I've been interested in Johann Bessler and his wheel since I was about fifteen years of age, when I read Rupert Gould's account of him in his book 'Oddities'. At that time I dreamed of the possibility of building a similar machine, however I knew already that science said they were impossible, I dreamed and speculated and drew hundreds of designs, but I said nothing to anybody.
At the age of about 28 I chanced upon a copy of Gould's book, 'Oddities', and I was struck anew by the quality of the narrative and the evidence described and how utterly convincing it was. I resolved to research the subject as thoroughly as possible even if it took me the rest of my life. In the intervening years I occasionally told people about him and about my ambition to reconstruct his wheel - and quickly got used to the scorn and laughter which erupted at my articulated aspirations! It seemed to me that Gould himself was sufficiently fascinated by the story to do some research and in my opinion became convinced of the inventor's sincerity.
But Gould was not alone; I've always thought how remarkable it was that Henry Dircks, author of the two compact volumes detailing the history of the seach for Perpetual Motion, should have spent some twenty years researching every single mention of the subject and reproducing them in his books, complete with drawings of numerous failed designs. Then there is Arthur Ord-Hume's book on the subject, another accountof the history of such machines. Like Dircks, Ord-Hume was an engineer, and like Gould wrote extensively on antique clocks and other mechanisms. Was it simply interest that drove these authors to spend years researching the subject - or was there a discreet longing to believe; to discover the secret apparently found only by Johann Bessler?
John Rowley was another one. He was Master of Mechanics to King George 1st and held a reputation as the finest instrument maker in England, and praised as such by none other John Harris, inventor of the Marine Chronometer which eventually won the prize offered by the British Board of Longitude for providing a means for finding a ship's longitudinal position at sea. Rowley spent his remaining years trying to duplicate Bessler's wheel having seen it during a visit to Kassel.
These men, all experts in their fields, seem to have been drawn to studying Perpetual Motion, and even if some of them declared their scepticism publicly, I have a feeling that privately they were not so cynical and perhaps yearned to discover that there was a way to achive the impossible.
My own suspicion that the historical accounts were wrong in assigning Bessler to the ranks of the fraudulent and the criminal, was first roused when I read Gould's account of the reported actions of Bessler's maid. She stated under oath that she was forced to turn the wheel by means of a secret lever from the adjoining bedroom. I simply did not believe that it was possible to turn a wheel measuring twelve feet in diameter and eighteen inches thick, by means of a simple system of levers which she said, applied their force to the quarter inch bearings at the ends of the axle. As if this wasn't enough she also claimed that she was able to turn the wheel which lifted the 70 poinds weight from the castle yard to the roof several times!
One of the problems we seem to encounter regularly is the intransigence of all those we ask to reconsider the evidence. No one will do that because they believe it would counter certain physical laws - it won't, but until the reason is explained and made clear they will continue to dismiss all such claims.
To repeat myself - only a working model will do it.
JC
10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.
Oh yes, a working model will do it for those integer enough to admit that you've done it, actually achieved it. But there are critics and pathological critics. Nothing has changed since Bessler's time.
ReplyDeleteDubunker's rule # 2: if you can't refute the data (a working model) attack the messenger. In other words: you'll be accused of fraud, trickery, and everything that comes with it. Of course especially by those that never saw a working model.
Schopenhauer already said it nicely: "all truths go through three stages. First, it is ignored. Secondly, it furiously denied. Third it is accepted as self-evident."
Science progresses far too often funeral by funeral. As the opponents of an idea pass away, the new ideas get accepted.
That is very true. Arthur C Clarke once put it like this:
Deletea. "It's nonsense."
b. "It is not important."
c. "I always said it was a good idea."
d. "I thought of it first."
We will have to be careful about that last one!
(The reference is http://www.documentarywire.com/equinox-it-runs-on-water ).
Hmmm...hey, John, did you ever think that you were the Henry Dircks of the 20th century? Which makes me then wonder who the Henry Dircks of the 21st century will be! Of course, IF we do manage to find THE design that Bessler found and used, then there WON'T be a need for another Henry Dircks!
ReplyDeleteLike you, I too was mesmerized by early exposure to the Bessler story in Rupert Gould's book. There is only one chapter in his book devoted to Bessler, yet that is the ONLY chapter that I remember! From reading it, one comes away convinced that Bessler actually did achieve PM and that the possibility of a hoax being involved in his success is so low that it CAN be safely dismissed.
You wrote: "To repeat myself - only a working model will do it."
Well, yes, but, right now, I will be quite content to just have a glitch-free virtual model wheel that works. That single achievement can then serve as the bridge to REAL working physical models in the future by others.
