The timing of Bessler's discovery, after some ten years research, was unfortunate - 6th June 1712.
Denis Papin's experimental steam cylinder and piston was published in 1690 and he finally left Kassel in 1707. After more than ten years his research culminated in 1704, with a ship powered by his steam engine, mechanically linked to paddles. He died in London in 1712.
In 1698 Thomas Savery patented a steam-powered pump. It was not as powerful as the Newcomen engine.
In 1712 Thomas Newcomen built the first successful steam engine in the world which was used for pumping water from coal mines. Savery's original patent of July 1698 gave 14 years' protection; the next year, 1699, an Act of Parliament was passed which extended his protection for a further 21 years.
Savery's patent covered all engines that raised water by fire and Newcomen was forced to go into partnership with Savery. By 1712, arrangements had been made with Newcomen to develop Newcomen's more advanced design of steam engine, which was marketed under Savery's patent. Newcomen's engine used the piston concept invented in 1690 by the Frenchman Denis Papin to produce the first steam engine capable of raising water from deep mines.
Unfortunately for him, the work of these men accidentally conspired to rob Bessler of his rightful place among the engine pioneers of .the 18th Century. Their machines were designed and built by creditable 'gentlemen' and backed by establishment and members of the Royal Society in London..
I often wonder what might have happened if the others had not been there when Bessler exhibited his machine - and if he had sold it!
Some people have speculated that it was because we experienced the steam age which, via the internal combustion engine, led to the petroleum age and hence the discovery of the many other benefits from the expansion of research into crude oil, and that we might have omitted that era if we had taken hold of Bessler's wheel and thus side-stepped much that we take for granted? My personal opinion is that combustion engines would still have prevailed.
Even as far back as 1673, Huygens carried out experiments with a basic form of internal combustion engine, fuelled by gunpowder, and although he never succeeded in building one that worked, his attempts were helpful to those that were successful. It seems to me perfectly reasonable to think that all the same engines and their fuels would have been developed in more or less the same time period as happened, with or without Bessler's wheel.
JC
Even if Bessler's wheels had arrived in 1500 and were revealed, we STILL would have seen the era of fossil fuel generated power.
ReplyDeleteWhy? Simple. Bessler's wheels were WEAK, FAR weaker than the water wheels and wind mills that ALREADY existed for centuries prior to Bessler. Yes, his wheels were portable and could run day and night, indoor and out, and, most fascinating of all, without conventional fuel supplies. But, they would have had to be very large and massive in order to match the power output of even a small steam engine of his time. Most businessmen were not interested in his wheels because of this issue, not because they thought he was a fraudster with a fake invention. They wanted to get the maximum power for their dollars (thalers) and they realized that Bessler's wheels were not going to provide that. Steam would.
Bessler's discovery only solves an ancient mystery: HOW to achieve a self-moving wheel and NOTHING more! Those who try to make anything "commercial" from them today will, I believe, wind up much like Bessler did...broke, frustrated, and embittered.
However, suppose that he HAD discovered his OB PM gravity wheel design and revealed it in 1500 AD. That revelation would certainly have focused interest on mechanics and, most importantly, on the concepts of energy (now more properly called "energy / mass") and that would definitely have spurred the development of physics.
As a result, Newton might have been publishing his works in the 1500's and Einstein in the early 1800's. Nuclear power might have been discovered a century before the 1940's and there could have been a manned moon landing by 1900!
Maybe now we would have cities on the Moon and Mars, routine space flight, artificially intelligent robots, and all of the other marvelous things that today's "futurists" and "visionaries" are predicting for the END of this century.
Sadly, we'll never know for sure what "might have been". All we know for sure is that at THIS point in time, 300 years after Bessler, we STILL do not have ALL of the details of his wheels. Hopefully, that situation will SOON be changing! I KNOW that I will be doing my best to make sure that happens!
TG said " They wanted to get the maximum power for their dollars (thalers) and they realized that Bessler's wheels were not going to provide that. Steam would. "
ReplyDeleteThat doesn't add up in the real world . Once constructed the wheel's output would have been " free " . I understand the fact that it was comparatively weak beside a steam engine , but coal is not free nor wood or oil or gasoline ...anything that is used to produce steam . This subject reminds me of Fletcher's ( @ BW ) perspective on things . Based on power output the wheel was inferior , but as far as science and human achievement it was superior . An actual P.M. machine is in a class by itself and shouldn't be compared to other machines which rely on combustibles to produce power because the combustibles are not free .
It does add up. Wood was everywhere and manpower was cheap.
DeleteEveryone seems to forget Bessler's wheels were considered fraudulent. If they were not frauds, whether they were powered by gravity(not)or some other legitimate power source, they were too weak either way to compete with steam engines fueled by abundant wood and manpower to cut the wood.
Any energy technology boils down to the bottom line like this.
That's why natural gas is so cheap; it's easier to get than oil now. Solar and wind technology have been put on the back burner because of fracking technology for instance.
Bessler's wheels came too late.
Agreed. When you go buy a car, you don't ask for the wimply engine. You get something with power. Cost of running was a low priority.
DeleteAlthough relatively "weak" (low output) I can see several applications for the Bessler wheel - even today. Since it's running freely and steadily 24/7/365, why not have it dump all its output constantly into a giant horizontal flywheel. Slowly but surely that thing (especially when mounted in circular Halbach-type magnetic bearings) will get up to high speeds and capable to release colossal amounts of torque (and thus energy) over a considerable amount of time. Ideal for load balancing in electrical grids, UPS systems, or surge backup.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, in Besslers time they could have banks of Bessler-wheels pump water into a reservoir as a energy store, and release it when needed, powering all kinds of hydraulic machinery, and (much) later, perhaps electrical generators. It would be intermittent, but that can be overcome by having multiple reservoirs and "bessler-pumps".
It might have made a interesting difference in the industrial revolution, perhaps. And certainly more "eco-friendly".
Understanding how to tap the gravitational field could lead on to tapping the EM field as demonstrated by Al Setalokin with the WhipMag.
ReplyDeleteYes guys,free is the key word.
ReplyDeleteIf they can build wind turbines as big as football fields then they might do the same for Bessler wheels.
Side by side a battery of wheels they would make a potent power station generating clean energy with an unrelenting resource.
It's just waiting for us,..so get to it!
There is simply nothing superior to energy ( movement ) produced by purely mechanical means as far as I can see .
ReplyDeleteYes Chris, I agree with that statement.
ReplyDeleteMy motto throughout my clue research and building programme has been ' A simple system of(solid)falling weights and levers'; I have always taken Karl's comment about 'the carpenters boy very seriously.
I'm glad that on your own account you have decided to 'take a chill-pill'. Saves me having to tell you to.
