it, the crucial word in the account is "hung". If this is taken to mean that the weights were just attached differently, and not raised, on crossing the vertical diameter, then the wheel won't work. Of course that is the case for the various present-day illustrations that purport to show this wheel's mechanism.
But if the weights are somehow (how?) raised, with less than full energy penalty, at the top and bottom of the wheel, then of course it will work.
One can find a nice image of the Marquis of Worcester's PM wheel here:
Deletehttp://www.mathapps.net/wheel/wheel.gif
Its forty 50 lb weights were simply hung from the periphery of the 14 ft diameter ONE-directional wheel by short lengths of chain and would swing out farther from the axle on the wheel's descending side (right side in image) and then swing in closer to the axle on the wheel's ascending side (left side in image).
Yes, I know it looks like it HAS to work, but it does not because the CoM of the 40 weights is ALWAYS located directly under its axle. As Arktos notes, the problem is the weights between 6:00 and 9:00 and the ones between 12:00 and 3:00. IF those weights could somehow be made to raise themselves up closer to the axle just as they passed the 6:00 position and farther from the axle as they passed 12:00, then this thing would be able to keep its CoM displaced onto the descending side and the wheel would run continously. Such motion, however, would require that ALL of the outputted energy / mass of the wheel be used and then, of course, there would be none left over to perform any "outside" work.
I hope the marquis had a fast and relatively painless death...kings don't like anybody, even members of the nobility, making a fool out of them!
I don't believe that image portrays the MOW wheel's mechanism. I know, it appears as Fig 27 in Arthur Ord-Hume's book "Perpetual Motion..." and is captioned "A reconstruction of the wheel built by the Marquis of Worcester...[etc]." But Ord-Hume is an unreliable author, to say the least. (JC has caught him out regarding the age of Professor 'sGravesande, the best "hands-on" witness of Bessler's wheel.)
DeleteSo where does that image come from? After some digging I found it in another book by Henry Dircks, titled "The Century of Inventions, Written in 1655; by Edward Somerset, Marquis of Worcester. Being a Verbatim Reprint of the First Edition, Published in 1663. With an Introduction and Commentary."
In this book, Dircks provides that image specifically to show that "it may easily be demonstrated that the conditions stated [i.e. the written description of the MOW wheel] may be mechanically produced without any resulting motion."
I think that image was originally drawn by Dircks, specifically to show a non-working wheel.
In presenting and then attacking an explanation of the MOW wheel which he must have known was never intended to be taken seriously, Ord-Hume is really setting up and attacking a straw man.
"...they all saw that no sooner these great weights passed the diameter line of the upper side but they hung a foot further from the center, nor no sooner passed the diameter line of the lower side, but they hung a foot nearer; be pleased to judge the consequence."
DeleteCertainly sounds like the version of the marquis' wheel that Dircks presented. If you do not accept it as being THE one the marquis constructed, then what is? In any event, I do not accept the Dircks' version, even if it is accurate, as having anything to do with Bessler wheels except maybe that they both sought to maintain an offset CoM. The Dircks' version demonstrates that, like "sphere weight wheels", all "hanging weight wheels" are also doomed to fail. I believe that this commonality of NON-functionality ultimately stems from the LACK of using springs within such wheels to provide a readily available source of energy / mass for use at critical times during wheel rotation, a problem that Bessler's wheels (and also Asa Jackson's!) did NOT suffer from.
Its nice to know that the marquis survived the king's disappointment with his PM wheel and was around long enough to author a book describing it in 1655! On rare occasions, kings will spare an offender's life as a display of their generosity and mercy (but, then again, after his wheel failed, maybe the marquis began to tell Charles I how he had a great idea for turning lead into gold! LOL!).
It seems that many books describing the history of PM tend to be written by skeptics and are biased from the start. I think many of these efforts are the product of disillusioned former mobilists who, having invested years of work with nothing to show for it, finally turned into "no track" skeptics and then hoped to capitalize with one last "contribution" to the subject: an encyclopedic treatment of all of the failed designs down through history.
Rather than serving as guides to prevent future mobilists from rebuilding the same failed designs century after century, these treatments only serve to portray the pursuit as a totally futile one and to empower / embolden the skeptics out there to produce more of their negative "noise". That is why I choose to focus on the SUCCESSES in the history of PM: Bessler and Jackson. It is THEIR efforts which need to have volumes written about them and which need to be studied in MINUTE detail with the hope of replication. If I wanted to become a millionaire, I would certainly prefer to read books about millionaires rather than ones about "down and outers" on poverty row!
@JC
ReplyDeleteI know that a gourd in is supposed to represent The Resurrection of Christ in some famous paintings, that the skull usually symbolises mortality and the ephemeral nature of life and the book represents human knowledge.
I’m sorry to have to say that I do not agree with you about Bessler’s left arm in portrait one looking odd. To me it looks OK. I cannot see any evidence of it having been moved during the pictures construction.
It looks to me like the corner of his cloak is pointing out towards the viewer, judging by the shadow across the top of the book. The extravagant folds in the cloak to which you refer to together with the projecting corner of it to which I refer make a believable space for the book to be in. Bessler is keeping his knowledge under his cloak! How apt!
Believe me, I have looked at loads of pictures exactly like this, this is formularised, standard, normal stuff. There is nothing especially interesting about either image although I imagine that the likeness of Bessler in portrait one is probably rather good, which is why he used it.
I will eat my hat, if it is ever proven to me that either image contains any reference to the workings of The Gravity Wheel (excepting the writing on the spine of the book)
JW
Might I recommend that you sprinkle a bit of salt onto your hat before you proceed to consume it?! LOL!
DeleteBTW. The "writings" on the spine of the book are only indistinct decorative geometric figures. They are not relevant to the internal construction of Bessler's wheels. Note that they do not appear on the other books on the shelf.
I have repeatedly emphasized in past comments how VERY important BOTH cords AND springs were to the construction and operation of Bessler's wheels. There are a variety of clues in the 1st DT portrait that verify this. Let me just briefly describe one of them.
ReplyDeleteFor example, each of the coils in Bessler's wig represents a helical coil spring inside one of his two-directional wheels. One identifies each coil in the wig by its visible circular end loop. There are 16 circular end loops visible on EACH SIDE of his wig and, thus, a total of 32 for the entire wig. This indicates that there were a total of 32 springs inside of each of Bessler's two-directional wheels and that EACH of their one-directional "sub wheels" contained 16 springs. Since each sub wheel only contained 8 weighted levers, this clearly indicates that each lever had TWO springs attached to it which is a conclusion I previously reached from other clues.
If one draws a horizontal line through the centers of the two circular loops at the top of Bessler forehead and extends it to the left side of the portrait, it will touch the bottom of the tassled pull piece of the cord that draws the curtain away from in front of the shelves.
The tassle is made up of MANY small CORDS and this symbol tells us that Bessler's internal wheel mechanics used a LOT of cords. Since a horizontal line directly connects the spring symbols (the circular loops in the wig) with the cord symbol (the tassled pull piece), we are told here by Bessler that BOTH cords AND springs are VERY important to the operation of this wheels and, in fact, work together to make his wheel's run.
The curtain's short pull cord and its attached tassled pull piece also represent the 6:00 weighted lever inside of one of Bessler's one-directional wheels or subwheels (the levers inside of Bessler's wheels were somewhat short...only 1/5 of the radius of a wheel). The pull cord is "pendant" or hanging vertically straight down. This represents the orientation of the weighted levers when they were at the 6:00 position of a CW turning drum.
Note that the tassled pull piece spans the width of the 7th item that can be put on the second shelf. Actually, the pull piece's edges align with and obscure the edges of the 7th item (which appears to be a jar). This indicates that the 6:00 weighted levers inside of Bessler's wheels would REMAIN vertically oriented as they traveled from the 6:30 to 7:30 positions of a CW rotating drum. (Indeed, I have found this to be a critically necessary condition in my model wheels. IF this verticality is not maintained, it pulls the CoM of the model wheel's 8 weights right over to the punctum quietus and ruins the OB.)
Again, I must emphasize that this example is only one of MANY that can be found in the two DT portraits. When ALL of the various symbols, angles, numbers, and ratios encoded into these two portraits are PROPERLY analyzed, the "right track" design that Bessler found and used will emerge. I've now got about 99% of that design!
Truly outstanding work TG. Stick to your beliefs and don't let any of the other self proclaimed experts convince you otherwise. I find it interesting that they admit to seeing some clues when it fits their ideas. This is very telling.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your most kind remark!