I also filled up dozens of notebooks with hundreds of kinds PM designs...a quantity of UNworkable machines that would truly dwarf MT into insignificance! If only Gould had included high resolution enlargements of the two DT portraits in his book, then I probably would have had the mystery solved by now!
Oh well, better late than never...
LOL !!
DeleteSqueek, squeek, squeek!
DeleteOh, no, we've got another "Anony-mouse" infestation! Quick someone, put out some Anony-mouse traps and make sure to bait them with extra cheese! LOL!
Ken, you continue to hide behind the technoguy label and refuse to admit it. You are the biggest loser.
Deletesqueek, squeek, squeek...???...sniff, sniff...nibble, nibble...SNAP! SQUEEE!!!
DeleteGOTCHA! And another "Anony-mouse" goes to Anony-mouse Heaven! Time to put out some more Anony-mouse traps! LOL!
I have to agree that the actual device , although unlikely to (re)appear would be more valuable than anyone's unfruitful research , opinion , superstition , and would not be required to respect anyone's ( or any established religion or scientific base ) particular belief .
ReplyDeletePART I:
ReplyDeleteI've just completed a late night computer modeling / testing session with my "Contact at 3:00" model wheel which uses the new primary spring parameters I recently obtained from a rather elusive DT portrait clue. So far, the results of the testing are "encouraging", however, I am still only working with isolated weighted levers or groups of such and not a fully interconnected set of active weighted levers.
My 6:00 going to 7:30 weighted lever dutifully stretches the primary spring attached to it that uses the new parameters and that lever is vertically oriented as its pivot reaches the drum's 7:30 position. The 7:30 going to 9:00 position and 9:00 going to 10:30 position weighted levers will maintain their orientations with respect to each other as the 7:30 weighted lever's pivot reaches the 9:00 position. This stability is only possible, however, because the 9:00 going to 10:30 weighted levers is PRECISELY counter balanced by the stretched secondary spring attached to it and a cord that connects it to the 7:30 going to 9:00 position weighted lever. Finally, the isolated group of four weighted levers whose pivots travel between the 10:30 and 4:30 drum positions ALL rapidly begin moving toward their respective rim stops after only about 4.5 deg of a 45 degree increment of drum rotation is completed. The motion of the unrestrained 10:30 going to 12:00 weighted lever is most noticeable as it momentarily slaps up against its rim stop.
From this, is seems like everything is working just fine...SEPARATELY, that is. Now the question is whether or not all of these groups of weighted levers will continue to work just fine when they are finally interconnected to each other. That, ultimately, is the real test of whether the design will work or not. The testing to determine that should be completed in another day or so.
PART II:
ReplyDeleteFrom viewing what I have so far, it seems that there is a very simple way to describe what was happening inside of Bessler's wheels.
The "Bessler Effect" occurred when the 9:00 weighted lever rapidly rose toward its rim stop as a CW rotating drum rotated through each 45 degree increment of rotation. This rapid rise, however, was only possible because of the sudden motion toward their rim stops of the four weighted levers whose pivots were moving between the drum's 10:30 and 4:30 positions. That motion resulted in an interconnecting cord between the 10:30 and 9:00 weighted levers applying a small lifting force to the 9:00 weighted lever. That force then, effectively, LOWERED the weight of the 9:00 going to 10:30 weighted lever and upset the precise counter balancing forces acting on it so that it could then be easily and rapidly lifted toward (but not yet reach) its rim stop by the 7:30 going to 9:00 weighted lever during the 45 degree increment of drum rotation and thereby display the Bessler Effect.
What role did a 6:00 going to 7:30 weighted lever play in creating the Bessler Effect? Actually, nothing directly as all this weighted lever did during any 45 degree increment of CW drum rotation was stretch the primary spring attached to it. But, later on, those same stretched primary springs would then begin contracting and helping to apply some of the lifting force to the 9:00 going to 10:30 position weighted lever so that it could then display the Bessler Effect.
Yes, it all sounds so simple, does it not? But, don't let the apparent simplicity deceive you. In order to work, this design had to use precisely shaped "magic" levers with an equally precise web of interconnecting cords attached to exact points on them. And, yes, springs ARE absolutely required to make it work! I know what it took for me to finally find the details of the "Connectedness Principle" and I had a simulation program assisting me that took a TEAM of engineers and computer specialists almost a DECADE to develop! The idea that Bessler was able to achieve such a design by laboriously making one modification after another to a 36 inch diameter wheel over the course of many years is absolutely mind boggling to contemplate!
There is only one small problem that could blind more than anythig else in this search. You could be convinced you go in the right way, until you reach the dead end.