This is a good Blogg. You need to realise that you are amongst friends here; fellow enthusiasts of Bessler/Gravity Wheel/PM. I suggest that we all help support and encourage each other. Do you have another opportunity in your life to discuss Bessler,I don't.
For me it helps a little with the loneliness of this endeavour. That's another thing that TG left out of his otherwise very good description of the trials and tribulations of the active mobilist recently.
JW
JW,
ReplyDeleteSeriously ...as if , LOL . Everyone expresses their " superiority " in a slightly different way . But in the end , when the device is understood and constructed , a superior mind will have indeed conceived of it ... regardless of the individual and his reputation . The kind of help that people need I have been trying to give it but no one seems to want to receive my message . To sum it up ... it goes like this : Bessler described his device accurately but you ( practically everyone ) have tarnished it with your own ideas of what the device should be . He , being an accomplished machinist for his time could not solve the problem on his own so he looked in the New Testament ( of which he was already very familiar ) and found the principle which he employed to produce his P.M. . I have approached this problem not so much from a religious point of view for it's own sake but rather to understand what it was Bessler found .
Chris, Now you are talking!
ReplyDeleteI completely agree this is an important aspect of Bessler's work, the man; who he was. I'm not sure that he exactly found the answer in the bible, but he clearly found a great deal of his inspiration and ideas there. I have taken this aspect fully into account in my work. You should read my poem 'For The Love of Eurydice'
JW
Bessler said there was no problem making more power, the limit would be the materials not the mechanism. The significance of the Bessler wheel is a dynamic question. Each action caused other actions to occur in the " Discovery" of all the great inventions, and they changed the world each in its own way. The STUBBORN action of Bessler deprived the world of a magnificent device that is surely needed today. I have finally decided what to do first after my wheel works. Find an innovation, successful, family oriented businessman / humanitarian and ask him for his advice. This person has been a hero of my for many years, and I know that his advice will be clearly thought out and in the best interest of all..... individuals and society alike. OH, just one more minor detail....... get the wheel working
ReplyDeleteBessler had put a price on his invention irrespective of who pain that price . The world had it's chance to learn of the mystery . Don't blame Bessler . If I develop it and put a price on it there will no doubt be those who will say that I am greedy or stubborn , but a possession has an owner and a value determined by that owner .
DeleteIt wasn't proven to be a genuine PM therefore it didn't arrive anywhere at any time, so the question is moot.
ReplyDeleteHad it been genuine then the competition was too strong for it commercially in Europe as it had little or no competitive advantage.
Wood and coal was in abundance as was low cost labor to gather the fuel needed for very powerful steam engines under development to industrialize the world, where power, manpower, economies and jobs were required and at stake. Bessler's wheel would not have supported an industrial revolution in heavy industry and manufacturing.
It's development today would have more impact in marginalized areas. For instance in providing the energy to make ice plants practical and affordable. Then individuals, villages, towns and outlying areas off the grid could keep fish and vegetables unspoiled for long enough to get them to market etc and increase their income opportunities.
There is the small problem of the inventor ... and the difficulty of prying the secret from his hands . :) Whoever you are , Anonymous 7 September 2012 02:43 , you're wrong . We never found out who Jack the Ripper was either ... but some bodies were strewn nonetheless .
DeleteIMO, mobilists tend to be "too close" to Bessler's wheels and, consequently, tend to be, literally, hypnotized by the idea of a self-moving machine powered by "free" energy (/ mass). Because of this trance we tend to slip into, it is natural for us to automatically assume that Bessler's wheels could be improved to supply all of the power the world now needs.
ReplyDeleteI, too, used to embrace that sort of thinking. But, as I've showed in earlier comments to other blog entries, one would have to construct 100 foot diameter wheels carrying TONS of weight to be able to supply the electrical needs of a single block of homes. No community would ever put up with that kind of "alternative" power supply for their homes. People are ALREADY beginning to complain loudly about the noise and unsightliness of all of those giant wind turbines that the conservationists want to litter our landscapes with.
The Crookes' radiometer was invented in the 1870's and, when exposed to sunlight, could actually out perform Bessler wheels in terms of their constant power output! What has been done in over a century to use them to provide "commercially viable" free electrical power? NOTHING! Don't expect the situation to be any different AFTER we finally obtain Bessler's design. It won't be!
I accept that Bessler DID find an OB PM gravity wheel design that worked and which used the various principles and "right track" approach I've emphasized in past comments. We WILL find it someday and, most likely, SOON. But, I look at that event as an OPPORTUNITY to study his wheels further with the hope of GREATLY improving their power output, because, ultimately, ONLY if that can be done will they actually be of any REAL benefit to humanity. I certainly hope that will happen.
Meahwhile, I've made a bit more progress in my own attempts to uncover the details of Bessler's "Secret Principle" which governed how he used the CRITICALLY necessary springs within his wheels to maintain their weights' imbalanced CoM during drum rotation. I've recently become aware of some VERY subtle new clues in the 2nd DT portrait that might provide the "breakthrough" that I need to finally successfully reach the end of that "right track" approach I'm on. I'm in the process of checking these clues out right now with the appropriately modified models.
All I can say at this point is that EACH of the weighted levers inside of Bessler's wheels DEFINITELY had TWO springs attached to it and used them is a VERY novel way. If all goes well with my current research, I may, indeed, have a VERY nice Christmas present for everyone here THIS year! No guarantees, of course, but just a really "good" feeling about where the clues are suddenly taking me...
Listen hear TG,..Bessler himself was not in a trance when he stated on the basis of experience with his working wheel that they could be multiplied up to meet any energy requirement.
ReplyDeleteOne can only dream if you sit around playing with computer simulations that never in a million years will be able to predict whether the wheel will work or not.
The only thing that is going to get you there is a hands on approach.
Such boastful claims are not new in the world of science. The relationship between an inventor and his invention is very much like the relationship between a parent and a child. Just as the parent naturally wants the best for his child and has great hopes for him, so, too, the inventor believes that HIS particular invention will have unlimited potential. This would certainly apply to the inventor of something extraordinary like Bessler's OB PM gravity wheel.
DeleteNo, you are wrong about the ability of computer simulations to predict whether a wheel will work or not. If they couldn't, then I would not be using them. They will predict success, but only IF one has the correct design and the model is glitch free. From working with hundreds of models, I know EXACTLY what I have to see in order to proclaim victory. So far, I have not seen it, but I DO believe I'm getting closer with each passing modeling session. If and when I do proclaim such success, I will have NO doubt that any physical model based on it will work...assuming, of course, that the builder is skilled enough to build a precision model because the little 36 inch diameter tabletop model I'm working on will only displace the CoM of its weights about 1/4 of an inch onto the descending side. The model, consequently, will have to be as precisely made and well lubricated as possible IF it is going to have enough net torque to run continuously.