DeleteI can not really blame the disbelief that my "right track" approach provokes in some. It is, indeed, a bitter pill to swallow to be told that one has been struggling for years to solve the Bessler wheel mystery and most likely doomed to failure because, all along, he has only been using a VERY small percentage of the clues. No one wants to hear a message like that! I certainly did not want to.
There was a time, years ago, when I was quite confident that I KNEW EVERYTHING important that there was to know about Bessler's wheels. You can imagine the shock I experienced when I finally realized that what I "knew" then was only a TINY portion of what I really needed to know if I wanted to make any progress in solving the Bessler wheel mystery; just the tip of a HUGE and submerged iceberg! Once one finally gets access to the rest of that iceberg sized collection of clues, it's amazing how fast he will begin to make REAL progress!
"I find it interesting that they admit to seeing some clues when it fits their ideas. This is very telling."
DeleteGranted my remark about the 'writing' on the spine did have that appearance. Please remember I had just undertaken to eat my hat. I can see in the "indistinct decorative geometric figures" as TG more accurately described them, the possibility of recognising an element of the working gravity wheel. I was therefore making it clear that I would not be prepared to eat my hat on their account.
I am aware that some believe that the "decorative geometric figures" on the book spine of the first DT portrait actually represent SCISSOR mechanisms and, therefore, these MUST have been what Bessler used in his wheels. IIRC, even JC, in the past, was so persuaded and produced an ingenious wheel using this concept to shift its weights about. No, it did not work or we certainly would have known about it by now! He no longer talks about it.
DeleteWhen I look at those designs on the spine, they just look to me like a diamond shape within a diamond shape between the "ribs" from the middle of the volume down to its bottom. I've owned hardcover books in my time that had that EXACT same design on them!
I'm not sure WHAT book Bessler is holding, but since it is from the bottom shelf and largest shelf it was obviously one that was very important to him and we can imagine that its concepts played a major role in his thinking; that is, its concepts formed a FOUNDATION upon which he based his thinking. Maybe it was a book on geometry, or mechanics, or a Bible. In any event, the book symbol establishes that Bessler knew how to read and was not illiterate as was a very large percentage of the people who came from the lower classes of his day.
TG, you have my sympathy; as you must be aware, I too have had to put up with the dismissal of the clues I too think I've found and deciphered. It's just something we have to endure in the hope that we will proved right in the end - I hope one of us is!
ReplyDeleteJC
I thank you for your sympathy, but I am not upset in the least if my "right track" approach is not immediately and universally accepted by all that become aware of it. I don't expect it to be. In fact, if only 1 in 100 is "receptive" and considers switching over to my approach, then I will be satisfied that I have not wasted my time in presenting it.
DeleteThe clues I focus on are NOT primarily textual, but, rather, are associational and mathematical in nature. Bessler left it up to the hopeful reverse engineering "right track" Bessler mobilists of the future to locate, properly interpret, and then use these many clues to finally reconstruct his wheels. Even when that is finally done, however, there will STILL be those who will deny that it is Bessler's design no matter how many clues are extracted from the portraits or the rest of the Bessler literature in support of it. Even when it is eventually proved that the design works there will remain some who will continue to stubbornly deny it could have been the one Bessler found and used. Most, however, I believe, will eventually accept it as Bessler's design and get on with life.
I wonder if there are any 'alignments' if you overlay bessler's left hand onto the other pic? I notice a possible dot under his finger?
ReplyDeleteAlso the right hand (and I am no artist...) looks a like a 'scissors fingers' gesture? and not a relaxed hand that usually has some curvature to all digits?
Regards
Jon
Yes I agree, the 'scissors finger's' gesture is probably significant, it has a meaning that is lost to us now. I do dimly remember from lectures at art college 35 years ago that different digits sticking out at different angles in a portrait symbolised certain things.
DeleteI really do feel bad guys, like having claimed myself 'the expert' I should be able to rattler this stuff of for you: to be able to say to you, The third finger extended means devotion to God, or something like that.
I am contacting some Art Historian friends of mine to see if I can progress this enquiry further.
JW
In my country extending the middle finger does NOT mean devotion to God! LOL!
DeleteI'm glad you fellows picked up on the "scissor fingers" gesture in the 1st DT portrait. You may also notice that it is REPEATED in the 2nd DT portrait. Yes, I DOES have special significance with regard to the ARRANGEMENT of some of the internal components of Bessler's wheels (and it does NOT symbolize an actual scissor mechanism within his wheels). This will become abundantly clear when (if!) I finally reveal my "right track" design for Bessler's wheels. This fingers gesture is yet another one of the DOZENS of clues in the two portraits.
The right hand is poised in a "presentation" gesture ... not unlike a magician indicating the completion of a trick .
ReplyDeleteLet us not forget that Bessler WAS a flesh and blood human being , an inventor , an ordinary man however shrouded in mystery and controversy . In order to move forward even in our summation of the man himself it is necessary to deduce the information we have rather than expanding it , not inflating it with fallible conjecture and theories which will lead us to where we do not want to be .
ReplyDelete"It is necessary to deduce the information we have rather than expanding it , not inflating it with fallible conjecture and theories"
DeleteThat's good,I agree with that.
That is the very point I have been trying to get across to TG, with his extravagant and unusual claims for his Portrait Clues Theory.
The best thing to have come out of my little 'spat' with him over the question of the portraits is to realise that at least my theories are not seriously undetermined by a serious doubt. There is no doubt that Bessler was the creator of the woodcut images in MT is there JC?
Now we are now asked to believe that Bessler did his hair in his portrait, but not his face, in a rather rare super-collaboration of artists working on the same copper-plate together!
Let me tell you this straight, the hand that did the hands, did the face and the hair and the cloak. This hand was very experienced and accomplished, the hand of a skilled practitioner, The Boss. Herr. Christian Fitzsch: The rest of the image was 'filled in' by an apprentice.
End of discussion
JW
Justsomeome says: John W. , I just wanted to say that I appreciate your posts. Thanks for your input.
ReplyDeleteThanks for that.
DeleteI would not normally be so vocal and assertive (as indeed I have not so far been) on this blogg, however the subject under discussion at the moment is the analysis of pictures, and this is something I feel fully qualified to speak on.
In my opinion TG has had exactly the right idea but applied it to the wrong pictures. Its the woodcuts that hold the visual clues, as Bessler says himself in his handwritten introduction to those works.
Chris wrote: "It is necessary to deduce the information we have rather than expanding it, not inflating it with fallible conjecture and theories"
ReplyDeleteAnd I do "deduce" from the information we have...the various textual clues (about 1% of all clues) and the DT illustrations and portrait clues (which are about 99% of the clues). EVERY single "expansion" I've made (which I refer to as an "advance in understanding THE secret mechanism Bessler used") has been the result of a LOT of modeling to make sure that the possibility of error has been reduced to as close to zero as possible. I am OBLIGED to do this so that WHEN a working OB PM gravity wheel model is finally obtained, I will be as close to 100% certain as possible that its design is, in fact, THE one Bessler found and used. Believe me, in this "game" ANY "fallible conjectures and theories" one makes are VERY quickly exposed for what they are...WORTHLESS!
JW wrote: "Let me tell you this straight, the hand that did the hands, did the face and the hair and the cloak."
We are going to have to agree to disagree about this! To me, the wig and clothing Bessler wears in the 1st DT portrait seem MUCH more coarsely executed than the face and hands. That clearly indicates to me that they were done by a different artist which, of course, in order to more easily justify the presence of the MANY clues in the portraits would have had to have been Bessler and not some student of Christian Fitzsch.
Clearly we will have to agree to disagree on this.
DeleteThe cloak, well maybe, that area of the image is a bit 'borderline' in the context of our disagreement. Perhaps outlined by the boss and completed by the apprentice?
I repeat, the hand that did the hands, did the face and the hair. The knowledge, experience and sophistication of technique employed in those areas stands out from the rest of the image.
Since Christian Fitzsch conceived and executed the hair, I find it highly improbable that this proves the existence of 32 springs in a working gravity wheel.
Ultimately, it is only the information content of the two portraits that interests me, not how many artists were involved in their execution. I have to assume Bessler produced the back and foreground portions, including his wig, after the face and hands were produced, because there are precise mathematical connections between his visible body parts and the other objects in the portrait. I doubt if Christian Fitzsch or his student would have been required to encode that kind of information into the portraits. I see the work of the Master as being absolutely necessary for that.