ReplyDeleteIf you put the real situation in black and withe, there are two main ways in the solution:
1) BW was a gravity driven device or
2) BW was not a gravity driven device.
I, like many of you guys have tested all kind of clever, artful, and witty devices trying to overcome gravity and defeat it. None has succeeded that way as far as I know.
Months ago I finished my search on the gravity wheel, after many atempts I realized I was messing with Newton and his laws, so playing that way is a dead end (the laws or rules are very clear).
I then decided to take the non gravity way, there is one area were Newton laws tend to disappear under certain conditions (in presence of gravity or in its absence).
Just consider it as an option before you gave up.
Charly2
Charly2,
DeleteI believe you are on the real right track. I am still performing research on a few areas before I can share any additional information. Jim_Mich on BW said it best. The Bessler wheel should be referred to as a "motion wheel" not a "gravity wheel".
zoelra
@Charly2
DeleteSorry to read that you finally quit your attempts to produce a "gravity wheel". But, maybe, you gave up a bit too soon.
All that is needed to make an OB PM gravity wheel work (i.e., continually output the "innate" energy / mass content of its weights) is to find some method to keep its weights' CoM CONTINUOUSLY located on its descendings side as the wheel rotates. That is the REAL problem that, other than Bessler (and Asa Jackson), no one has managed to do so far.
I'm VERY convinced that Bessler's method just involved a counter balanced maintained equilibrium amongst his wheels' weighted levers that was so precise and delicate that the motion of a SINGLE weighted lever, the one going from the 7:30 to 9:00 drum positions, was sufficient to "readjust" the equilibrium so that the CoM of the drum's active weights would constantly remained on the drum's descending side.
So, what is really defeating those who pursue the "gravity ONLY" (i.e., no CF required) approach is finding a delicate equilibrium that will do what I describe above. Bessler found it, IMO, and his wheels demonstrate that it works. If he could find it, then so can others. I think I'm closer to it than I've ever been before and I owe practically all of my recent progress (i.e., in the last two or three years) to the two DT portraits. There's a reason they are at the front of DT and their various symbols are clustered around the Master's face for a reason. He wanted to make sure that there would be absolutely NO confusion in the future about who had found this method of "sequentially adjusted equilibrium" to drive a wheel. Those portraits are his legacy to humanity, but we will not be able to collect that legacy unless we are willing to do so.
I am VERY willing and invite others to join me!
I also concluded some time ago that it would be better not to keep looking for a gravity wheel, and to check out other options. In my case, the first option was/is energy from the rotating Earth.
DeleteI have found devices that will *in theory* extract such energy with no upper limit on their power rating. They involve tuned mass-spring oscillations where the oscillation amplitude increases linearly, without limit, over time. This means that the energy extracted increases as a square-law over time (½mv² or ½kx²).
Of course these are just computer models where I deliberately set frictional and all other losses to zero. So far, when I introduce reasonable dissipative losses, their performance drops drastically. This is mainly because they operate at such high speed, where even a small damping coefficient has a very large effect.
PART I:
ReplyDeleteI just spent an hour or so fiddling with my current "Contact AFTER 3:00" model wheel and, most depressingly, it STILL stubbornly refused to display the "Bessler Effect" for me. In fact, its 9:00 going to 10:30 weighted lever was actually "frozen" in place throughout the entire 45 degree increment of CW drum rotation!
From studying the situation, it's obvious that the 9:00 going to 10:30 weighted lever is still not carefully counter balanced enough as the interval of drum rotation begins because the 7:30 going to 9:00 weighted lever is not applying enough lifting torque to it. I found, however, that this problem could be corrected somewhat, but it required me to rotate the interval starting orientation of the 7:30 weighted lever a bit CW around its pivot so that it was no longer vertical with its weight hanging directly below the lever's pivot. This is something that I've avoided doing up to now because I know how very sentive the location of the design's CoM is to the smallest changes in location of this weighted lever and pulling the weight farther from the center of the axle also pulls the CoM of the design's 8 weights right along with it.
There is a symbol in the second portrait that represents the 7:30 weighted lever and the most prominent angle associated with it is 45 degrees implying that this lever is oriented exactly 45 degrees with respect to its pivot's radial support member. But, in immediately accepting this clue as valid, I actually violated one of the MOST important things I've learned over the years about the DT portrait clues: "NEVER trust your first one or even second interpretations of a clue!" Upon revisiting the symbol for the 7:30 weighted lever, I found that there are also OTHER angles that could be derived from it such as 40 degrees, 35 degrees, etc. Now I'm starting to consider the possibility of designs that do NOT have their 7:30 weighted levers perfectly vertical. That non-verticality then allows these weighted levers to apply more lifting torque to the 9:30 drum position weighted lever and, hopefully, might then allow it to rotate rapidly CW about its pivot during a 45 degree increment of drum rotation and, quite possibly, to complete the Bessler Effect early in the interval which would then project the CoM of the weights as far onto the drum's descending side as possible.