Speaking of a "hands on approach", how is the wheel that YOU are working on doing? I remember a month or so ago that you were awaiting the arrival of certain parts for it. They then arrived, were installed, but the wheel failed to run. You stated that there was another test that you would do on it after some modification. What were the results of that test? You mentioned that, if it failed that test, then you would be "devastated". Did that happen? I hope not, of course.
TG Do you ever sleep?
DeleteI take random catnaps thoughout the day which are only interrupted when the need for drinking, eating, elimination, entertainment, home and garden maintenance, Bessler wheel modeling, and lovemaking arise. I now consider myself to have a near perfect exitence!
DeleteYou are very fortunate,wish you good luck in your modeling.
DeleteBTW can you check in your simulation program how your device will perform ,
let's say, in minus twenty five degree Celsius? Keep in mind all the materials,bearings,lubricant's etc. year 1712.
@ vincent
DeleteUnfortunately, my simulation programs do not take into account the effects of temperature on a mechanism, especially its bearings.
IIRC, Wagner wrote in one of his "critiques" that one day Bessler's Merseburg wheel unexpectedly slowed to a halt. Later in the same work, Wagner mentions that it was probably due to the congealing of its bearing lubricants because of the coldness of the room in which the giant wheel was housed. This can be a big problem when using substances like animal fat or vegetable oil as lubricants.
For this reason, I would advise anybody trying to replicate a scale model of one of the Merseburg wheel's one-directional sub wheels using my "right track" design to make sure he uses some sort of silicone oil on its various bearings and metal to metal contact points that will retain its viscosity should the ambient air temperature drop in the location where the wheel is made to run.
TG...What happened was I was busy on modifications but found suddenly that we had to move house from westville Durban to Ballito on the Dolfin coast.This has delayed things a whole month.
ReplyDeleteThe changes to the wheel look very good and I can see how it could very possibly work.
I believe the wheel consisted of four independant seperate compartments consisting of two opposing weights for balance.
This is why Bessler said he could just keep adding compartments to tailor the power to the load.
It should not be long now and I will have some good news!
I'm unfamiliar with any quotes of Bessler's about "adding compartments to tailor the power to the load", but it sounds like you have a firm design you are committed to and are still slowly working toward the "moment of truth" with it. I shall be hoping you have "joyous" news to report soon.
DeleteThere cannot be any doubt that Bessler really did invent a motor that would run on Gravity. I am a skilled craftsman in the field of composites, I have built many successful complex products for 20 years, but I would really have to check myself before I would make the statement........ " and If it is not as I say, you can chop off my head ". Those are not the words of a person who is trying to deceive someone, especially when the funds were exchanged the Truth would be know in an instant
ReplyDeleteI believe he did succeed and the keys are becoming obvious with each tick of the clock
Very true! A sane person would never say anything of the sort; especially in those days!
DeleteI KNOW I would NOT being giving permission to anybody to decapitate me if my wheel was revealed to be fradulent. Bessler had his "idiosyncracies", but he wasn't suicidal.
DeleteIt would appear Bessler had an Intrinsic Motion machine which is how he describes it. How it was powered is another matter.
ReplyDeleteTG....Another argument for seperate compartments for each set of weights,is the fact that he said the wheel can even be repaired while it is still in operation.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who doubts Bessler's story is in complete denial for reasons of professional jealousy or is subject to the fear of ridicule from the traditional scientific comunity.
That quote about the wheels being "repairable" while in rotation has always perplexed me. I think, perhaps, we are seeing a bad translation here. Maybe Bessler actually said that the wheels could be "adjusted" while in rotation which referred adjusting their speed using the external pendula or some sort of friction brake?
DeleteGravity can't provide energy; it can only transform it from potential to kinetic. The potential has to come from an external source.
ReplyDeleteIf you had 2.5 million dollars to spend on technology in 1712, you'd have made the same choice those gentlemen did.
Doug, that's a correct description of the current understanding, yes. But if I had an X-amount of money to spend in 1712 (or even now) and was confronted with something "impossible" that however does work (and cannot be proven fraudulent) I would go with the little guy who made it work.
DeleteAfter all, spending my money on something else would pose a far greater risk. I'd stick with what works - impossible or not.
That's easy to say after the fact. I'd bet if you had been there, you would not have bought it for 2.5 M. You would have made the pragmatic business decision, and invested in less risky steam, rather than something that could have been a sucker bet.
Delete"The potential has to come from an external source."
DeleteNot necessarily! Any gravitational potential energy / mass could (and did!) come from the energy / mass content of the weights INSIDE of Bessler's wheels.
Doug,...Ive said this once before and I will say it again.
ReplyDeleteThere is a configuration that allows you to use gravity itself to prime heavy weights so they can overbalance a wheel to output energy.
The torque is only for 12 minutes for each setting of weights so if you multiply that by 5 {John's favourite number} you get a full revolution or 60 minutes or 360 degrees,a full revolution.
No, there isn't a configuration. Your wheel is "primed" when you erect it in your shop. It might get 1 revolution, or it might get 10. But it doesn't convert gravity into energy; and contrary to what TG preaches, it won't convert inert mass into energy, either.
DeleteOkay,okay,we'll leave it there.I will leave you in the rut of scientific convention.
DeleteYou not even open to the possibilty that there is something that has been overlooked.
Okay, I'll leave you in a state of denial.
DeleteYour possibility that something has been overlooked is wishful thinking. You are taking a very simple machine ( a wheel and axle) and trying to make it into something complicated (a wheel and axle that transforms energy with no input of energy; the more complicated you try to make it, the less you understand it.
Please do me favour?..Don't go quiet on me when I show you a working wheel.
DeleteI’m with Trevor on this one, there is an exception, a simple system of falling weights and levers that does the job, and yes, something that has been overlooked all this time. Bessler said that he found ‘it’ in a place others were always looking.
DeleteWhen The Gravity Wheel is finally revolving for us all, it will not prove Sir Isaac’s Laws wrong, or any other law/rule that you clearly know so well Doug.
It will simply be an anomaly; ‘the odd one out’; ‘the exception that proves the rules’.
Bumble Bees can’t fly, don’t tell the Bumble Bees!
JW
Doug wrote: "But it doesn't convert gravity into energy; and contrary to what TG preaches, it won't convert inert mass into energy, either."
DeleteJust when I thought you were starting to understand modern physics, you have to go and shatter my belief with a statement like that!
Mass is ALREADY energy and energy is ALREADY mass. No "conversion" from one to the other is required! If an object loses any of its mass, then it ALSO loses some of its energy. If an object gains any mass, then it ALSO gains some energy.
An overbalanced wheel WILL output some of the energy / mass of its weights, but will only do so until equilibrium is achieved which means that the CoM of its weights "settles down" to a position directly below the axle (the "punctum quietus"). In order for the wheel to CONTINUOUSLY output the energy / mass of its weights, some means must be provided to maintain the OB of its CoM. And, most importantly, that means MUST require the input back into the wheel of LESS energy / mass than the wheel outputs due to its OB.
Quite fortunately, Bessler's wheels had this capability.
If they were OB wheels, the meager source of external energy they used is what maintained the OB. Not the magic levers.
DeleteTrevor, you've been saying you're about to have a working wheel ever since I started reading John's blog about a year and a half ago.
DeleteDoug wrote: "If they were OB wheels, the meager source of external energy they used is what maintained the OB. Not the magic levers."
DeleteThe "magic levers" were critical to using the Connectedness Principle within one of Bessler's wheels so that the weighted levers, IF SHIFTED properly, would always keep the CoM of a wheel's 8 active weights on the drum's descending side during rotation. Ultimately, ALL of the energy / mass outputted from one of his wheels came from a equilibrium of weighted levers and springs that was carefully adjusted so that its CoM always stayed OB during drum rotation. This adjustment had to use energy / mass at a lower rate than was outputted from the OB wheel.
I've have pondered this problem for a long time and concluded that the CoM of one of his one-directional wheels was NOT actually being solely raised at the same rate as it was caused to drop by the rotating drum. IF that had been the case, then ALL of the energy / mass being outputted from the rotating drum would have been required in order to continously reset the location of the CoM back to its starting location on the descending side of the rotating drum.
I now think that what was actually happening was that the CoM did not rise so much as it just SLID horizontally away from a vertical line passing through the axle in order to remain fixed in space on the rotating drum's descending side. This continuous sliding action, if perfectly horizontal, would not change the elevation of the CoM with respect to the ground beneath the drum and, thus, would not have required any input of energy / mass. Of course, there was probably some vertical rising of the CoM taking place during drum rotation and an input of energy / mass constantly required for this rising motion. BUT, it would only have been a FRACTION of the drum's outputted energy / mass.
HOW this CoM "horizontal sliding effect" was achieved is, of course, the result of the unique design that Bessler found and used. Hopefully, we will soon have it, too!
Even if the com slid perfectly horizontally, it would still take energy to do so.
DeleteJust when I thought you understood modern physics; tsk.
Doug wrote: "Even if the com slid perfectly horizontally, it would still take energy to do so."
DeleteMy point was that such a motion would not require the input of energy / mass to continuously change the gravitational potential energy / mass of the CoM by actually RAISING it in the Earth's gravity field. Once the CoM was sliding horizontally away from the axle at a constant velocity, it would still not require that much energy / mass be supplied to it...just the amount needed to overcome the air and bearing drag continuously acting on a one-directional wheel's 8 weighted levers and, in the case of Bessler's wheels, that would amount would only have been a FRACTION of the amount of energy / mass outputted by the wheel due to its OB CoM per drum rotation. It, indeed, requires a VERY precise and unique mechanism to function like this.
It doesn't matter, either way. Whether the com was fixed in space as you previously said, or sliding horizontally, back and forth, it requires energy to maintain the com to be in a fixed position or sliding back and forth. If you apply a load to your magic wheel, the com is going to try to sink, and requires energy to counter the load.
DeleteGood luck with your sim.
Doug wrote: "Whether the com was fixed in space as you previously said, or sliding horizontally, back and forth, it requires energy to maintain the com to be in a fixed position or sliding back and forth."
DeleteThis is where things get interesting in a WORKING OB PM gravity wheel design. Although the CoM of the weights is continuously rising and sliding away from its former location within a rotating drum, it remains STATIONARY with respect to the Earth's gravity field! I have had partial success in creating this bizarre effect in model wheels and, indeed, I DO think it was taking place within Bessler's wheels. I have also seen designs by others that managed to do this, but they ALL had to use 100% of the design's outputted energy / mass to do so. Obviously, since Bessler's wheels also were able to output extra energy / mass to operate external machinery, the method he used did not require all of the wheel's outputted energy / mass in order to create this "CoM rising / sliding effect". His design was not only unique, but also VERY efficient when it came to using energy / mass to produce this effect.
Really. Rising and sliding, yet stationary.
DeletePerhaps you could share a design by another you've seen that used 100% of the output to do so, I'd like to know what you're referring to.
"If an object loses any of its mass, then it ALSO loses some of its energy. If an object gains any mass, then it ALSO gains some energy."
DeleteRight.
Unfortunately, in a gravitational field, it loses and gains the same amount of energy. That's why a wheel can't be continually unbalanced by internal shifting weights. Your sim will always come to a rest without the motor turning it at 1 RPM.
Doug wrote: "Really. Rising and sliding, yet stationary."
DeleteExactly! BUT, that's ONLY because the floating CoM has those motions RELATIVE to its starting location on a ROTATING drum. That original starting location can also be considered to be falling and sliding away from the "fixed" CoM in the opposite directions. The two relative motions thus cancel each other out so that the CoM REMAINS motionless with respect to the floor under the wheel and the Earth's gravity field. Since the CoM does not actually rise or fall in the Earth's gravity field, it does not need to gain or lose any energy / mass.
"Your sim will always come to a rest without the motor turning it at 1 RPM."
Not quite. My models DO continue to turn as long as my design can maintain its CoM on the wheel's descending side. The trick is to find THE design that Bessler found and used which did this THROUGHOUT a 45 degree increment of drum rotation. Additionally, at the end of one increment of drum rotation (which is the exact beginning of the NEXT increment), all 8 of a drum's weighed levers must have the EXACT same orientations they possessed at the beginning of the increment. This can NOT be done unless one has the correct or "magic" lever design AND the correct "Connectedness Principle" which amounts to a set of cords of the correct lengths attached to SPECIFIC points on the levers.
And, there is still the CRITICALLY necessary "Secret Principle" to contend with. This specifies HOW the springs were used inside of Bessler's wheels to "assist" with the shifting of their weighted levers during the increment of drum rotation in order to achieve the conditions cited above. I already have the correct "magic" lever design AND the correct "Connectedness Principle" and must now focus my research efforts on finding ALL of the details of the "Secret Principle" (I still have only one of the MOST important of its details at this point in time). I is a monumental task because it forces one to deal with the technicalities of springs which are the "bane" of most mobilists, but it is a task that MUST be successfully completed if Bessler's wheels are ever to spin again!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFrom Arktos yesterday in the previous thread (Bessler’s double portrait …):
ReplyDeleteYes, 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:—
"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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
And from Arktos today also in the previous thread:
John, 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.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The main point of these posts is the statement “at least we know that if slowly turned, the wheel never "ran away" at any point in a revolution”.
If true, then maybe the weight reset/shifting could not begin until weights used in the reset/shifting mechanism(s) had sufficient kinetic energy. That is, the energy required to reset/shift the weights came not from excess energy of the wheel, but from the kinetic energy of the weights themselves (or at least in some part).
Thanks Arktos, I had not seen this information before. The design I am working on requires the wheel to be turning at a minimum speed before the weights will shift to their extended position.
Rick
I should clarify one thing. I made it sound like the weights that extend, are the weights in the reset mechanism, and this is not necessarily true. Also, the shift is not due to CF in any way.
DeleteYes, Rick, as I said, a small detail, but still a "high quality" clue from the best hands-on witness. There are few enough such clues, and I think we present-day researchers have to make the most of them!
DeleteBy the way, if anyone wants to check it out, Professor 'sGravesande's original report, in French, was reprinted in Appendix E of Henry Dircks' book "Perpetuum Mobile; or Search for Self-Motive Power..." (1861) starting on page 518.
DeleteWhen one of Bessler's two-directional wheels was given a push in either direction, this action would cause whichever of its two one-directional "sub wheels" that was undergoing retrograde rotation to begin having its weights "locked" up against their rim stops. The locking up of the 8 weights did not occur simultaneously, but, rather, SEQUENTIALLY as one retrograde rotation was completed and the weights were locked up one after another. As this single initial retrograde rotation took place, the CoM of the retrograde rotating sub wheel's weights would be SLOWLY drawn back to the center of the axle where it could then contribute no counter torque to oppose the driving torque produced by the sub wheel that was rotating in its "preferred " direction and still had the CoM of its 8 weights displaced onto its descending side.
DeleteIf one only gave a two-directional wheel's drum a small push, then the CoM of the retrograde rotating sub wheel's weights would not be drawn in close enough to the center of the axle to significantly shift the COMPOSITE CoM of BOTH sub wheels away from the punctum quietus point under the axle and the wheel would always stop. However, a stronger push would propel the well lubricated drum through an entire rotation and then the Com of its retrograde rotating sub wheel's 8 weights would reside at the center of the axle while the CoM of its other active driving sub wheel's 8 weights remained displaced onto the drum descending side and provide the axle with driving torque. Once this happened the drum would begin rapidly accelerating up to its maximum terminal rotation rate IF the axle was unloaded.
I have just found the original report on-line, at http://cerebro.xu.edu/math/Sources/sGravesande/gravesande.html
ReplyDeleteClick on Volume I and scroll down to page 303, where the report starts.
Thanks Arktos, for clarifying that. I thought you were saying there was no English translation, when I had published one fifteen years ago.
ReplyDeleteI understand your point, and perhaps I should have included the two references, but the words I used seem to me to encapsulate the point equally well, "When I turned it but gently, it always stood still as soon as I took my hand away. But when I gave it any tolerable degree of velocity, I was always obliged to stop it again by force; for when I let it go, it acquired in two or three turns its greatest velocity, after which it revolved at twenty-five or twenty-six times a minute."
JC
To me, the two main facts that 'sGravesande reports, taken together, are possibly the best clues about Bessler's wheel. Also the most puzzling; i.e. the wheel never, ever, tried to "run away" when turned slowly, and yet that large, high-inertia wheel accelerated to its maximum velocity in just two revolutions when started off with only slightly more external energy. That implies the expenditure of a lot of internal energy. But it wouldn't go beyond its characteristic velocity of 26 rpm!
DeleteI completely agree with that, Arktos. A very significant fact.
DeleteHi Andre, I just noticed this. Going back to your comment near the top of this blog, there is more to large energy storage flywheels than meets the eye.
DeleteI hope to be in a position to explain what I mean by that, maybe late this year or more likely in the first half of next year.
Isn't it funny that at some point in history someone cleverly worked out the problem of P.M. and the world went on in the way that it was going and didn't take much notice ? When I read all these things said I can't help but wonder what exactly is being discussed . I am in that place again where I feel I need someone to evaluate my " idea of the week " , but I dare not share it ... to poke humor at myself and use someone else's stab . So what happens when/if someone finally envision the principle and all the people discussing Bessler are caught up in the nonsense " of the day " and likely will not take much notice .
ReplyDeleteI am so sure I have the solution I'd bet my life on it . John , tell J_M to come down to Fl with a ton of gold and a good sharp axe and we have something to discuss .
DeleteGood luck to you ,Chris.
DeleteChris,
DeleteSo this clue doesn't fit your latest running wheel so you summarily dismiss it as more "nonsense of the day". It's no wonder you can't figure out what is being discussed because you don't discuss anything. All you basically do is tell us how great Bessler was for discovering the secret to PM, and then tell us you discovered it too. Maybe, but saying and having are two different things. I don't mean to put you down, and I certainly don't want you to go away. I'm just trying to draw you into carrying on constructive discussions even if they don't fit your idea of a runner. If you are as smart as I think you are, then your talents are needed here. When someone says they want you to share, I don't think it means to share your invention, I think it means to share your expertise and your knowledge. In other words, join in and discuss the "nonsense of the day" ...
Thanks Doug .
DeleteI already gave my opinion concerning the images . But it seems everyone wants to be a leader and not a follower . Hell , if someone had a theory that made sense to me I'd be a follower too . But no one does . I have already made some comments , as Bessler did , that if taken correctly will get someone current with my theory . Bessler said a lot more than most people can hear about his invention . For instance he said ," they rise ( these his things ) as if equal no matter how many sparrows are horribly bitten around on a quiet mill wheel ." He talked a lot about eating ( consuming ) , the cat , himself , the crab ... and hinted that things can be influenced from a remote location ... or by " elemental influence " . All of this concerning something apparently simple and easy to understand and build .
Just for good measure here I will share a design I abandoned : Take into account the "circle of fifths " or MT137 I thnk . Think of it as six levers affixed to the rim of the wheel . Now understand that your axle is split and even so that the levers can pass through the center (the black area ) . Now for ever two levers ( opposite each other ) there is a weight suspended by a chord passing through an eyelet at the center of the wheel ( for a total of three weights ) . The animation of this design looks somewhat like a wheel within a wheel where the only imbalance t=is the continuously " hammering " lever passing over the top as each weight in the center falls and rises .
Doug,..I hear what you are saying and this is because a year ago I had a revelation as to how it can be done,but putting theory into practice is taking much longer than I anticipated.
ReplyDeleteLike Chris I am so confident that it is going to work but finding the right configuration is the key.
I am so,so close you must please excuse my enthiusiasm.
It's somewhat humbling to think that throughout Earth's recorded history, with only two notable exceptions, there have been tens of thousands of mobilists who were convinced "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that they were only "one small step" away from achieving a PM. All were eventually proven wrong by further testing. Heaven only knows how many MILLIONS of man-hours of dreaming, analyzing, planning, and building have gone into his pursuit with absolutely nothing to show for it except the development of the various branches of engineering and the energy / mass conservation laws...which, of course, is nothing to dismiss as worthless!
DeleteWith the first successful replication of Bessler's wheels we will finally have a SCIENCE of PM; that is, we will know exactly what must be done to maintain the OB of a collection of weights' CoM during wheel rotation. As Bessler wrote:
"In this manner I shall be able to show to others the pathway I myself discovered, after many errors, and which will enable them to bring to light, with little difficulty, even more wonderful things." (DT, pg. 265)
Ah, yes, "many errors"...after decades of work, I can certainly appreciate THAT comment!
The important thing is that one does not give up!If I did not consider myself to be near success I would lose heart and throw in the towel.
DeleteThe fact is I do consider myself to be a worthy competitor and am optimistic for success.
The workings of the wheel are not passive the weights are very lively,this is the key.I have used every property of mechanical physics in order to accomplish my goal.
Good luck to you too, Trevor; i think you'll need it.
DeleteTD wrote: "The important thing is that one does not give up! If I did not consider myself to be near success I would lose heart and throw in the towel."
DeleteYes, HOPE is VERY important to achieving results in ANY undertaking, especially the quest to achieve PM.
I remember reading about a psychology experiment performed years ago that came to this same conclusion. The experimenters place lab rats into buckets of water to see how long they could swim before exhaustion set in and they began to drown.
In the first experiment, they filled the water in a bucket up to within an inch of the rim and then dropped a rat in who began swimming about and, of course, trying to get out of the water. The rat could feel the rim of the bucket with his snout, but it was just a bit too far away for him to actually grab onto it and climb out of the water. It was not uncommon for the rats to swim about in the water for up to 15 HOURS before they finally succumbed to exhaustion and began to drown. Of course, the experimenters took them out at this point and let them rest and recover. Their little rat muscles must have really been sore the next day!
In the second experiment, the rats were again dropped into a bucket of water, but this time the water lever was only filled until it reached about half way up to the top of the bucket's rim.
How long were the rats swimming about in this bucket before they began to drown? 10 hours, 15 hours, 20 hours? No. Surprisingly, they began to drown in only 5 MINUTES!
It was concluded that in this second experiment the rats certainly did not drown from physical exhaustion. Rather, because they could not feel the rim of the bucket with their little snouts as did the rats in the almost full buckets of water, they realized that there was NO hope of ever escaping from the bucket of water and it was just a matter of time before they drowned and died. This then created such a state of depression in their little rat brains that they, literally, just gave up and began to drown in order to "get it over with". The rats in the first experiment's almost filled to the rim buckets, however, HAD some hope and it was enough to keep them motivated and continuously trying to achieve their goal of escaping from the buckets.
Yes, HOPE is a very important thing to have as a mobilist, especially a Bessler mobilist. That's why blogs like this are important...to provide some hope and counteract the messages of hopelessness coming from the "no track" skeptics out there. If a mobilist EVER accepts such a message as being valid, then it is just a matter of time before he gives up and quits just like those poor rats did in those second only half filled buckets of water!
Image of the above mentioned design :
ReplyDeletehttp://i717.photobucket.com/albums/ww175/christo4_99/x3.jpg
The device would be balanced ( symmetrical ) except for the motion of the two levers crossing the center . The weight in the center rising and falling ( x3 ) would cause the movement without contributing lateral force either negatively or positively .
DeleteI hope this explains , from my point of view why I get excited about many of my ideas . Though I have abandoned it , it still makes a lot of sense to me that this could work ...the reason being that the two levers can be lifted at some point across the center and then inevitably will settle again upon rotation .
DeleteThanks for giving us a link to your sketch, Chris. I, too, have a photobucket account and, possibly, in the future I will provide some sketches of what I'm working on.
DeleteThe design you show uses long levers and it would be necessary to not have the axle obstructing their swing path inside of a rotating drum. Thus, your design could not be the design Bessler used because he told us he would allow skeptics to place their hand through a hole in a wheel's drum so that they could "grope" the internal section of axle and verify that there was nothing attached to it.
The problem with the design you show is that it's equivalent to those designs that have compartments containing rolling ball weights. In those, as a ball reaches the 9:00 position of a CW turning wheel, it rolls toward the axle while, simultaneously, a ball near the axle on the wheels descending side rolls out toward the rim of its compartment. The 1st illustration in MT shows such a wheel.
Sadly, designs of this type do not work because they can not manage to rotate enough to make the ball weights horizontal with the axle begin rolling toward the descending side of the wheel. I don't think your current long lever version of this basic design will solve this problem. However, you might consider modifying the design by relocating the levers so that they begin swinging to the wheel's descending side as they approach the 10:30 position of the rotating drum (which will require shorter levers). And, of course, you should seriously consider introducing springs into the design to provide a bit of assistance to the levers during critical points in the drum's rotation.
Good luck with it.
This was just a design I abandoned . If you were to see an animation of the design you would better understand the idea . The things you said above are not applicable to this design . If you download the Blender 3d app I can send you an animation which will clear it up for you .
DeleteAlso...Bessler said his axle was " evenly matched " and had many Facher which translates to " ranges " or followers . The weights in the center of this design are not rolling , they are hanging by chords which are passed through an eyelet at the center or three eyelets . At least get the concept right before you criticize it . Besides , I just wanted to share something because people say I never share my ideas ,
Deletelet us find areas that we can all agree on as absolute truths
ReplyDeletea one lb weight can have more energy than one lb. if the weight is accelerated then it has increased energy on impact. To accomplish this It must fall...... a falling weight gains more energy the farther it falls
0n his 12 ft wheel he would have over 37.69908 ft of circumference. 3.14159
That is why the wheels kept getting larger in diameter
I find that the reason that Bessler's wheels kept getting larger is because this allowed proportionately longer levers to be used and they then resulted in the CoM being displaced a proportionately farther distance out onto the descending side of a drum for a proportionately larger CONSTANT driving torque.
DeleteIt sounds like you are an advocate of the "impact" approach to explaining how Bessler's wheels operated. The problem with this approach is that, while a weight is falling, it becomes detached from the wheel momentarily and, during that time, the wheel suddenly becomes imbalanced and begins rotation in the opposite direction that the impact will drive it in once the impact occurs. The result is that one gains no extra rotational energy / mass from the impacts. I've seen designs like this and all they do is run "jerkily" for a while as the impacts occur sequentially and then the wheels inevitably stop.
TG...seriously , I guess you don't read what I write either ... what's your email ? I made a WMV of the animation if you'd like to see it .
ReplyDeleteThis design boasts like a peacock's tail ... upside down .
ReplyDeleteHere's a link to the video : http://www.overunity.com/12698/my-idea-before-last-a-p-m-dream/msg335562/#msg335562
ReplyDeleteI did view your .wmv file on overunity.com and, quite frankly, it's so incomplete that I can not make out exactly how it is supposed to work. Videos of animations are nice, but they should contain as much detail as possible and, if possible, some labeling of parts.
DeleteAfter slowing the playback to a crawl, I did notice the sequence of pairs of left side long levers flopping over to the right side of the axle and that their intersection point passed through the axle. Is this intersection point supposed to be carrying weights of some sort from the left to right side of the wheel? Also, what is that "bouncy" ball dropping below and then back up again to the axle supposed to signify?
IF this design is just transferring weights from one side of the wheel carrying the levers to the other side through the axle as the weights approach a horizontal line passing through the axle, then I can not change my original negative assessment of it.
TG,
DeleteAre you retarded ? Seriously , it seems to me that you can't wrap your brain around this simple design . You keep adding aspects to it that aren't there . Also you are being critical of it's "incompleteness" when it is actually quite complete except for the chords which I don't see as necessary to animate . Yes, the weights in the center hang freely (and revolve ) with the rotation of the wheel and are meant to pull the levers through the center of gravity at the crossing point . Very simple and yet you don't seem to grasp it . The weights are not involved in the overbalance of the wheel but rather only serve to "walk" the levers to the opposite position , hopefully adding an impulse to the wheel .
Such strong language is neither helpful nor necessary, Chris. I found the animation although interesting not too clear either. TG is trying to get things clear, that's all.
DeleteThe design is very simple ... if someone is listening , but if they are not things can get complicated . There are six levers and three weights . The weights are connected to the levers ( two levers per weight ) at their intersection by a chord which passes through an eyelet at the center of the wheel . As the levers approach TDC and BDC they are hoisted across the center of gravity by the weights . Simple .
DeleteI'm only "retarded" when it comes to understanding ALL of the details of Bessler's "Secret Principle". A condition with I hope will only be temporary!
DeleteOkay, I think I'm starting to begin to understand what you were trying to convey with your animation. There are a total of 6 levers and there is a weight suspended between 3 pairs of them (a total of 3 weights). The intersection points of the pairs of levers take turns passing through the center of the wheel (being allowed because there is not section of axle there to block their travel) during rotation. Now you are saying that the motion of each of these three pairs of levers is assisted as the weight connecting them drops during the "transit" of their intersection point through the center of the wheel.
Although you do not show where the CoM of the levers and their weights are located during the wheel's rotation, I assume that you are thinking that it is ALWAYS located to the right of the center of the wheel. The problem I see with this design (assuming that I have finally gotten its mode of operation correct) is that the levers, as they move to the right and their intersection point passes through the center, must then begin LIFTING the weight back again toward the center of the wheel. I suspect that all that would happen with such a design is that the weight would sink as the levers' intersection point passed through the center and then their further motion to the right side of the wheel would be "retarded" as they were forced to again lift their suspended weight that then hung below the axle.
What happens to the weights after they drop below the center of the wheel and then return? Do they stay there for another 120 degrees of wheel rotation until it's their "turn" again? If so, what keeps them located at the center?
A P pg . 327 :
ReplyDeleteXIII (b) The biting cold was the cause of my wheel's coming to a
standstill.
Wagner says that because there was such a hard frost the grease
and oil I used thickened and hardened, and that as a result my
wheel stopped of its own accord. Nonsense! As if we haven't by
now had enough lies, he says not in passing, but as a matter of
"absolute fact", that my wheel rotates only by imparted momentum.
Well, Wagner is an "absolute liar" until he can demonstrate the truth
of this lie.
It is true that it was WAGNER who came to conclusion that the Merseburg wheel failed to turn on ONE occasion because of a low temperature related viscosity increase of its various lubricants. He did, however, also mention that, at the time of the failure, Bessler told a patron viewing the wheel that it must have been "rubbing" against something that, eventually, brought it to a stop.
DeleteI think this is certainly a possible alternative explanation and that Wagner should not have been so quick to dismiss it. Possibly, that rubbing occurred at the contact point between one of the axle pivots and the brass bearing piece that it was "nested" in. All it would take was for the lubricant there to have dissipated so that there was bare steel turning against bare brass. That type of drag could easily begin converting 10's of watts of the wheel's stored and constantly produced power into heat and it would have been virtually unnoticeable unless someone actually touched the affected pivot and noticed how hot it had become. Bessler, of course, would have checked the pivots immediately as soon as the wheel "seized up" and, after relubricating them, given the wheel a push to get it up to speed again.
Warning :
ReplyDeleteJust because no one has been able to solve Bessler's principle and device thus far , do not pretend that it cannot be just any Joe Shmoe that can stuble upon it . Nothing man-made exist in reality unless it exists first in the mind .
Here are two clues from MT that I have not seen mentioned by anyone before.
ReplyDeleteIn MT30 at M, Bessler gives us his Helping-Hand Clue. I wondered if those of you who are thinking about, designing, modelling or building The Mechanism: if you have ever found this particular clue to be of help?
In MT46 again at M (note ‘The M Coincidence’) Bessler states in his handwritten notes accompanying the image that “M shows a heavy perpendicular”
However, when we examine the image for ourselves, we see that in fact M shows a heavy horizontal (or a pair of horizontals?), and not a perpendicular.
Has anyone else found this clue to be useful too?
JW
JW wrote: "Here are two clues from MT that I have not seen mentioned by anyone before."
DeleteMaybe the reason no one discusses them is because they apply to designs that are UNworkable and, IMO, are IRRELEVANT to the "right track" design that Bessler found and used?!
That "Helping Hand" in MT30 is NOT a clue. It is just an artistic device that Bessler uses to try to help the reader understand how the weighted levers in the wheel are being raised up when the rope wrapped around their pivot pulleys is forced downward by its connection to yet another lever which the hand operates. Of course, in the wheel the downward force is applied to these levers when each in its turn gets "squeezed" as it passes under the cog gear labeled "D".
In MT46 the "large perpendicular" labeled "M" IS perpendicular to the AXIS of the screw labeled "D". Note the semi-circular ends of this large perpendicular piece. These are used in other MT illustrations and even in one of Wagner's "Critiques"! This large perpendicular is intended to function as a sort of aerodynamic brake to prevent VARIOUS types of mechanisms from running too quickly!
Bessler obviously thought that this could be a problem, but, if he had actually built this machine, he would have quickly realized that, just like the regenerative water wheel, it is UNworkable IF the number of sphere weights being lifted per unit of time by screw "D" is EQUAL to the number of sphere weights dropping per unit of time along the rim of wheel "A". It CAN be made to run, BRIEFLY, but only if the number of sphere weights descending is greater than the number ascending per unit of time If, however, that is arranged, it won't be long before the supply of sphere weights on channel "E" is completely depleted and there won't be enough sphere weights on the rim of wheel "A" to continue to lift the full load of them on screw "D".
These "clues" are worthless as, unfortunately, are MOST of the other "clues" mobilists THINK they see in MT illustrations. Yes, there ARE a few VERY important clues in MT, but I would again emphasize that the SERIOUS "right track" Bessler mobilist focus his or her efforts on the MANY MORE clues found in the TWO DT portraits. All one will learn from MT is what does NOT work...the portraits will get you on the "right track" to what WILL work!
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNo, no, no, no, no TG! You’ve got that completely wrong again. You have walked right past The Treasure Trove of (visual) Clues, not seeing it for what it is, and mistakenly gone to the Fitzsch brother’s portraits instead.
ReplyDeleteI am perfectly certain that the other followers of this Blogg will see the sense of my argument and the precariousness of yours.
My argument says that Bessler spent a great deal of time and effort carving woodcut images and hiding his clues in them; that he explicitly says this is what he has done in his handwritten notes accompanying the work.
Your argument says that Bessler spent a great deal of time and effort carving woodcut images that are overwhelmingly “irrelevant and worthless” (“except for a few important clues”?) and preferred instead to embed his visual clues in an unprecedented super-collaboration with another Artist, then “allowing” the other Artist to sign the work so that everyone would think it was not Bessler who did it.
If other Bloggers do feel forced to choose between these two possibilities, it’s a bit of a ‘no-brainer’ for them, isn’t it?
JW
JW wrote: "My argument says that Bessler spent a great deal of time and effort carving woodcut images and hiding his clues in them..."
DeleteYour "argument" is, IMO, BOGUS! WHY would Bessler go to the trouble of putting all sorts of "clues" into the MT woodcuts when he ORIGINALLY intended to end the text by giving woodcuts that would have revealed ALL of the construction details of his one- and two-directional wheels at "the appropriate place" as he mentions several times in the notations to the illustrations at the beginning?
Sorry, but I still think you are WASTING your time chasing after "The Treasure Trove of (visual) Clues" that you have convinced yourself are in MT. Yes, at one time they were there AT THE END, but that changed after they were removed, burned, and buried along with Bessler's other notes and illustrations that gave the details of this OB PM gravity wheels.
If there are any " clues " that are hidden they are trumped by the simple and straightforward explanation of the action of the weights which Bessler described . From my point of view it is not necessary to complicate things with alledged clues and artifacts that may or may not exist in a more or less specific context .
ReplyDelete"they are trumped by the simple and straightforward explanation of the action of the weights which Bessler described"
DeleteYes Chris, I can live with that contention. That is why I continually write 'visual clues' to differentiate them from the 'written clues' on this Blogg. It is also why on my website I have divided the clues into the two types; written and picture.
I do believe there are other types of clue; I call them The Code Breaking type, which JC seems to be engaged in. I have spent no time on this. I do not believe there are any clues in the Fitzsch brother’s portraits of Bessler.
Both types of clue, written and visual have been important to me, the eyewitness accounts are also important.
Probably you are right, the written clues are the most useful to the most people. However, because I am a visual artist, it should hardly come as a great surprise to anyone that I have spent a great deal of time on the visual clues.
We all bring our own particular talents and abilities to the party.
What else could we do?
JW
JW wrote: "I do not believe there are any clues in the Fitzsch brother’s portraits of Bessler."
DeleteIF you had made a DETAILED study of the two portraits while simultaneously modeling and saw the RICH abundance of mathematical clues contained in BOTH of them, then you would QUICKLY change your mind. Specifically, there are clues in the two portraits that tell EXACTLY how to shape and position the "magic" levers within the drum and how to attach the cords required by the "Connectedness Principle" to these levers. There are also clues, which I previously mentioned, that even tell HOW MANY springs Bessler used in each of his two-directional wheels as well as the size and type of springs used. These various clues are REPEATED in BOTH portraits. The chance of this happening by coincidence is so small as to be nearly equal to zero! (Which is another way of saying that the chance of it being done ON PURPOSE is close to 100%!)
Yes, there are a FEW important clues in MT, but they are almost insignificant in quantity compared to what will be found in the portraits! To become a "right track" mobilist, one must, literally, memorize and precisely measure every angle, line, number, and ratio in those portraits. It's a MAJOR task in itself, but one will make little if any progress if he does not do EXACTLY that. There was a time when, like you and many others, I casually dismissed the portraits as interesting, but irrelevant. NOW I could KICK myself in the arse for having done so and, in the process, WASTED many years of time!
Justsomeone says : If you draw a line from Bessler's ear to his butt, in the portrait, it CLEARLY shows that Bessler hears that TG is pulling clues out of his BUTT!!!
ReplyDeleteNot really. ALL of the clues I am currently working with as I chase down the details of the "Secret Principle" come SOLELY from the two portraits. There is, however, always the danger that one will wind up pulling INTERPRETATIONS from his butt which I HAVE done on occasion to my regret and additional waste of time in correcting. I can also assure everyone that the various interpretations I gave about the "vase, skull, book, and hands" in the last blog entry were not pulled from anyone's butt...they ARE the correct interpretations and if one is not working with them, then he can forget about making any serious progress in finding THE design that Bessler found and used.
DeleteVisual clues, textual (written) clues, coded clues, in short: clues everywhere. Consider this: isn't it likely that Bessler - obsessed and frustrated as he may very well have been, attacked and ridiculed even after presenting, demonstrating and testing a working gravity engine - would have left several redundant but cleverly hidden clues in all kinds of ways?
ReplyDeleteIn other words, perhaps it's possible to derive a working gravity engine design from all clues combined and/or one separate set of clues? I know that is what I would have done. Repeat (redundant) clues, not only visually or textually, but all over the place, everywhere, including obvious codes to alert the reader "with a discerning eye" that there are clues everywhere.
There ARE many "redundant" clues found in the two DT portraits, both within each portrait AND between the two. Other than those, the best other clues to be found are the textual descriptions that Bessler gives in both AP and DT and the notes to CERTAIN of the MT illustrations. I believe that all of these clues, PARTICULARLY the mathematical ones in the portraits, WILL lead the serious Bessler mobilist to a solution.
DeleteNo, it won't happen in a week or a month or, perhaps, even a year or so. But, I do know this: IF one does not START by fully accepting that the portrait clues hold the MOST and the BEST of the clues, then he will only find himself continously frustrated by his lack of results. I was in that SAD catagory for more time than I care to think about. I am now OUT of that catagory and making REAL progress for the FIRST time in DECADES. I would not make such a statement if I did not KNOW it to be 100% TRUE.
You're studying all of the words, images, translations, Bible references, and whatever else you can find about Bessler and his wheels? Great! BUT, if you neglect or dismiss the two DT portraits, then you might as well not WASTE your time studying anything else! The portrait clues are the FINAL key to solving the Bessler wheel mystery!
Credo che ad Oggi siete lontano dalla verità .
ReplyDelete