DeleteI have counted and recounted the circular end loops of the curls in his 1st portrait wig many times and I always come up with exactly 16 for EACH side of the wig for a total of 32. I have no doubt that the curls in the wig represent springs (there are also other symbols used for them in both portraits) and I find it more than a "concidence" that their total is a nice multiple of 8. Since there were two seperate one-directional sub wheels within each two-directional wheel, this implies that Bessler would have assigned 2 springs to each of a sub wheels 8 weighted levers (a detail also derivable from other spring related clues in the portraits). This is an important clue in working out the details of his "Secret Principle" which MUST be understood before his wheels can be duplicated.
In my comment below, I gave the 1st portrait symbols for the 12:00 and 4:30 weighted levers and mentioned that whenever an object in the portraits can be joined by a straight line with one of Bessler's pupils, then that is something he wanted the reader to focus his attention on. If one draws a straight line through BOTH of Bessler's pupils in the 1st DT portrait, then that line will intersect the curtain at the exact point where it begins to fold sharply to the right. This is intended to direct our attention to the tear drop bottle at that location which, as I mentioned below, corresponds to a weighted lever whose pivot is located at the 12:00 position of a CW rotating drum.
Those whose current designs are based solely on the very few relevant MT clues will have a need to dismiss as coincidental ALL of the various associational / mathematical clues that emerge from a study of the DT portraits. I can understand that biased motivation. I, too, had that initial reaction. However, at some point one eventually realizes that all of these DOZENS of "coincidences" DO eventually add up to a simple FACT: Bessler spent a LOT of time encoding all of them into the portraits. They are NOT random and they do lead to a final single design that he used: his "right track" design!
Sadly, one remains "blind" to them until and unless he can begin to see them through the "eyeglasses" of careful analysis. I have been "wearing" those metaphorical glasses for several years now and what I am seeing is truly ASTOUNDING!
Portraits are usually expressions of personal vanity. Bessler was accomplished for his time and his modest family background; so it seems natural for him to have portraits made. Even if the horizontal and vertical lines indicate secret meaning, I don't think they are so precisely drawn that bessler wouldn't have trusted CF to draw them. For all we know, bessler could have arranged the objects in front of him on the table and held his hands that way while CF made a quick sketch, and there is no meaning behind them, other than the vain aspects ( bessler was well read, he studied medicine and machinery).
ReplyDeleteThe second portrait looks like it was done by a different person but in the style of CF. Look at the way the hands are drawn; they appear too wide at the wrist in both portraits. The overall difference in contrast between the two portraits is telling. My insticts say that bessler tried to render a self portrait ( maybe he was the student of CF) and was unhappy with the way the face turned out in the second portrait, and vanity compelled him to tear it out.
Sometimes the simplest explanation is best.
My instinct says that Bessler took very little part (if any) in the construction and arrangement of these images. Two guys were paid to do a job and they did it. Sometimes the simplest explanation is best.
DeleteIt would be of interest to locate other portraits by the brothers Christian Fitzsch for comparison purposes. If anyone can be bothered to do that I believe they will find that the other images are remarkably similar, with the same poses, wigs with 32 springs in them, wiggly digits and other bits and bobs arranged according to a formular/convention. I suspect all the copperplates to be cut the same size and much of the image to be derived from templates (so not such a coincidence that the two portraits lay on top of each other so neatly)I definitely cannot be bothered to go looking for them. I'm going to my workshop, I have a machine to finish building!
I have seen other engravings by Christian Fitzsch and they do, indeed, bear a resemblance to what is seen in the DT portraits. One sees individuals in seated poses surrounded by the various implements of their profession, trade, or lifestyle. That was a popular motif in his time. What makes the DT portraits rather unique is the huge amount of situational and mathematical data they contain. This data is certainly not obvious when the portraits are first viewed. It was not intended to be! But, careful study WHILE BUILDING / MODELING a "right track" wheel design WILL eventually make the data become "visible" to the analyst / mobilist. Bessler never really intended to just give his OB PM gravity wheel design away should he die before he sold the design. One who would be his heir must WORK for it and work VERY hard, indeed!
DeleteIn reviewing my early two-part comment of 1 September 2012, I noticed that I invited the more "ambitious" mobilists here to see if they could find the symbols that represent the 12:00 weighted lever in the 1st DT portrait. Did anybody find them? Did anybody even bother to try to find them?!
ReplyDeleteOkay, I'll save you all the trouble, here it is:
Find the 12th item on the shelves behind Bessler. It's that rightmost tear drop shaped bottle on the third shelf whose cap meets the place in the curtain where there is a sudden and sharp fold in the material. If one extends a line from the cap and along the folded edge of the curtain far enough, it will reach the bottom edge of the book on the table. Here Bessler is telling us that there is a direct connection, a cord, of course, between the 12:00 weighted lever and the 10:30 weighted lever, but its extreme distance from the book tells us that the 12:00 weighted lever is not providing a lot of the counterbalancing to the 10:30 weighted lever.
That then completes the treatment of the 6:00, 7:30, 9:00, 10:30, 12:00, 1:30, and 3:00 weighted levers in the 1st DT portrait.
Hey, wait a minute! What about the 4:30 weighted lever?!
It's represented by the 16th item, a bottle, on the 4th shelf from the top or, more precisely, by the slight gap between the right side of this bottle and the side wall of the shelf which corresponds to 16.5 or, in clock dial time, 16:30 = 4:30. Note that the diagonal label on this bottle is reversed from the labels on the other 3 similar bottles on the shelf. In other words, there is something DIFFERENT about this bottle. Indeed, if one extends a straight line along the top edge of the label, it will intersect the pupil of Bessler's right eye! Whenever an extended line from a symbol passes through one of Bessler's pupils, it means the Master wants you to pay PARTICULAR attention to that symbol.
Bessler is clearly calling our attention to this bottle AND its close proximity with the side wall of the shelf (it might even be touching the side wall, but this is VERY difficult to discern from even the best enlargements of the portrait available). The message is clear to me, however. Bessler is simply telling us that, within one of his one-directional wheels or sub wheels, a lever's weight will be resting on its rim stop by the time that the lever's pivot reaches the 4:30 position of a CW rotating drum.
Also note that the diagonal labels on the 15th and 16th items TOUCH at the contact point BETWEEN these two bottles which has a numerical value of 15.5 or, in clock dial time, 15:30 = 3:30. This tells us that a lever's weight is AlSO in contact with its rim stop by as early as the CW rotating drum's 3:30 position. Indeed, one of the questions I am currently wrestling with is whether or not a lever's weight makes contact with its rim stop just before or just after it passes the 3:00 position of a CW rotating drum.
An astute reader may also notice that a straight line extended downward from the top edge of the 15th item's label will pass through the THIRD button on Bessler's jacket cuff. This is further verification that this bottle represents a weighted lever at the 3:00 position of a CW rotating drum!
Once again, these are only a VERY FEW of the MANY clues hidden in the two DT portraits alone. As one begins to don the "eyeglasses" provided by an intensive analysis of the two portraits, the final picture of Bessler's secret wheel mechanism will come into sharper and sharper focus. Soon one will finally see his secret mechanism in all of its marvelous detail!
I am amazed and fascinated at how many different interpretations and clues we all distill from these portraits. Personally, I feel that the most significance somehow is the precise cut out hole. I cannot put a finger on it but it IS significant, hence the precision.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find interesting is that Bessler is clearly pointing to the book in the first (complete) a much more formal portrait. In the second, we have the organ-builders "environment", far more (workmans) simple clothing, and specific tools. What strikes me is that now his (for the observer) left hand (therefore, for him his right hand) is holding a pair of reading glasses. The other hand is holding an compass or similar measuring instrument, the feet at a certain angle.
Maybe the angle is important in relation to the sphere (represented by the globe). There's also some instrument that resembles a whirligig, vaguely perhaps a primitive gyroscope or regulator.
But all that aside... isn't Bessler simply telling us to LOOK THROUGH the clues in his book(s) with the EYES of a organ maker?
Yes, he is Andre! That's exactly what he is saying.
DeleteThe mechanism is 'a simple system of falling weights and levers' as Karl observed and Bessler clearly stated.
Andre wrote: "I am amazed and fascinated at how many different interpretations and clues we all distill from these portraits."
DeleteSo far I have NOT read of any other interpretations of the jar, skull, book, and hands other than the ones I provided. IF there are any, they I'd certainly like to know about them.