While all of that DT portrait analysis was going on, I even stumbled across a clue I'd never noticed before that indicates that the weights were landing on their rim stops BEFORE 3:00!!! So, I may even be returning to that previously failed design option and trying the new k values that I recently obtained for the primary and secondary springs which seem to be valid (at least so far!). I've always been a bit biased toward this approach since it seems to fit in better with Bessler's description of how his wheels worked in DT:
PART II:
ReplyDelete"...these weights, on the contrary, are the essential parts, and constitute the perpetual motion itself; since from them is received the universal movement which they must exercise so long as they remain out of the centre of gravity; and when they come to be placed together, and so arranged one against another that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wonderfully speedy flight, one or other of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis, which in its turn must also move."
Note the phrase: "...one or other of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis..."
This seems to imply that the weights alighted on their respective rim stops BEFORE their lever's pivots reached the 3:00 position of the drum so that, as the weighted levers' pivots reached the drum's 3:00 position, extended lines passing through the center of a weight, its lever's pivot, and the center of the wheel's axle would then form a perfect 90 degree angle with a vertical line also passing through the axle. So if that was the case, then why am I now working on a design that does NOT do that? Answer: Because my previous attempts to achieve the Bessler Effect with a "Contact BEFORE 3:00" design failed, that's why. BUT, maybe those past failures ONLY took place because I was stubbornly insisting on keeping my 7:30 weighted levers vertical and was doing that because Bessler had previously hypnotized me into doing so by slipping me a false "decoy" clue suggesting that was what had to be done!
So, although the current testing of the "Contact AFTER 3:00" design was a failure, I think it was still valuable because I've learned something from it and can now see another way forward along that meandering "right track" path to success. However, in light of this mornings' disappointing test results, I am, regrettably, going to hereby officially reduce my perceived progress along the "right track" from 99.999% back down to a more modest 99.5%...such is the penalty for failure!
"...one or other of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis..."
DeleteI think all this means is that the weights move in a plane that is perpendicular to the axis of rotation (the axle). Any movement outside this plane and you are wasting energy.
Well, I find I must adhere to my interpretation because of that single word "apply" that Bessler uses.
DeleteIt seems like he is saying that BEFORE weight to rim contact is made, a line passing through the center of a weight and the center of the axle does not form a right angle with a vertical line passing through the center of the axle. But, then, AFTER contact is made with its rim stop, a line passing through the center of a weight and the center of the axle DOES form a right angle with a vertical line passing through the center of the axle. This latter configuration was only possible when weight to rim stop contact either ALREADY existed or took place precisely at the instant that a weighted lever's pivot reached the 3:00 position of a CW rotating drum. I suspect that, most likely, weight to rim stop contact was achieved shortly BEFORE a weighted lever's pivot reached the drum's 3:00 position and that is the latest design feature I will be working with.
@Charly2, Zoelra, Arktos
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you are still looking for a Bessler Wheel but concluded that it is not gravity, but centralfugal force which is driving it (I wonder whether I understood you correctly). Do you mean to say that gravity has no influence at all, e.g. the wheel could be run horizontally? Or does gravity have a place in it, e.g. for priming or resetting the motion, which is however mainly driven by CF? When you consider a wheel with segments, in which a movable mass (e.g. a ball) is located, then it has 2 degrees of freedom: one is radial (sine function, CF direction), one is tangential (cosine function, direction of torque). I am looking to use both.
@Mimi
Delete"Do you mean to say that gravity has no influence at all..."
Correct!
It is only my opinion (and it sounds like others here share this opinion too), but there may be ways to power a horizontally oriented wheel. Possibly by CF or by change in moment of inertia (like an ice skater pulling in their arms). It is worth considering since 300 years of vertical attempts have led no where.
Standing the wheel vertically would be a great way for Bessler to hide his secret would it not. A vertical orientation almost certainly suggests overbalance.
Zoelra
@ Mimi and Zoelra
DeleteThe wheels I am currently modelling are horizontal, and gravity has no influence on their ability to extract energy. They exploit only the centrifugal force from Earth's rotation. That is 0.0339 newtons per kilogram for a mass sitting at the equator, i.e. about 0.346% of its weight of 9.81 newtons per kilogram. That value will vary according to whether the mass is moving eastward or westward on a rotating wheel.
Unfortunately, since the Earth-derived CF is so small, any wheel using that alone has to be a large, high-speed one, leading to many problems! If Bessler really used an approach like this, he must have seen some way of amplifying it.
@Arktos
DeleteInteresting idea you have there, best of luck with it.
My entry into the CF area was about 3 years ago. I built a variation of the Milkovic two stage oscillator. My plan was to house the device within a large wheel. The upward movement of the main lever would push against rim stops and propel the wheel. So far I have not achieved my goal of a runner but I continue to work with it, along with 2 other vertical (but totally different) designs. I'm not ruling out anything at this point.
I only recently became interested in a horizontal approach. I'm looking at ways of utilizing CF from outwardly moving weights (after running up the wheels rotational speed by first moving the weights inward) - kind of like the ice skater I mentioned above. Pull in the arms to speed up, release the arms to do work, repeat, repeat, ...
I have found a way to move the weights inward (against the effects of CF) with no effort. That's half of the battle, and where all the energy gain comes from. I'm now investigating ways to allow the weights to fall outward without slowing the wheel (and losing that energy gain). The force (CF) of the weights moving outward would be the motive force driving the wheel.
Zoelra
I forgot to say, as this design is completely balanced, it could be stood up vertically.
DeleteZoelra
@ Zoelra
DeleteYes, pulling weights closer to the center of a rotating wheel, whether its plane is horizontal or vertical, will INCREASE the wheel's rate of rotation. BUT, as the weights move closer to the center of the wheel, the wheel's moment of inertia DECREASES. Since the rotational kinetic energy / mass of a rotating body is the product of its rotation rate times its moment of inertia, it turns out that pulling the weights closer to the center of a wheel to speed it up simultaneously decreases the wheel's moment of inertia so that the product of rotation rate and moment of inertia remains CONSTANT. Thus, there is NO increase in the rotational kinetic energy / mass of the wheel due to moving the weights closer to its center that you could then tap to perform outside work.
In fact, if you do extract any energy / mass from the wheel to perform outside work after the weights are moved closer to its center of rotation, then, when you again move the weights farther from the center of rotation to "reset" your system by restoring its original moment of inertia, you will find that the wheel is then rotating SLOWER than it ORIGINALLY was before the weights were moved closer to its center of rotation. Such a system can not be used to continously extract the innate energy / mass content of its weights so as to achieve "PM".
Wish I could be more encouraging about this approach.
@TG
DeleteAngular energy is not the "product of its rotation rate times its moment of inertia". It is the product of its rotation "squared" times its moment of inertia.
Moment of Inertia I = m(r^2)
Angular Momentum L = Iw
Angular Energy E = (1/2)Iw^2
Energy has to be added to the wheel to move the weights inward against the effects of CF. Angular momentum is conserved but angular energy increases. However, to achieve angular momentum conservation, the external energy source has to apply the energy in a way that no torque is applied to the wheel.
Example. When an ice skater pulls in their arms and they spin faster, angular momentum is conserved, but rotational energy increases. Where did the energy come from to do the work? The skater.
In the case of the wheel, the trick is moving the weights inward without applying torque, and without additional energy (external or internal). The magical lever!!!
Zoelra
@Mimi, the prototype I'm building does not need gravity as a "fuel" nor centrifugal force, gravity only helps to keep one arm or flail pointing always down, it is the "fixed" part that the primer mover uses as reference and where the conection, synchrony, and impulse with the moving parts begins. Sounds complex, maybe it is at first.
DeleteBut yes, BW could run horizontally if the exterior cylindrical cover could be removed and the reference point would be fixed with a cord to a wall, column or just by hand.
I'm talking always about the bi-directional wheel, thats were I'm working.
Charly2
@ Zoelra
DeleteI was, of course, aware of the formula for rotational energy / mass, but did not want to confuse readers not familiar with it by including the 0.5 factor and squaring the rotation rate.
You wrote: "When an ice skater pulls in their arms and they spin faster, angular momentum is conserved, but rotational energy increases. Where did the energy come from to do the work? The skater."
I agree that the ice skater's body will spin faster and this will increase her body's rotational energy / mass. In fact, if her rotation rate doubles, then her body's rotational energy / mass will also double. Obviously, this extra rotational energy / mass is, ultimately, coming from the chemical potential energy / mass of the food molecules she consumed and the oxygen molecules she breathes.
Indeed, it might be possible to construct a wheel that could output any such gain in its rotational energy / mass to its environment to perform useful work. However, that outputted energy / mass would NOT be coming from the INNATE energy / mass of the weights within the wheel (as was the case with Bessler's wheels). It would have to have been provided previously to the wheel from an external energy / mass source. Such a device would not really be "PM", but just a way of temporarily storing energy / mass for later use.
@TG
DeleteMaybe if I say my magic lever also includes springs will change your mind. I have indeed found a way to pull the weights in using the levers and it requires no force to do so. This is the energy gain and is equivalent to the skater pulling in her arms. I am now working on the method of releasing the weights to perform work. However, if not done correctly, the outward movement of the weights will affect the rotation of the wheel causing it to slow, which is what you don't want to happen.
I won't say for now, but the idea is in MT!
Zoelra
@Zoelra
DeleteWell, if you have found a way to pull your rotating wheel's weights toward the center of rotation WITHOUT having to use "outside" supplied energy / mass to do so, then, quite possibly, you ARE onto something! That would then mean that your design could output energy / mass that would have been supplied by nothing other than the weights in the wheel itself! Sort of like the CF version of Bessler's gravity activated design for tapping the "innate" energy / mass content of its lead atoms' subatomic particles. The major advantage of your design, however, being that, unlike Bessler's wheels, it could operate in ANY orientation with respect to the Earth gravity field.
I'm feeling a bit more positive about what you are trying to do.
@TG
DeleteThanks, your acknowledgement means a lot.
I will provide more definitive information as soon as I can. I have a working theory and need to build a test model before I disclose more.
Zoelra
You should be questioning me but then again I wouldn't give you any answers . Suffice to say the wheel was not overbalanced , that is to say the ( pairs of ? ) weights were not magically hoisted at or around their 6 o'clock position to a place closer to the axle and then lifted again at or around their 12 o'clock position to a place farther from the axle . Bessler clearly indicates that this principle was wrongly attributed to him by Wagner . This is the same impossible ( stupid ) hypothetical machine that people for some reason cling to as the answer to the P.M. problem . Rather , it would take quite a different machine ( than that ) to produce any P.M. in reality . I have a(n) ( alternate? ) theory and am building the expression of that theory .
ReplyDeleteAlso , Bessler elaborated largely concerning his " principle " . It is funny to me that in all of this " information " nobody , in their infinite knowledge and expertise of Bessler and his machine has ever come round to defining and specifying the origin and practice of this mysterious " principle " .
DeleteYou have described my theory as outlined on my http://www.besslerswheel.com/ website - or rather half of it. I think it's a bit offensive to call it stupid seeing as this is my blog! I posted the solution as I see it back in 2010, although I had realised it a couple of years earlier, and I haven't changed my opinion that it is the right way. When are you going to learn some manners and some repect for others, Chris?
DeleteJC
Misguided? Fatally flawed?
DeleteThose books' authors weren't believers in gravity pm anymore than I am.
@JC
DeleteYour kiiking approach is applicable in a horizontal configuration. How the weights are shifted inward and outward to alter the moment of inertia is the secret. IMHO.
Doug, you may be right but I have sneaking feeling that Gould may have believed in Bessler's wheel at least.
DeleteAnon, I am satisfied with the vertical configuration and I know how to do it, but I need the proof first.
JC
@JC
DeleteSorry John, no disrespect intended with my "horizontal" comment. I only meant it was another approach in the way weights could be moved inward in a horizontal design. Unlike TG, I have a bad habit of using too few words to express my thoughts.
I wish you nothing but the best and hope you are the first to achieve a runner.
Zoelra (Rick)
Hey anon, I wasn't meaning you. I'm more than happy for people to have differing opinions with mine. I just don't like Chris's manners.
DeleteJC
I don't know what you got so offended about . I wasn't referring to your concept in particular just OB in general .
DeleteChris wrote:
Delete"Suffice to say the wheel was not overbalanced , that is to say the ( pairs of ? ) weights were not magically hoisted at or around their 6 o'clock position to a place closer to the axle and then lifted again at or around their 12 o'clock position to a place farther from the axle ."
While I must, of course, continue to insist that Bessler's wheels WERE OB, I DO agree with your observation about their weights not merely being vertically hoisted toward and away from their axles at the 6:00 and 12:00 positions of a rotating drum. Such a process requires a rate of energy / mass input for the hoisting process that far exceedes the maximum rate of energy / mass output that any kind of "classic" OB PM gravity wheel design could ever hope to deliver (such as ALL of the designs shown in MT!).
What was going on inside of Bessler's wheels, while OB, was far more subtle. It involved a CoM that, even in his giant 12 ft diameter wheels, was only offset, horizontally, about 1 INCH from the center of the axle. Consequently, these wheels produced only miniscule rates of energy / mass output. What made them workable, however, was that the rates of energy / mass input required to "reset" the VERY delicate equilibria of their counter balanced (via interconnecting cords and stretched springs) weighted levers during each 45 degree increment of drum rotation was only a FRACTION of their rates of energy / mass output.
Bessler's secret mechanism was simple, clever, and VERY sensitive to the rotation of the drum that carried the counter balanced weighted levers.
A rather somber day over here in the US. The cable tv news channels are all reporting a story about a gunman who entered an elementary school today in the state of Connecticut and murdered about 30 people, 20 or so of whom where children! The body count will probably go higher as the hours pass. Just what we need to put everyone in a really foul mood this holiday season.
ReplyDeleteWell, maybe, this atrocity will FINALLY make us start to get SERIOUS about keeping guns out of the hands of mental cases and criminals!
I do have some positive news to report about my ongoing Bessler wheel research, but this just does not seem like the appropriate time for it.
John,
ReplyDeletePlease consider changing the display font to a Serif font such as Segoe UI so that a capital i (I) does not resemble a lower case l (L). I and l are common variables used in rotation mathematics (the topic at hand).
Zoelra
Zoelra, I've looked at my options but I can't find the one you mention. If you can tell me which would suit I can try it but I cannot tell from the names of the fonts which would be any good.
DeleteJC
Segoe UI is a modern looking Serif font. I use it in place of Courier or Times New Roman as those remind me of the old typewriter days. I will look for other options though. Thanks for considering this.
DeleteZoelra
John, I was originally going to reply with the comment below. However, since we can't add superscripts or subscripts (which would help in the readability of mathematical equations), using a Serif font in place of the Sans Serif font really won't help all that much. Sorry for taking up your time with this.
Delete-
-
MY ORIGINAL COMMENT
There are around 34 Serif font sets that are not what I would call artsy and could have a place in the business world. They are divided into two groups: heavy Serif fonts and light Serif fonts.
Heavy Serif font sets - those that stay true to the "old style" such as Times New Roman. They tend to have varying thicknesses to the letters and have many of the small dash marks at the ends of the letter strokes (like at the ends of the letter S). They tend to look cluttered (busy looking and crunched together). Microsoft introduced a recreation to help with on-screen readability. The font is called CAMBRIA. This is the only font I recommend from this group.
Light Serif font sets - those that maintain a minimum of Serifs (the dash marks) while still retaining the main marks that differentiate a capital i and from a lower case L. In fact, other than the differences with i and L, these fonts closely resemble the Sans Serifs font sets such as ARIAL and CALIBRI. The two I recommend from this group are SEGOE UI and VERDANA. Verdana is basically a widened version of SEGOE UI.
CAMBRIA, SEGOE UI, and VERDANA would be my recommendations. If you would like to see what all the fonts look like, so you have more to choose from, I can email you a Word document or PDF showing all of them.
Zoelra
Wow John, after saving my reply, I noticed the font changed. Thanks.
DeleteZoelra
Chris Wilson on 14 December 2012 at 15:33, offered to us THIS observation of canny salience
ReplyDelete'Also , Bessler elaborated largely concerning his " principle " . It is funny to me that in all of this " information " nobody , in their infinite knowledge and expertise of Bessler and his machine has ever come round to defining and specifying the origin and practice of this mysterious " principle " .'
Very well.
That time of rounding has now come . . .
For want of an other term better concording the German original, the very thing itself is "PREPONDERANCE." ("Ein wort und . . . !")
(Oh, HOW it is so!)
Necessarily, perpetual motions (ones that are to WORK, that is) require a chain of particular events preceded by their known, predictive causations (das Kausalgesetz).
In the case of Bessler's, this thumb-rule was (is!) no different.
The required trick is to find the means of achieving that which Bessler did specify most clearly, as in 'a word'.
Do that, and your now-stone-still motions will surely perpetuate of their very own selves - they will, and thereby produce precious energy (wealth), from purely and plainly no thing at all! (Not from gravity, even.)
Preponderance!!!
Now, Chris need not suffer any longer, that vexing humor.
James
I suppose you can apply that word " preponderance " mechanically ( not ) ? I can , oh feather fencer ... oh " wise word entertainer " .
DeleteBessler : " Even according to the ideas my enemies express in their writings,
Deletemy Wheel is the true device, and is indeed, per se, a genuine Perpetuum Mobile. None better will ever be found upon this earth, for without the principle that I alone possess, there can be no real perpetual motion. Whoever seeks another method is deceiving himself, for my device does not need winding; it runs according to "preponderance", and turns everything else along with it; so long as its material shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord. On one side it is heavy and full; on the other empty and light, just as it should be. That which hitherto has been impossible, was vouchsafed to me to discover . "
I think Bessler's "Preponderance Principle" was MORE than just a reference to the OB condition of a wheel's weights' CoM. Every newbie mobilist knows an OB wheel will turn. The "trick", however, is to KEEP it turning by KEEPING it OB.
DeleteThat "trick" was what Bessler's "Preponderance Principle" was really all about; that is, this "principle" refers to his METHOD of maintaining the OB of the CoM of a wheel's weights as the wheel underwent rotation. That method, IMO, involved a collection of interconnecting cords and tensioning springs that maintained a set of 8 weighted levers in SPECIFIC orientations with respect to each other whose CoM was located on the wheel's descending side. Because of the VERY rotation sensitive counter balancing and "coordination" amongst these weighted levers, these orientations would be preserved while the wheel rotated and, of course, that would also keep the CoM of its weights continuously located on the wheel's descending side.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Delete"On one side it is heavy and full; on the other empty and light, just as it should be."
DeleteThis does not describe any OB wheel I have ever seen. In any OB wheel, there are weights all around the wheel, some may be closer to the axle than the others, but one side is never empty.
You all interpret his comment to fit your understanding and that is why you don't succeed. Listen to his words.
Chris Wilson, on 15 December 2012 03:43, in cleverly rejoindering did offer an "I suppose you can apply that word " preponderance " mechanically ( not ) ? I can , . .' "
ReplyDelete"I suppose . . ."
Do you?
". . . I can, . . ."
Can you really?
Well, from whatever the quarter finally coming, this we all await.
It is nice that someone is " listening " instead of taking offense at perceived provocation .
DeleteIn all honesty I need to back off a bit and let my arse catch up with my mouth for a couple of days . I suggest anyone of similar need do likewise .
DeleteChris:
DeleteNo problemo, man!
You HAVE a good sense of humor and as far as I am concerned (?), you're one of the good guys around here.
(Although . . . certain of pseudo-named 'hidden others' being not-so! I hit their "IGNORE" button long ago. I recommend this to others as well for those endless and boring Parts 1, 2 and 3 type things, too often put under our offended, overly patient noses.)
We all get a little huffy and out of sorts sometimes. What the heck. That's life.
("Das is Leben!" u. "Man lebt nur einamal" Ja? Nein?)
Now, let's get to applying that "Preponderance" principle of dear brother Bessler's, and the fine results it does promise. Onward and upward!
Regards
James
"You [Chris] HAVE a good sense of humor and as far as I am concerned (?), you're one of the good guys around here.
Delete(Although . . . certain of pseudo-named 'hidden others' being not-so! I hit their "IGNORE" button long ago. I recommend this to others as well for those endless and boring Parts 1, 2 and 3 type things, too often put under our offended, overly patient noses.)"
I, likewise, recommend that others hit their "IGNORE" button on the tedious ravings of any pseudo-intellectual TROLL types that show up here.
I am building it .
DeleteYour words appear somewhat ambiguous to me Chris, but I accept that you weren't "referring to your concept in particular just OB in general".
ReplyDeleteI think little is said about Bessler's principle because no one knows for sure what it was - or they think they know and are not saying because they need to prove it or disprove it first. The latter situation applies to myself.
JC
Taking just the odds into account , only one Bessler , so many " mob'lemachers " it is logical ( and likely ) that classical ( overtried ) overbalance is not the answer . So what alternative ? I have something interesting up my sleeve . I don't expect anyone to care , per se , and that is a secondary reason for why I am now building something rather than just running my mouth .
Delete@ Chris
DeleteMany of us here DO care, "per se", what you are working on and wish you well. However, it would be nice if you could give us a GENERAL idea of your approach other than merely saying it is not OB. That would, at least, stimulate some discussion about the approach and it might even help you as you struggle to make it work.
I am like Bessler . A single word could easily betray . And he didn't mean one word ... he meant a single word too many in IMO . I appreciate the invitation nonetheless .
DeleteFollowing the disappointing 12/14/2012 failure of my "Contact AFTER 3:00" model wheel, I spent some "quality time" with the two DT portraits looking for a new direction in which to head. As usual, I have found one!
ReplyDeleteI noticed a few additional clues (previously missed, of course) that suggest that, indeed, the weights on the descending sides of Bessler's wheels were making contact with their rim stops BEFORE their levers' pivots reached the 3:00 position of the drum. This, of course, agrees better with Bessler's DT description of his wheel's weights as "...one or other of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis...".
Fine. