Monday, 15 October 2012

Johann Bessler's wheel was ahead of its time.

We routinely discuss the various tests that Bessler's wheel was subjected to, such as the 70 pound lifting test, the translocation to a second set of bearings, the 54 day endurance test and the turning of the archimedes pump. Plus, the ability of the latter two wheels to turn in either direction... and there were numerous examination carried out over the twelve years or so, most likely executed by persons determined to prove the alleged scoundrel a fake, but no one succeeded, hence our view that he was genuine.  

I was considering what other tests Bessler might have included to try to prove his machine was genuine and I couldn't think of any.  In Gründlicher Bericht he describes the possible uses his machine could be put to, such as driving a mill wheel, cable making, glass or stone polishing, alloying, laundry and bleaching, in clocks and machinery associated with hydraulics; pumping water for various uses. I don't think that any of these could easily be added to the ones he demonstrated at the castle.

I have always assumed that during his two meetings with Gottfried Leibniz, Bessler asked what tests the latter could recommend he arrange, and perhaps the endurance test would have been suggested, along with the advice to ensure the wheel bearings did not seize up, perhaps by slowing the wheel down. They might have also discussed the ones described in the previous paragraph, but I think they were probably dismissed as unworkable or not worth the trouble?

As far as I can see the only additional possibility available to him, was to find a man of unimpeachable reputation for absolute integrity who, having seen the interior of the machine, could vouch for its validity  - and Bessler found that man in Karl, the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel.  

This leads me on to another thought.  In those suggested uses Bessler provides in his Gründlicher Bericht, there isn't really one that could be put to beneficial use in place of the existing methods used at that time.  Pumping water out of mines seems to me to hold the most potential but there was competition in the form of the steam engines of Savery and Newcomen.  But Savery's engine was limited to a depth of 10 meters (just over 30 feet) and Newcomen's, operating huge pistons, eventually prevailed.  

But these machines were steam driven.  It is hard to imagine Bessler's wheel drawing up much water by means of an archimedes pump!  No wonder Karl did not buy it for his cascade.  All cascades and fountains of the time were gravity-fed from a number of reservoirs on the top of the hill ... how ironic!

I think that Bessler failed to sell his machine for the simple reason that his invention was ahead of its time. Many inventions are conceived simultaneously by several different persons because the time is "right", meaning that a technical and scientific foundation exists and that there is demand and business potential for the invention, but Bessler's wheel came at a time when there was no way of using it to pump water.  Piston pumps using one way valves had existed but they were few and far between and too small for Karl's cascade. Now, however, the conditions are perfect for Bessler's wheel as an electricity generator  and all the other things we can imagine; I suspect it will be discovered simultaneously by different individuals from many different places, because the conditions for its entry into the modern world are last.




  1. Instead of talking so much about anything around the wheel you should present the solution, really, before 2012 ends...

  2. Yes John you're absulutely right of course.It is idealy suited to generating electric current especially because of its contant speed characteristic.
    If only we can get this thing birthed!

  3. Alas, such is the fate of those that are (way) ahead of their time. The saying goes - if you're one step ahead of the pack, you're a genius, if you're two steps ahead, you're a crackpot. Bessler was at the very least two steps ahead.

    When Bessler's invention finally sees the light of day again, I expect that lots and lots of engineers are going to improve on it, and/or design and construct several variations on the theme. And that's a good thing - the time is certainly right for something like this.

  4. I daren't say it will be this year Trevor - I've been saying that for the last, God knows how many years! But, fingers crossed.

    Yes I think you're right Andre, certainly if they see my cobbled-together effort (assuming it works)they will have no problem improving it!


  5. @JC “Now, however, the conditions are perfect for Bessler's wheel as an electricity generator and all the other things we can imagine; I suspect it will be discovered simultaneously by different individuals from many different places, because the conditions for its entry into the modern world are right: at last”

    Hey JC! Where did that idea come from? Are you now a proponent of my ‘sheep rolling over the cattle grid’ observation?

    As far as I'm concerned this year is still possible


  6. Was Bessler "ahead of his time"? Not really when one considers that people had been searching, UNsuccessfully, for a working PM gravity wheel design for about 1,000 years BEFORE he came along! I suspect that the quest may even go back MUCH farther than that to the ancient Greeks and Persians who were playing around with various mechanical principles centuries before Jesus was born. Unlike them, however, he was lucky enough to finally stumble upon the design that worked.

    Well, my view on the future potential of Bessler's wheels, as they originally performed, is NOT an optimistic one at all. IF they can be duplicated today, then I think they will suffer the same fate as did Crooks' "radiometer"; that is, they will be perceived as amazing by the public and get some media coverage, but then they will be quickly dismissed as having little practical value. They will, of course, attract the attention of a few craftsmen, but the serious investors will keep their distance and maintain a "wait and see" attitude. They will wait, but they will not see what they want to in order to motivate them to start sinking cash into developing the design.

    In fact, I think it is actually a BIG mistake to even try to find a practical commercial use for Bessler's wheels! Once the design is found, it really needs to be minutely scrutinized by professional engineers so that all of the mathematical intricacies of its operation are understood. THEN, with that information available, it will be time to see if it is possible to GREATLY improve their performance. I'm also NOT very optimistic about this possibility, but I'm trying to keep an open mind about it.

    My ONLY goal is to finally figure out, with as much accuracy as possible, just HOW Bessler made those wheels of his turn. Once I achieve that goal, my work will be finished and I will wish whoever tries thereafter to make something more out of his wheels the best of luck with them...they will need it!

  7. Research update:

    Well, I had another computer modeling "marathon" earlier today and have reached a rather inescapable conclusion. That is that it is NOT possible to maintain the OB of one of Bessler's one-directional wheels or two-directional wheel's "sub wheels" by ONLY assigning a SINGLE spring to each of its 8 weighted levers. As a consequence, I am now moving on to the two springs per weighed lever approach. This, of course, complicates the modeling process, but could be yet another reason why no mobilist since Bessler has managed to duplicate HIS design (yes, Asa Jackson made a working wheel, but it was definitely NOT the same as Bessler's). Most mobilists are terrified at the thought of using springs in their wheels and the idea of having to use TWO of them per weighted lever would discourage about 9,999 out of 10,000 of them from even trying!

    Yes, I know that I reported in the last blog entry's comment section that I had managed to get that immediate and smooth lifting motion of the 9:00 going to 10:30 drum position weighted lever by only using a single spring on my levers. That is quite true, but to do it I could NOT have my 7:30 lever VERTICALLY oriented which is CRITICAL to maximizing the OB of the wheel's weights' CoM. The reason the lift worked so smoothly was because that non-verticality of the 7:30 weighted lever allowed it to fall farther as it rotated CCW about its pivot during a 45 degree internal of CW drum rotation and thereby supply additional energy / mass to help lift the 9:00 going to 10:30 lever's weight back toward its rim stop. Unfortunately, that extra energy / mass is NOT available when the 7:30 weighed lever is hanging vertically as it MUST do. Some other means of supplying the needed extra energy / mass MUST be found.

    And, now that I am again returning to the two springs per weighted lever approach, I can see that it is, indeed, the better choice. Why? Well, in that first DT portrait, this approach is CLEARLY indicated by the "parted wig clue". As I previously mentioned, the individual curls in that wig stand for the helical coil springs used in Bessler's wheels. The two halves of the wig represent the two sub wheels within one of his two-directional wheels each of which contained 8 weighted levers. Each side of the wig has 16 curls which means that EACH of the sub wheels inside of one of his two-directional wheels contained 16 helical coil springs and that means that each of that sub wheel's 8 weighted levers had to have TWO springs attached to it. There is NO way of getting around this interpretation of this VITAL clue. There are no alternative interpretations. Each weighted lever had TWO springs attached to it.

    How do I know that this clue is valid and not just another one of Bessler's "decoy" clues purposely inserted into the portraits to lead future reverse engineering mobilists astray? Simple. That wig is wrapped right around the Master's head and shows that he wanted to EMPHASIZE that he was the originator of that particular design element. He would not have used that sort of proximity with a false clue. It IS valid and, from now on, I will ONLY be working with two spring per weighted lever designs.

    Amazing how difficult that last 0.5% of the "right track" path to a working OB PM gravity wheel can be!

  8. Hey guys ready for 1 month and gravity wheel!

    1. Good luck, "K". I shall mark November 16th on my calendar and eagerly await the revelation of your gravity wheel! I hope that JC will not be too embarrassed that you have beaten him to the solution!

  9. @JC
    Glad to see that you are busy blogging and updating... However, you skipped past parametric oscillation pretty fast. I have been looking at the data on Wikipedia and some related articles. The general idea seems to be that the interesting resonant frequency would be around double the "natural" frequency, and the amplitudes should change as sine functions. Are you fellows doing all that? And how? Have you decided what the natural frequency of a Bessler wheel should be?

  10. Sorry Mimi, I just wanted to point out that I have been studying parametric oscillation for several years and put my findings up for all to see at

    I have been particularly interested in trying to cause the weights to replicate the actions of the "kiiking" man. I believe I have succeeded, but of course a full working model is the only thing which will confirms this.


    1. I went through your besslerswheel site again and found this line:

      "The wheel [referring to Bessler's one directional wheels] was rotated by the overbalancing position of the primary weight. In order for the primary weight to be able to re-input what it delivered along the way, it was lifted at or just after the six o’clock position, by the action of the shifter weight. The shifter weight was able to lift the primary weight again because it was returned to its ready-to-fall position by the rotation of the wheel, which was caused by the imbalance of the primary weight [this "resetting" apparently takes place as the pair approaches the 3:00 position of the wheel]. While returning to its former ready-to-fall position the shifter weight pushed out the primary weight towards the edge of the wheel again ready for its ‘power arc’ again."

      The problem I see with this approach is that, as your coupled "shifter / primary" weight pairs are flopping about near the 3:00 and 6:00 positions of the rim of your wheel, there will be NO actual changes in the locations of their individual two weight CoM's relative to the wheel's axle. Thus, your wheel will behave exactly as it would if you merely attached five stationary weights near the rim of the wheel that were each equidistant from the axle and from their adjacent weights. Such a system has a composite CoM with a location that is exactly at the center of the wheel and can produce NO torque.

      You also state:

      "To return to kiiking, the person on the swing, raises his body as quickly as possible at the six o’clock point by straightening his legs, just as the primary weight is lifted by the fall of the shifter weight at the same point. Again, at the twelve o’clock point the swinger squats in order to shorten the pendulum by the three o’clock point - and this action is mimicked by the primary weight which is moved by the shifter weight falling."

      The athlete engaging in the sport of kiiking is not really doing the same thing that the weight pairs in your wheel are supposed to do. At the 6:00 position of his swing, the athlete uses some of the chemical potential energy / mass of his body to lift his body's CoM against the pull of gravity and thereby shift its CoM closer to the swing's axis of rotation. Thus, his body is analogous to the "primary" weight in your approach, BUT there is NO shifter weight involved. In his case there TRULY is a shifting in the AVERAGE location of the CoM of the system taking place that can accelerate the rotation rate of the swing.

      I agree that your shifter weights, IF properly leveraged, will be able to lift your primary weights closer to the axle of your wheel at the 6:00 position and later farther from the axle near the 3:00 position and that, when all five primary weights are considered, this would certainly displace their composite CoM onto the wheel's descending side. BUT, you do NOT discuss what is happening to the location of the composite CoM of all of the SHIFTER weights while that is happening. I think you will find that it is being displaced out onto the wheel's ASCENDING side in such a way that, when you consider the composite CoM of ALL of the shifter AND primary weights together, it will reside either at or very near the "punctum quietus" point under the axle, a location from which no or only small brief driving torque can be created.

      Well, maybe I'm basing too much on what's on your website concerning the possible application of kiiking to Bessler's wheels and you have found ways around these obvious problems. Like others, I look forward to finally seeing what you have come up with. I'm STILL betting that revelation will be forthcoming BEFORE this Christmas.

    2. If we assume that a Bessler wheel is driven by parametric oscillation, I think there is probably a range for an acceptable natural frequency/wheel speed. After all, the Merseburg wheel ran significantly faster than the Kassel wheel, although they were about the same diameter.

      For my first attempt at a paired-mass wheel, with two 4kg masses moving radially, I started the 9 o'clock mass at 0.3m from the center, and the 3 o'clock mass at 0.15m. I could get one full oscillation per wheel revolution, which gives two sinusoidal "pulls" from gravity on the mass-pair, always in the desired direction, as follows:

      Wheel speed: 30 radians/second (about 286.5 rpm)

      Tension spring between each mass and center: Free length = 0.15m, Max length = 0.5m, Max force = 2600N (giving k = 7428.6N/m, which is high!)

      I'm sure a more reasonable, slower wheel model could be built, if the mass-pair started at a smaller offset, say 0.2m/0.25m.

      As expected, as the oscillation amplitude increases, its frequency drops a bit, because the outer mass dwells longer in a region of higher centrifugal force.

      As said before, so far I haven't found any net energy gain from this approach.

    3. "After all, the Merseburg wheel ran significantly faster than the Kassel wheel, although they were about the same diameter."

      I think the main reason that the Kassel or Weissenstein wheel had a lower terminal rotation rate when running freely than did the Merseburg wheel was because the weights used inside of the Weissenstein wheel were about twice as massive as those in the Merseburg wheel (8 lbs as compared to 4 lbs). Those more massive Weissenstein wheel weights would therefore have been subject to more CF at any particular rotation rate compared to what would have been experienced by the Merseburg wheel weights. The greater the CF acting on the 6:00 going to 9:00 position weights inside of a CW turning drum, the greater the angle through which the drum would have to rotate in order to allow the 7:30 going to 9:00 position weighted levers to BEGIN to lift the 9:00 going to 10:30 position weighted levers (and, of course, all of the other counter balanced weighted levers leading it up to the one on the descending side whose attached end weight finally makes contact with its rim stop). That delay, even though it was only a fraction of a second, then resulted in the CoM of all of an 8 weighted lever one-directional sub wheel being "drawn" closer to the punctum quietus point under the axle and thereby reducing the torque acting on the axle. As axle torque was lowered, the drum was only able to reach a lower rotation rate before that driving torque was exactly cancelled out by the counter torques of air and bearing drag that acted on the drum. Consequently, Bessler's drums could only reach lowerer and lower terminal rotation rates as the masses of their weights were increased.

      In the past, I have tried MANY designs that used simple diametrically opposed "pairs" of weights that employed a wide variety of methods in an effort to keep their CoM on a wheel's descending side for at least most of a complete wheel rotation. NO method ever worked because when it came time to reset the weights for the next half of a complete wheel rotation, the process used up ALL of the kinetic energy / mass that had accumulated in the wheel during the time that its CoM resided on its descending side. None was left over to continue the motion of the wheel much less perform any sort of significant "outside" work. I also found to my surprise that this problem was NOT solved by "ganging" or overlapping the motions of multiple sets of paired weights. I think that JC is hoping that, by using 5 equally angularly spaced mechanisms containing two weights each, he will somehow overcome this problem. My experience tells me differently!

      Quite amazingly, this problem did NOT exist in Bessler's wheels. The resetting process, because of the near perfect counter balancing of the weighted levers that was maintained during drum rotation, could be readily achieved by the 7:30 going to 9:00 weighted lever as it lifted the 9:00 going to 10:30 position weight and those leading it closer to their rim stops and, most importantly, this resetting only used a small FRACTION of the extra energy / mass outputted by the 8 weights during any 45 degree increment of rotation.

      Bessler's wheels were a true REVOLUTION [no pun intended] in the design of OB PM gravity wheels. Depending upon which increment of drum rotation a weighted lever was traveling through, its weight could either be what JC calls a "shifter" weight or one of several "primary" weights or even be NEITHER as it rested for an increment or two or drum rotation on its rim stop!

  11. Thank you for your comments TG and Arktos, I have not put all of my design thinking on the website and there is an element missing which I have referred to previously as the overlooked principle.


  12. Thank you TG! I believe that more time should be inkáb because a lot of activity, but is concerned that the machine is completely clear and understandable mechanism! Of course, there's always something that does not take into account when planning the man, but many years of experience in me say, that will work with the machine.

  13. My concern John is; When Bessler wheels start to become prolific and commonplace,what is to stop the opposition blaming the resultant free-energy production for exess globle warming.
    Our argument against that could that the coal fired power stations will be scaled back and petrol driven cars will disapear along with their Co2 emissions.

    1. There IS no man-made global warming anyway. The latest official data sets prove it. Besides, environmental changes have been observed on all planets (!) in our solar system. No one in his right mind -not even a politician- would claim that humans are responsible for changes on Mars or Venus.

      More spectacularly, the angular momentum of giant planets like Saturn have changed of the past 15 to 20 years. Imagine the forces required! Besides, CO2 is not a poison: it's a requirement for life as we know it. The plant nurseries pump their greenhouses full of C02 because it makes the plants grow extremely well. Never mind that the air and water hasn't been as clean in decades; and that the planet's green (growth) signature has increased by 15% as measured from space, and so forth.

      Nah, rest assured that the politicians and environmental talking heads have a new fear mongering weapon: microdust. Extremely fine (dust) and pollution particles that need to be removed - at great cost, of course.

      We can leave it safely to them to extract some more money out of the economy and our wallets. I am all for sustainable energy sources and proper stewardship of this precious giant floating spaceship called Earth, but I don't think we should entrust any of this to the talking heads.

    2. I also am not convinced that bovine flatulence (basically methane or CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) are that dangerous in terms of creating "Global Warming" and "Climate Change".

      However, I think there might be something to the "microdust theory" which I suspected years ago. We currently blast about 80 MILLION TONS of carbon into our atmosphere EACH year, but, surprisingly, only a small percentage of it is in the form of CO2. Most of it is in the form of micron sized carbon granules that readily absorb infrared and visible light and heat up as a result. As these hot little nuggets float around in the air, they in turn heat it up. If the other planets in our solar system are also getting hotter, then it could be because they are picking up carbon dust from space or even blasting it out of their own volcanoes. Also, as this carbon microdust finally reaches Earth's Artic Circle and begins to settle out onto the polar ice cap, it can greatly accelerate its melting and increase the production of icebergs (the melting of this ice then releases any green house gases that were trapped in it when it originally frozen centuries ago).

      I know that on "bad air days" when the "particulates" (mainly this carbon microdust) levels are high, it tends to negatively affect my respiratory tract so I would support ALL efforts to get this stuff out of our air. Sadly, most of it comes from the unfiltered smoke stacks of COAL fueled electrical power plants and, right now, the Chinese are building an average of TWO of these per WEEK!!! There is some indication that breathing this crap can increase one's risk of contracting lung cancer because the granules are carcinogenic! The less the better I say.

  14. Good point Trevor. Overall I'm sure it could be shown that there won't be any addition to global warming and it's much more likely there would be a significant reduction.


  15. I am starting now building my bessler wheel and i will have it finished and working tomorrow , will i post a video on utube tomorrow of my working wheel , or is there some other place on the internet to put it ?

    1. Youtube is as good as anywhere. Be sure to post a link on John's blog to the video.

      Everyone 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. Bessler's bottom line was too much.

      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.
      (cut and paste from September 6)

      It's climate change, not just global warming. And whether we have a hand in it or not won't matter in a few short years, the models predict the change to continue for years after the atmosphere recovers. So expect more frequent biblical-sized weather events to occur for the rest of your life even if bessler's wheel is solved tomorrow.

      Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered, weak and weary,
      Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore —
      While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
      As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
      "Parametric oscillation," I muttered, "tapping at my chamber door —
      Only this and nothing more."

    2. Doug said, "It's climate change, not just global warming. And whether we have a hand in it or not won't matter in a few short years, the models predict the change to continue for years after the atmosphere recovers. So expect more frequent biblical-sized weather events to occur for the rest of your life even if bessler's wheel is solved tomorrow."

      Absolutely right Doug! I love the adaption of Poe's poem.


    3. Doug wrote: "So expect more frequent biblical-sized weather events to occur for the rest of your life even if bessler's wheel is solved tomorrow."

      I just love "frequent biblical-sized weather events"! Just so long, of course, as I am safe and comfy inside my house while it is all going on! LOL!

  16. Well, I'm now starting to do serious modeling using two springs per weighted lever which is what the Master clearly indicates he used. Immediately, I am seeing some problems with this approach and am continuing to search the DT portraits for clues about how Bessler overcame them. I have no doubt that I will find the solutions I seek.

    Meanwhile, I've been focusing on the second portrait and, particularly, that clock that hangs on a nail driven into the side of the organ in the background.

    Has anybody else noticed the TIME on that clock? It looks like 6:00 and, if so, then this is yet another important clue in these portraits. I'll reveal why in a future comment.

  17. That was what time it was when he discovered PM!

  18. No, it would be highly improbable to make the BIG discovery at exactly 6:00.

    He probably made that discovery late at night working by lamp light just before going to sleep. No doubt, he routinely took the particular problems he was encountering with this table top prototype wheel to bed with him and they affected the content of his dreams. Apparently, one night because of this he had a particularly vivid dream that really energized him and helped guide him to a final solution that worked. Without doubt, he would have attributed the dream to divine aid in his quest to achieve a PM.

    Actually, the interpretation of the clock clue is extremely obvious and I'm somewhat surprised that no one else "sees" it yet. It's as clear as crystal to me, but, then again, I have donned, metaphorically, those eyeglasses Bessler offers the viewer in the second portrait and that does help a bit.

  19. The mechanical intrpretation and application of the principle which Bessler described , in all it's simplicity , is needed to solve this problem . In retrospect I see that he could not have been very much clearer in his descriptions . We all have our machine rooms and depending on our housekeeping habits we might possibly leave a number of tools here and there within . At any given time a hammer , saw , measuring instruments and the like . I think Bessler gave us too much credit for being possibly as imaginative as himself . I beleive that he felt that there was really nothing at all necessary , besides common sense of course to solve the problem . Of course as he said he had God's help . We should trouble ourselves ( and I have ) to reckon or find out what he meant by that . Or we can just stick to our mechanical sense of things , which , by all indications , are (not) doing quite well at solving the problem .

    1. Immediately after starting to work with simulation programs, I quickly realized just how UNreliable my "mechanical sense of things" was!

  20. Chris, are you now posting from California?

  21. No... I only stayed a short time . It didn't work out well . His mechanical room was so full of clues that there was no room to work ! ,lol .

  22. I'm continuing to computer model / simulate using two springs per weighted lever and, once again, have reached a fork in the "right track" approach which requires me to make a decision. The decision is whether to use two springs with the SAME physical dimensions and k values or to use two with DIFFERENT physical dimensions and k values. There are clues in the portraits that seem to support both approaches and one will be valid and the other a false or "decoy" clue. However, as I now regularly do, I will start with the simplest approach first which assumes that the two springs were identical. That would certainly make things easier for the reverse engineer and for any skilled craftsman who was trying to build one of Bessler's wheels had he divulged the secret after a sale of the invention during his lifetime.

    I'm also gaining a much better appreciation of Bessler's quote about his wheels being "exceedingly greedy" meaning that very little of their energy / mass was wasted during the resetting process of the weighted levers that took place THOUGHOUT each 45 degree increment of drum rotation.

    Indeed, I was happily surprised when a model I completed and tested about a week ago suddenly began displaying the exact behavior of its 9:00 going to 10:30 position weighted lever that I expect to be necessary in order to maintain the OB of the wheel's CoM and thereby achieve PM. It was a rather accidental discovery which indicates that my luck seems to be holding up so far.

    When, however, only a small amount of energy / mass was removed from that process by restoring the verticality of the 7:30 weighted lever, the desirable motion suddenly ceased! So, it's obvious that the stretching of the springs attached to each weighted lever that takes place as they pass the 6:00 position of the drum must be CRITICAL to the desired resetting taking place. Those springs MUST efficiently store as much of a weight's outputted energy / mass for later release as possible. One's design, as the Master tells us, must be "exceedingly greedy".

    I'm also starting to realize that this matter of the stretching the springs within the drum is, in reality, the HEART of the secret that Bessler found and, no doubt, the main reason that he rarely discusses the use of spring tension. You either find this final design element and reach the end of the "right track" with a WORKING OB PM gravity wheel or you do not find it and FAIL in your quest like all the others have in the last several MILLENIA. Bessler gives the clues in the portraits that reveal this great secret, but the reverse engineering mobilist will be pushed to his very limits of physical AND mental endurance in order to property extract that information.

    IF I am very, VERY lucky, then I MIGHT have it by THIS Christmas.


Why did Bessler Use Embedded Codes?

It seems clear enough that Bessler had always intended to insert coded information embedded within his publications, because by applying a s...