Andre also wrote: "There's also some instrument that resembles a whirligig, vaguely perhaps a primitive gyroscope or regulator."
Gyroscope? Where in the 2nd portrait do you see a "whirligig" or gyroscope?!
This is Bessler's self publication . He did for himself what the world would not do for him . Because of him alone we have the clues and books ,and the drawings . Had he sold his wheel and made the art famous some other paintings/drawings of him would most likely have been commissioned and we would have more but also his device . Of course we would not be here hashing out whether or not there is something hidden in these drawings or what their purpose is had he sold his wheel .
ReplyDeleteI think it is safe to assume that Bessler believed that he would sell his wheel and that all these clues and such would have been easily applied to the device , once seen . Where would all your theories and codes be if he had sold it ?
ReplyDeleteYou are 100% correct there, Chris. Aside from allowing some struggling future reverse engineering Bessler mobilist to resurrect Bessler's lost OB PM gravity wheel design, those DT portrait clues were Bessler's equivalent of a PATENT! Should any of his rivals suddenly produce a WORKING PM wheel and claim that he (the rival) was the ORIGINAL inventor, then Bessler would have had a hard time disputing that claim if his last wheel had been destroyed months earlier and its schematics "burned and buried".
DeleteThe PUBLISHED DT portraits, however, provided a way around that problem. When the rival finally revealed his "original" design, all Bessler would have to do was pull out a copy of DT and then point out to everyone how ALL of the component associations, angles, numbers, and ratios incorportated into the rival's wheel just "happened" to EXACTLY match all of the ones encrypted into the two DT portraits. People would, as I did LONG ago, immediately realize that all of those correspondences could not just be due to chance and that the rival's design therefore was NOT original so that, indeed, Bessler had priority to the design. Such a tactic indicates how very confident Bessler was that his "right track" design was the ONLY one that would work.
Hmmm...it would certainly be interesting if Asa Jackson had invented his wheel about 150 years earlier and he and Bessler could have held "joint" demonstrations of their wheels. I can see it now! Each would be proclaiming that his was the superior one and trying to prove that to a never ending stream of awed patrons. In the end, I think both Bessler and Jackson would have become the best of friends. Afterall, they had some VERY unique things in common: EACH had done what an entire planet full of "no track" skeptics would have bet their last dollars (thalers!) was a physical impossibility. EACH had produced a "self-moving" piece of machinery that did NOT violate any of our known laws of physics or mechanics yet STILL worked!
Dear Fellow Blogger,
ReplyDeleteIF you can focus your eyes for a moment, see through your tears of laughter at ‘The Laughingstock’ and his website, you might perceive the following;
In my first set of drawings, simply entitled ‘My Drawings’ I have tried to show you ‘ how I did it’; the clue elements I focused on and how my ideas developed.
Because I have now deciphered The Visual Clue Language that Bessler employed in his unpublished work ‘Further demonstrations regarding the possibility and impossibility of perpetual motion’, now thankfully published and suitably renamed Maschinen Tractate (MT for short) by John Collins, you will see (one day) that my second set of drawings shows ‘how it works’.
I should explain what I have done with the images in this series. In MT/JFW drawing numbers 9-138 (a work incomplete) I have taken at least one of the clue elements; the structures in the gravity wheel to which Bessler refers in his image of the corresponding number (and letter) and highlighted it by my own drawing and design. Each image serves two purposes; firstly; to prove my understanding, and secondly, to add to the stack of images that Bessler already amassed to prove his foreknowledge.
MT139/JFW and MT140/JFW have a different genealogy. Those of you who have purchased the paperback spiral-bound copies of John Collins book MT will be unable to see the ‘faint information’; the subtly of drawing Bessler employed in these images. On the other hand, those of you who have purchased the e-book version and who have discovered the zoom function will be able to confirm that my drawings are a faithful re-presentation of what Bessler drew in these two images. I will admit that in my drawing MT140/JFW, I did get a bit ‘carried away’, but it was such a boring image, it needed brightening-up!
You may correctly assume that in MT/JFW drawing numbers 141 and above (since there are no corresponding Bessler-numbered images) that I am having fun; being an Artist; visually speaking in the new language that I have learned.
JW
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI decided to revisit your site, factumpoetica.org, and noted the
Deletefollowing lines on one of its pages:
"The Best Way To Do Things Is To Do Them
It’s all very well doodling at the kitchen table.
Things always look great on paper and surely must work!
Get the job on the bench in the workshop.
Observe what actually happens."
So WHAT, if anything, have been the results of your observations? Is
ANYTHING actually happening? I claim to be 99% of the way to a working wheel. What percentage of the way to a working wheel are you in YOUR estimation?
I found the enlarged image of Bessler's professional signature at the top of the pages to be of GREAT interest to me. It shows the large letter "O" of "Orffyreus" with a really distinctive "curly" flourish hanging down into it from the top side. The letter "O", of course, represents one of Bessler's wheels and the curly flourish is an OBVIOUS symbol for a helical SPRING! Yet another way that the Master tells us how VERY important SPRINGS are to the operation of his wheels!
TG wrote, "So far I have NOT read of any other interpretations of the jar, skull, book, and hands other than the ones I provided. IF there are any, they I'd certainly like to know about them."
ReplyDeleteI have pointed people to my orffyreuscode site many times, but to save time, here is a much abbreviated copy and paste from it.
"In the potrait, notice the presence of a jar, skull and book. These are generally inluded in art as representative of a concept described as ‘Memento Mori’ a reminder that we all must die one day. The same objects may also be included as symbols of a similar theme known in Latin as ‘Vanitas’, meaning 'emptiness' and is interpreted as indicating the insignificance of our earthly existence and the temporary quality of vanity.
The fact that Bessler has included three of them in his portrait may be taken as a memento mori, but given his fondness for secondary meanings liberally scattered througout his works, one cannot help but wonder if there is more to this than meets the eye. Perhaps the jar is not a jar but a gourd. In art the gourd is often a symbol of controversy and that is certainly applicable to Bessler. The skull is, as we have surmised, a symbol of death and the book, wisdom.
I feel certain that the presence of the jar, skull and book are not just a memento mori, but I am unable to determine what that purpose might be. However much of this site is speculation and I am about to go out on a limb.
I have hesitated at length over whether to include this next piece as I remain sceptical of its validity, nevertheless it would be remiss of me not to include anything however bizarre, just in case it turns out to have been relevant.
The three objects in the portrait ... also occur widely in the world of medieval art and are specifically included in paintings representing Mary Magdalene. My first reaction to this discovery was that this was coincidental and had nothing to do with Bessler. However there is a connection no matter that it is extremely obscure.
Given Bessler’s predilection for the number five and pentagrams I sought a connection between the Magdalene and the pentagram and of course found not one, but many. There is an excellent thesis ...on the subject of the depiction,in Renaissance art, of the Magdelene as the heavenly Venus. By Bessler’s time the two images were irrevocably intertwined and there is no doubt that the Venus was commonly associated with the Magdalene then. But how do we get from Venus to the pentagram?
It seems that the pentagram has long been associated with the planet Venus and ...there is an argument that asserts that the planet Venus describes a pentgram and the best description I found was as follows:-
“...the orbits of Venus and Earth are almost a perfect 13:8 resonance, meaning that Venus does 13 orbits for every 8 of Earth. 13:8 is a succession in the Fibonacci Sequence, and the previous one is 8:5. Because of the time it takes for Earth to complete this orbit (8 years), Venus has moved in a sufficient manner to trace a pentagram with curved sides.
So is all this in aid just another pointer to the pentagram? Did Bessler know of the association of Mary Magdalene, Venus and the pentagram? Who knows? I don’t, but I offer it as another interpretation to be considered and/or rejected.
JC
I think I like my explanations of the vase, skull, book, and hands better, John. Yes, such objects may appear in medieval paints for various symbolic purposes and, no doubt, as an artist Bessler would have been aware of their use in such paintings. But, I view the objects in the 1st portrait as having a far more important "secondary" meaning. I think it makes far more sense to view them as representing weighted levers at the various clock dial time positions of a wheel's rotating drum.
DeleteIn past comments, I have noted that one could find a pentagram of cords emerging from the cords that interconnected my design. That was true, but that was when my "Connectedness Principle" employed 48 cords. Now that I've reduced that to 32, the pentagram has disappeared from my models!
However, I still think the pentagram has much significance because of its hidden presence in BOTH of the DT portraits, but not, of course, in the way you do. I now see the pentagram as indicating that there is a special relationship between 5 of the 8 weighted levers inside of one of Bessler's one-directional wheels or sub wheels. I now believe that the pentagram refers to the careful, spring assisted, counter balancing that took place between the 9:00, 10:30, 12:00, 1:30, and 3:00 weighted levers. That counterbalancing involves what I call Bessler's "Secret Principle" and the one that I am now focusing all of my research efforts on rediscovering. It is, indeed, a VERY hard nut to crack! But, without it, neither I nor anybody else will ever be reaching the end of the "right track" with a successful replication of Bessler's lost OB PM gravity wheel design!
I have never had a problem letting go of a bad idea . How else would I expect to arrive at the actual solution ? I seriously think that some of you guys need a break . You need to let go of these silly ideas and stop telling people at what percentage of success you're currently @ . P.M. is like pregnancy ... you either have it or you don't . STFU and produce something before you claim to be an expert . That's one of the reasons I have tried to imagine this thing so strongly ... I WANT to put all you guys to shame who pretend do much and yet are hailed to be experts and pat each other on the back for accomplishing absolutely nothing . Sure , I have heard all the opinions about helping each other and all and in a world where there was not so much misdirected praise and egocentric bullshit theory and just pretense I would agree with those views . Under the circumstances I think I have taken a good position as antagonist and would not change a thing that I have ever posted . They say it takes a crazy person . Well... that's me ! thanks for your time .
ReplyDeleteJohn ,
DeleteThe above was not a reaction to your post . I am sick of all the long-winded " facts " that TG posts . You know how I feel about your codes also . I think I am there John . I
am finding it hard to tolerate all of this play that is going on . It seems the most important thing would be to produce a working wheel or at least gain an understanding of what Bessler did ( however difficult that tough nut might be ) . All of this "discussion" is becoming annoying to me the more I know . I hope you understand what I am saying and where ( finally ) my head is at .
"I am sick of all the long-winded "facts" that TG posts.
DeleteThen again, maybe you're just ENVIOUS of the progress I claim to have made?! I, however, am VERY happy with that progress even though, regrettably, I still do not have 100% of what I would like to have: a WORKING OB PM gravity wheel design that I am CERTAIN is the one Bessler found and used.
I am attempting to reduce the character count of my comments so as to convey the same amount of information with less words. It is, however, a real challenge because I do want to share my current research results and goals, in a general way at least, with my fellow mobilists with some degree of detail. Often, this requires me to get more "wordy" than I would like to, but I prefer to post something that will have some actual value to a reader than just another irrelevant blog comment that no one will remember or care about. Life is way too short to be irrelevant!
This state of things will not go on much longer I promise you .
ReplyDeleteI agree to a certain extent, Chris. As you say, you can't claim you are a certain percentage there; you either have the solution or you don't. You can believe you have it but that is not the same as actually having a working model.
ReplyDeleteI understand why people may say they are 90 per cent of the way there - I've done it myself. When you are handling a mechanism and you suddenly seem to have a revelation followed by another, you think you are making progress, but maybe you aren't, and you cannot really have any idea of what per centage you might have progressed - if any.
But it's important to visualise winning!
JC
I don't feel uncomfortable claiming to be 99% of the way down the "right track" to duplicating Bessler's design because I DO have the "Connectedness Principle" AND the correct shape of the "magic lever" that utilizes it so as to achieve "coordination" of the weighted levers during drum rotation. What I still do not have are ALL of the details of the "Secret Principle" which involves the use of the springs within one of Bessler's wheels. This principle is the most difficult to "deduce" from the hidden DT portrait clues. But, I am confident that it will be found with enough effort.
DeleteAs, I've said before, even when that is finally done and successful replication achieved, there will still be some who will not accept the design. That, however, is okay with me because, ultimately, the only one I have to really satisfy is MYSELF and I can be VERY difficult to convince! If others agree with what I've found, then fine. And, if they don't, then they are free to continue to search for an alternative design that works...even if it takes them the rest of their lives! LOL!
For those who seek further clues the portraits show very carefully drawn corners and it is but an easy thing to do in Paint to draw two diagonals to discover that they measure 72 degrees - oh no, not the pentagon again!
ReplyDeleteJC
If the second one isn't bessler, then who is it? Why would someone else have a portrait made with such a contrived background and foreground; the organ, the tools,?
ReplyDeleteThat's why I think the second one is bessler. There is an explanation for why the face is torn out; what else could it be but the face was poorly done?
Opinion ---- You can't hear what Bessler has to say but when he looks through the portraits from one to the other he can give you information in kind. His clues are his accessories that surround him in both portraits. The cut-out face lets him speak to you without words. He conveys the idea of his words in kind not only reaching your ears but his breath actually blowing the information to you and onto you. I would say that was telling, excuse the pun.
Deleteoppure bisogna guardare le immagini insieme sovrapponendole...............
ReplyDeleteITL
;-)
Translation: Or look at the images together superposing .............
ReplyDeleteI've done that ... there seems to be nothing substantial .
Delete@ John Collins 4 September 2012 09:07
ReplyDeleteI am guilty of visualizing myself winning , that's for sure :D . The thing is , no matter what my concepts are I have a hard time clinging to them ... believing in them and finally , much less promoting them . But in the end ( which , this is the end ) it appears that is my advantage over everyone . I have not let myself become attached to these concepts as far as my ego is concerned , thus believing that with an improvement here or a design change there I can realize the design . No , it has been quite a different road for me . When I arrive at the concept which will function as we hope , then , I will take notice and concentrate on that design ... doing whatever I possibly can to bring it into the world , fully functional and indisputable . I am there .
That's the scientific method, Chris. Follow the data to wherever it leads you.
DeleteIn "good" science, one must always let the facts determine the theories. In "bad" or "junk" science, the PREconceived theories determine the facts!
DeleteWhen trying to use the clues hidden in the Bessler literature, one is actually forced to operate on a bizarre "middle ground" between these two polar opposite approaches to science!
First he must determine if a "clue" is, indeed, a clue and, IF it is, then he must decide if it is a "valid" clue and thus a fact or if it is a "false" or "decoy" clue and thus worthless. Making the determination requires a LOT of building / modeling AND an awareness of the various methods Bessler used to confuse and distract the reverse engineering Bessler mobilist trying to duplicate the internal mechanics of his wheels. As valid clues are slowly accumulated, they will lead to a general design which will then subtly determine the interpretations of any newly discovered clues and, on occasion, old clues one thought he understood. Thus, there is a continuous "feedback loop" established between one's evolving design and the interpretations of the clues. With continuous effort, one's design WILL slowly evolve into being THE one Bessler found and used.
Because of the rules of this bizarre "game" that Bessler has laid down for us, the successful replication of his wheels will NOT be done in a single bold stroke as many newbie mobilists believe will happen. No, the replication will sort of "evolve" into existence. One will initially go through MANY designs based on erroneous interpretations of "clues" that are quickly determined to be unworkable. Then there will be a small collection of "almost" workable designs that were based on a better determination of the clues. Finally, one will obtain a particular design that REALLY looks like it would work IF some small change could be made to it. That design will be based on a larger number of better interpreted clues.
When that design is finally found, then it's time to really focus intensely on the clues, specifically the DT portrait clues, with the hope of finding that little something extra that will finally turn this "almost" runner into a "full-fledged" runner. When that something extra is finally found, that VERY lucky mobilist will have his OWN "House of Richters" moment. A VERY happy experience, indeed!
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI had a conversation with my mother , stating that Bessler built machines for ten years ... and that I , although I did spend some money on materials and built something a few years ago now , have not built anything of resemblance to what Bessler did . And I stated that it would be nice to have figured it all out without wasting money along the way ... without having built anything ... grasping the concept at first in the mind , without overactive imagination , sticking to instinctual truths .
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete@TG
ReplyDeleteTo answer your questions
I don’t really think about my work in percentage terms, but, If I must, its 50-50.
I can assure you that things are ‘actually happening’ and that they have been happening for some time now. From my point of view I have already given you half of the Bessler Mechanism. When I did this in 2011, sadly only a handful of people were able to recognise this. One of them was Andre (on this Blogg) Thanks again for that Andre! I really did (and still do) appreciate it. Andre described my work as “Very Significant” He did his own drawings and designs inspired by my work and JC posted them on this website. Perhaps you missed that small and unimportant event?
The other half of the Bessler Mechanism I have kept hold of for now for a mixture of reasons, I’ll give you one of them. I was aware that I had spent insufficient time building and working with this element; developing the design; doing the ‘on the bench testing’. I felt there was more to be got out of it and I was right. There had been an imbalance in my work; in the amount of time I had spent on my Design for The Small Weight Armature and this ‘other element’, simply because it arrived later in my understanding.
I have already indicated several times that I think you are mistaken in your belief that springs are vital for the successful functioning of The Gravity Wheel. Yes, you could employ them, for cushioning, silent running or the protection of the longevity of the other components, or you could use thick industrial-grade felt as I am using.
JW
Well, JW, if you are 50% of the way to successful completion, then that is certainly something to be proud of. It's better than being 25% of the way there or 0% of the way there as ALL "no track" skeptics are.
DeleteFYI, I did not learn about this blog until earlier this year and am unaware of any prior presentations of your design. I do remember seeing a photo that showed an extendible arm mechanism consisting of a small weight moved outward from a pivot point by a larger weight much closer to the pivot. (Was it on your website?) I have worked with such designs in the past, but quickly realized they were not workable in terms of keeping the CoM of the weights of SEVERAL symmetrically arranged arms mounted on an axle on one side of the axle during its rotation. That is, their weights' CoM's ALWAYS just rotated down to the punctum quietus below the axle and, after a few oscillations around that point, came to a dead stop. Perhaps you have some way of overcoming this obstacle with that "other element" you mentioned. In any event, I wish you luck with your approach.
I now ALWAYS emphasize the use of springs in Bessler's wheels because I, literally, find the DT portraits loaded with SPRING symbols and, indeed, Bessler HIMSELF admits to using springs in his wheels. And, there's also the cryptic notation to MT18:
"This is the previous spring-model, and it seems to be good, but seeming is different from being. In the meantime, the principle should not be disdained or entirely disregarded, for it says more than it shows. I, however, will show more than speak of it at the appropriate place."
Whenever Bessler mentions in MT that he will elaborate upon some principle "at the appropriate time" he means that he actually USED that principle in the design of his WORKING OB PM gravity wheels the illustrations of which were supposed to appear at the end of MT. Of course, they never did because, quite unfortnately, after his arrest, any sketches or woodcuts showing those illustrations were "burned and buried".
But, the point from this notation AND the DT portrait clues is VERY clear to me. SPRINGS are a VERY important part of THE design that Bessler found and used and, I am very convinced, are CRITICAL to their operation. This is why I tend to automatically discount / ignore ANY designs that are presented which do NOT require the use of springs for their operation.
@ TG
ReplyDeleteYou have been stuck at "99%" for months, which means:—
1. You are not good at estimating, or
2. That last 1% is very elusive, or
3. Your "right track" is illusive.
I'm inclining towards the last option.
@ John Worton
To anticipate a possible objection from others: "Felt acts as a damper, and any damper will just dissipate energy (i.e. will waste energy)".
Strictly speaking that statement is true only if one end of the damper is connected to Earth (where Earth is assumed to have infinite mass, as it usually is). Any damper connected between components within a wheel, or between a component and the wheel itself, is quite capable of transferring energy between those items, i.e. it is not wasted.
It is still possible to quibble about how well felt approximates an ideal damper.
@ Arktos
DeleteIt's option #2 for me. I'm also handicapped by the fact that I've only recently (within the last several months) started incorporating springs into my models and they are somewhat "tricky" to learn how to properly calibrate and use. BUT, I AM making slow progress. At least, I now know exactly WHAT the "Secret Principle" MUST do inside of Bessler's wheels although I still do not have ALL of the details of exactly how it does that! Only more time and effort will close this "knowledge" gap, but I have no doubt that it will eventually be closed.
My guess about this subject is that they are just published images , nothing more .
ReplyDeleteI am 100% in possession of a complete understanding of Bessler's principle and quite capable of explaining it's function and operation . At this point I'd like to invite anyone capable of actually building the device ... crafsmanship/machine-wise or monetarily to come join me in Florida for the realization and disclosure of it .
DeleteIf your new idea is as abstract as your last, don't expect anyone to jump in to help.
DeleteGood news . It's actually very simple . Abstract is in the mind of the thinker . I wonder sometimes who is really talking . What's the point in communicating negatively to someone who is trying to solve an alleged mechanical impossibility ?
DeleteI am quite capable of a complex build and I live within 75min. From you. But................ I have NO desire to see your latest " I know how he did it "" design!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteYes , but you're not quite capable of the complex thought required to solve the problem . Build away into oblivion ... and waste your time and money . Oh , I almost forgot ... good luck .
DeleteCool. The builders are coming out of the closets. I, too, have been building wheels "that should have turned". Bessler also describes this phase of his building, how he was totally convinced, then totally disappointed. For me, half a year ago, a change occurred, when I got a wheel that would move - however, not complete the circle. I have been optimising ever since and feel that I am slowly getting there. For now, I have switched from building to modelling to find the optimisation. I have several models that now complete a full turn, but then get out of sync and stop. Oddly, it seems that the extra speed gained during one revolution is causing the problem. A nice problem to have, compared with the ones I used to have.
ReplyDeleteMaybe you've already found this, but anyway:—
DeleteTo help "settle down" variations in the speed of a wheel when modelling it, I find it can be useful to assign the wheel a very high mass, (sometimes even ridiculously high, say 1000kg), which of course greatly increases its rotational inertia, and hence its stability.
Assuming that your wheels are of the OB type, then the best way to test them is to build a computer model and then make its CoM appear. Since WM2D always places the "System Center of Mass" on top of the background, but underneath any parts you make, you will have to make those obscuring parts transparent in order to see the CoM (This is done by "highlighting" the part to make those black corner squares bracket it. Once that's done, then click Window at the top of the workspace > Appearance > Pattern > No).
DeleteWhen you're ready to test, do not just let the model Run freely. Rather, place a motor on its axle pivot and only allow it to rotate at a steady, motor controlled speed. I use a speed of -1 rpm on the motor which is the same rate of motion as the second hand on a clock and makes following the motions of the wheel's components easier to observe. You can, of course, vary the motor speed to your own liking, but a low motor speed helps minimize the effects of CF on the design.
As your model wheel slowly rotates through one increment of rotation (45 degrees if your wheel has 8 weighted levers which will take 7.5 seconds with a motor speed of -1 rpm), keep an eye on the location of the CoM of its parts. IF your wheel is truly PERPETUALLY OB, that CoM should REMAIN on the wheel's descending side during the ENTIRE increment of wheel rotation. IF it slowly swings down and under the axle pivot, then a REAL wheel based on the design will do the same and you need not waste your time building it. At this point it's time to consider modifications that might improve the situation.
Thanks for your help, Arktos and technoguy. Yes, I have already been assigning the wheel a high mass, because of the rotational inertia, and it makes a big difference. I hadn't found out how to make things transparent in WM2d and was quite annoyed about that. Never would have guessed that transparency figures as a "pattern", and as I never was able to see CoM, I guessed it was a bug in the program. Thanks, again. Not sure I really want to go along with the motor speed hint, but will keep it in mind.
DeleteNo worries, Mimi. Actually I have to agree with TG that keeping rotor speed absolutely constant can (sometimes) be useful. Then I can record data points for wheel torque and wheel angle over an operating cycle, and then use a CAD program to accurately plot the energy graph, i.e. torque vs angle. Then I integrate it (find its area) to see whether there is any excess above or below the x-axis.
DeleteWhere I completely disagree with TG is that a wheel with an offset center of mass must work. Once again, there is a simple counter-example at http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/patents.htm (scroll down to the device by Pierre Richard, 1858).
Actually I don't assign a large mass to the wheel. I do the exact opposite. It's not the momentum of the wheel I want to test. It's the interaction of the parts and the torque produced. I make it transparent and give it a very low mass, perhaps 1-10kg and even as low 0.000001kg. When I start the model build I bump up accuracy to 600 frames calculation. Sometimes as high as 1000. This slows the 'delivery' to a speed I can follow easily with full accuracy.
DeleteAnon, I'm guessing that you are using WM2d, like TG and Mimi. I admit to not knowing much about it. Silux, which I use, automatically sets the calculation interval. The "delivery" (= speed at which the simulation plays?) can be slowed to any desired value by adding a separate low-mass object that is set to interact with other objects, but otherwise does not take part in the simulation.
DeleteArktos wrote: "Where I completely disagree with TG is that a wheel with an offset center of mass must work."
DeleteWe actually DO agree that a design with an offset CoM need not HAVE to work and I have stated this in several of my past comments. In designs with this problem, ALL of the energy / mass outputted by the wheel's weights will be used to maintain its offset CoM and none will be left over to accelerate the wheel or perform outside work. Bessler's wheels were NOT of this type, hence it is not a concern on the "right track" design that I pursue.
Suit yourselves .
ReplyDeleteHey Chris, I'm not a 'waste' or confident I have any solution (your post 6.24 on the 5th), please don't generalise or lump me in with the 'idiots' you 'don't give a shit about'. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteregards
Jon
Looks as though I've been censored . I said some rather nasty things yes ... but please have a great idea before you say anymore ... anyone . Prove something before you become an expert . Those who worship blindly and offer congratulations for nothing , over and over again ... please grow up . The original inventor got a boat load of crap for his efforts ... from many anyway , not everyone . You all know I speak the truth . Mo one should be famous yet . No one has succeeded . That's the real problem , you're all just too comfortable with your mere efforts and percentages , leading your readers on and on to nothing ... and polite all the while . Quite sickening the reality is .
ReplyDeleteI think they have proven their ideas to themselves just as you have proven your ideas to yourself. They discuss their ideas pretty much openly and you share practically nothing. You complain about the wordiness of their posts while your posts are thin and non enlightening. They are actively building and testing and you are not. They don't claim to know the secret or have a running wheel. You claim to know the secret but have no working wheel to verify. Your behavior is confusing.
DeleteChris said ...
Delete"I said some rather nasty things yes ..."
Yes you have. Why do you do this. No one else here belittles or
calls others names the way you do.
"please have a great idea before you say anymore"
Who is to say what a great idea is. Someone building and discussing
their ideas or someone that doesn't do either?
"Prove something before you become an expert."
You have made numerous false claims in the past. You are unable or
unwilling to build to prove your ideas. You refuse to share details
about your invention. You are now making another unsubstantiated
claim. These are not the actions of a true expert.
"Quite sickening the reality is."
Indeed it is.
Obviously you are not putting yourself in my shoes . The very first experience I had with these people was having Jim @ BW re-post something after I had deleted it . I considered that I violation of privacy to an extent . Never an apology BTW . " They " have trumped each other ( and their egos ) up with mutual back patting . This is not conducive to a solution ... solitude , however might just be . I don't claim to be an expert . Once the principle is understood the game is over . Remember what Bessler said , " A man can be too clever to understand anything . "
DeleteBTW ... your very first step ... and anyone else's should be to identify yourself here . No guts no glory .
DeleteGee Chris. You should go back and read some, well a lot really, of the earlier threads on BW this year where this guy was truly sickening for a very long time. All he wanted endless praise and boot licking coz he had a few dreams that were sure bets.
ReplyDelete@ Arktos
ReplyDeleteAt those points in my design where the felt is 'in use' there is plenty of energy to be wasted, it needs to be wasted, heavy swinging levers need to be stopped for example.
I have used felt out of concerns about noise and damage to components when they strike each other.
JW
In the "right track" design I am working on, the weights only alight GENTLY on their rim stops near a CW rotating drum's 3:00 position because they are counterbalanced by their cord connections to other weights. Bessler mentioned that his design was "exceedingly greedy" which meant that as little energy as possible was wasted in the production of sound and heat during its rotation. Of course, some waste in these forms is unavoidable and the Merseburg wheel's rim stops would have had their contact surfaces padded with thick felt in order to further reduce the sounds made during rotation (this does not, however, reduce the wasted energy / mass, just converts more of it into heat than sound). Generally speaking, "heavy" impacts are to be avoided in any replication of Bessler's design.
DeleteHi John Worton, sounds like you are having a similar problem with excess energy. From what I am seeing, the wheel needs to be braked in order to reset back to the initial conditions. Rather than wasteing the braking energy, it could maybe be stored and used at a later, less difficult, point. The eyewitnesses did say that the wheel accelerated approx. for 3 turns and then stayed at the same speed. My guess is that the max. speed is reached when the acceleration reaches g, in other words when the square of the angular velocity multiplied by the radius is 10 m/sec2. Once the wheel frame is rotating as fast as the weights can drop, no extra input would be possible, hence no further acceleration.
ReplyDeleteOr, if the wheel needs braking that could be provided by it doing work.
ReplyDeleteJC
yes, of course the energy could be used, but imagine if every turn of the wheel continuously produced more and more energy, then we would have an uncontrollable run- away system, worse than an atomic chain reaction. I am not unhappy with a built-in limitation. As I understood the eyewitness reports, there was a limit of 26 rpm when there was no load on the wheel.
ReplyDeleteYes that is right, Mimi. Possibly there was some braking action because the maximum rate of fall was reached by the weights? Of course I do not know the design of your wheel so I cannot speculate on what might happen but I assume that your design includes weights which must fall at some point.
ReplyDeleteIntriguing!
JC
John, perhaps you should have said 'Or, if the wheel needs braking that could be provided by it doing work on springs.'
ReplyDeleteregards
Jon
Hi Mimi,
ReplyDeleteI am not having a problem with ‘excess energy’, that is “exactly what we want!” (As Andre would say) Indeed, it is the name of this game.
Here’s how I see it. The Gravity Wheel has to be braked if you don’t want the wheel to revolve, there is a permanent state of overbalance; the weights and levers of the mechanism are so arranged that this is always the case.
I am not seeing how “the wheel needs to be braked in order to reset back to the initial conditions” Such a concept does not form part of my design.
“Once the wheel frame is rotating as fast as the weights can drop, no extra input would be possible, hence no further acceleration” Yes, you are exactly right there, however, it might be more useful to think about moving the weights sideways, rather than conceive of them actually ‘dropping’.
Bessler makes this very clear in his handwritten notes accompanying MT 41
“There is only this to mention: the present horizontal application of the stork's bills is always better than the vertical application, regardless of the machine, since there is always more friction with the vertical”.
JW
I wonder if its right thinking that: if the flail or kike effect needs braking in some way and this was done by compressing a spring, then as you only get back what you put in the energy available for use further around the rotation at a 'dead spot' would be allmost the exact amount required to maintain even torque(15 degrees of rotation?), giving an overall smoothing of delivery and a torque curve that is flatter and less of a sine wave?
ReplyDeleteThat would be two systems interacting, one mech based flail/kike 'ring' and one 'ring' of springs compressing and extending, running of course out of phase. I'm failing here to picture this interaction in my mind so may have to do a few sketches...
regards
Jon
I think it may well be wrong thinking.
DeleteWhat we need here is a fundamental form, a fundamental overbalance; the kind that would take your fingers off if you got them in the way.
A ‘very finely balanced’ Wig-Powered knitting machine of the sort described by TG, is not going to haul a wheelbarrow full of bricks halfway up the side of a castle!
If you think that by the employment of a few springs you are going to trick Gravity and Sir Isaac’s rules. Dream on.
JW
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI really don't get why you guys are so obsessed with springs.
DeleteWithout the Fundamental Overbalance already established; created by the arrangement of weights and levers, your springs will have nothing to taken in and give back later.
JW
I agree that there is a very important clue in the fact that all of Bessler's wheels had a characteristic operating speed. They didn't drop much below that speed when loaded, or rise much when being driven (e.g. with the falling box of weights).
ReplyDeleteTo me, that suggests that the mechanism included some kind of mass-spring resonance.
Bessler did I believe state he used a spring/springs in one wheel, though he also said he could make a wheel work with different internals now he had the secret, and those may have had springs or not we don't know.
ReplyDeleteA finely balanced wheel of any sort seems unlikely, the rate at wich the one way wheel put on revs and reached top speed infers it is seriously out of balance in the initial condition.
But hey, I like springs and see in their manifold types and behaviours a certain form and beauty.
regards
Jon
Oh, and the 'boing' spring noise reported when Bessler was loading in the weights.... ;)
ReplyDeleteregards
J
Yes, there is good evidence of springs, and that the wheel accelerated very quickly. I'm now going to quote a sentence in the report of Professor 'sGravesande, about the Kassel wheel. What annoys me is that after 238 years there is still no *full* English translation of that report. Mine is:—
Delete"I turned the drum very slowly, and it stood still as soon as I took my hand away; I made it make a turn or two in that way; then I made it move slightly more quickly; I made it make a turn or two; but then I was obliged to keep holding it back; for having let it go, it reached in less than two turns its maximum velocity, so that it made 25 or 26 turns per minute."
I know, some will claim that friction alone can account for the wheel not "running away" when it was turned slowly. But I still incline towards mass-spring resonance as playing some part.
Arktos there is a full English translation of the entir report in my book, "Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?" Moreover I have the original French text too.
DeleteJC
It would be very helpful to know how fast the professor could turn the wheel (in RPMs) before the wheel would sustain itself. From that we could approximate the kinetic energy of the moving weights. It could be that a certain amount of kinetic energy was required before the weights would extend. Just a thought.
DeleteJohn, please compare the original French version with the translation in your book. You will find that the phrase "je lui ai fait faire un tour ou deux," i.e. "I made it make a turn or two," (which 'sGravesande says twice,) is omitted from the English translation. A small detail, but at least we know that if slowly turned, the wheel never "ran away" at any point in a revolution.
DeleteNot only a 'boing' but also a clatter and a bang I suspect. The crabs leg does recoil into the crabs shell 'a bit rapid' on the light side of The Gravity Wheel.
ReplyDeleteBessler simply lost hold of one of the small weight armatures, when he was loading a set of the small weights. As I indicated above, they can take your fingers off.
JW
The clues I've found indicate to me that if a design does NOT use spring tension as a CRITICAL part of its functioning, then it can NOT be the one Bessler found and used.
DeleteThat "boing" noise heard during the Merseburg wheel weight reloading was probably due to a spring that experienced rapid contraction which was then abruptly halted as the unweighted lever it was attached to struck an internal stop in the drum. Such an action will make a spring momentarily "sing" as its coils vibrate at a resonance frequency determined by the physical parameters of the spring. The springs inside of Bessler's wheels were simple helical coil springs.
Seems to be much discussion here about the maximum terminal rotation rates displayed by Bessler's wheels. Here's what I've concluded about this issue.
ReplyDeleteWhen one of Bessler's wheels was "unloaded" and thus running "freely" it would reach a maximum rotation rate and then level off at that rate. There is a simple reason for this.
We must remember that ALL of the energy / mass outputted by one of his wheels was due to the DISPLACEMENT of its weights' CoM onto the drum's descending side. The greater the displacement, the more energy / mass that would be outputted per unit time and the higher would be the wheel's power output.
In my research, I noticed how VERY sensitive the location of the CoM of the 8 weighted levers of a one-directional wheel or two-directional wheel's sub wheel is to the orientation of a weighted lever as it approaches the 7:30 position of a CW rotating drum. Maximum displacement of the CoM ONLY occurs when a weighted lever reaching the 7:30 position of the drum is perfectly VERTICAL. However, as drum rotation rate increases, the growing CF acting on the weights will tend to cause the weighted lever passing the 7:30 position to "hang" at slightly less than a 90 degree angle as its weight is pushed outward away from the axle. That then requires the drum to rotate a bit farther before this lever's weight can begin to swing CCW and inward toward the axle and then begin shifting the other weighted levers in the "train" ahead of it.
This delay, although small, makes a big difference in the location of the CoM and, as the delay increases, begins to draw it in closer to the punctum quietus point under the axle. As this happens the driving torque that the axle experiences decreases and the acceleration that the wheel experiences will decrease. At some point, the CF will be high enough to cause the CoM to be practically at the punctum quietus and the torque driving the axle will then EXACTLY equal the counter torque due to air and bearing drag acting on the wheel's components. At that point there is NO NET torque acting on the axle and the wheel's rotation rate will become steady.
If a load is suddenly applied to the axle of a wheel running at its maximum terminal rotation rate, the supply of energy / mass accumulated in all of the structures of the wheel will be immediately be tapped to move the load and this supply will be quickly reduced. As that happens, the wheel will begin to decelerate. BUT, as that happens, so, too, will the CF acting on the weights inside of the drum. With decreasing CF, the weighted levers approaching the 7:30 position will be able to achieve more verticality and they will then be able to shift the leading train of weights closer to their rim stops a bit earlier. This action then shifts the CoM of the 8 weights back toward its maximum displacement from a vertical line passing through the center of the axle. As this happens, the torque AND power output of the wheel will begin to increase.
At some point, the rising power output of the wheel will exactly match the demand required by the load attached to its axle (plus the small amount wasted in overcoming air and bearing drag). However, this power matching will ALWAYS occur at a LOWER rotation rate than the maximum terminal rotation rate of a wheel when it is running freely. It is for this simple reason that the Weissenstein wheel, while unloaded, ran at 26 rpm's, but quickly slowed to only 20 rpm's when the Archimedean screw water pump was attached to its axle.
Yes TG,
ReplyDeleteThat's all cool, very interesting and everything!
However, I return to my earlier point;
Without the Fundamental Overbalance already established; created by the arrangement of weights and levers, your springs will have nothing to taken in and give back later.
JW
And my point is that without the PRIOR presence of spring tension inside of his wheel mechanics, there will be NO "Fundamental Overbalance". Such an overbalance is critically dependent upon the collection of weights maintaining a certain configuration during drum rotation (which is precisely "coordinated" by the various cords interconnecting the levers) and that configuration will not be maintained if the spring tension is not present and acting on the weighted levers at all times.
DeleteI feel at this point I must ask forgiveness from everyone for taking this thing a wee bit over the top in a lot of ways . I reason that the solution has not been found because of lack of looking , laziness , pretense , comfort , ignorance , ill will , egocentricity , madness , fantasy , doubt , and to a lesser extent poverty , greed and false doctrine ( assumptions made at some point in history by the ignorant ). Forgive me if my favorite mobilist is Bessler himself and not any one still alive . I don't mean any harm but what I do mean to do is find the real solution and something that will act in no way different from what the record describes . The truth is, given the odds , none of us are likely to find a solution . I don't care about the odds . All I care about is applying my own mind to the problem as best I can . Also I care about getting credit if and when I can produce the device . In almost every case individuals are not truthful because of their beliefs ... but because it is presented as opinion nobody is upset by it . But from my point of view there must be something fundamentally amiss in this community , simply because there is so much effort , so much to say and no clear definition of the actual subject we all have in common .
ReplyDeleteI feel that the major reasons that THE solution has not been found are because: a.) it involves some REALLY unique application of spring tension to an otherwise unworkable design, and b.) most mobilists are completely unaware of and, consequently, do NOT yet have access to ALL of the clues that Bessler left us...they are somewhat in the position of poker players hoping to be dealt a royal flush from an INCOMPLETE deck that does not contain any "picture" cards!
DeleteI always keep in mind that Bessler had a LOT of experience working with and repairing ORGANS. He would certainly have qualified as an "organmaker" in his day and even today. He even credits that experience, aside from divine providence, with his being able to find an OB PM gravity wheel design that actually worked!
Many people I've talked with have the erroneous idea that an organ is pretty much like a piano in its operation. True, they both have a keyboard and foot pedals, but after that the comparison ends. Piano keys, when pressed, cause a "hammer" to fly up and strike a stretched metal wire or "string" to produce a note afterwhich the key drops back down to its starting position. When an organ key, which is just a lever, is pressed, it causes a CORD to be pulled which then works a another distant LEVER that opens a valve so that compressed air (and sometimes steam) can escape through a tube or "pipe" whose resonance vibration produces the note. When the organ key is released, a SPRING or counter WEIGHT pulls it back into position and results in the escape valve on the tube being closed so that the note stops being produced.
Bessler would have been an expert on the types of levers, interconnecting cords, springs and counter weights used in organs. That expertise was later applied to his construction of his marvelous wheels. There is a REASON that we see a ORGAN in the background of the 2nd DT portrait. That is to let us know that his wheels used the SAME kinds of components found in organs!
No , I'll stick with the reasons I posted above . Thanks anyway .
DeleteChris said ...
Delete"... But from my point of view there must be something fundamentally amiss in this community ..."
You can't criticize when you don't participate. You make unsubstantiated claims, you shoot down other's ideas with no proof, you offer no constructive advice, and you don't share.
And who are you again ?
DeleteAs far as technical details/theory of operation/drawings/descriptions , etc ... I don't see anything valuable or relevant in anyone's comments thus far but if I did spot something or hear what I thought to be revolutionary to the cause I would say so . Do we all envy Bessler for his achievement or are we inspired by him ? We can't ALL solve the problem . A few (at best ) must stand out ... away from the crowd and approach the problem differently , as Bessler apparently did . He said before him people could only imagine such a device ... and mostly incompletely .
ReplyDelete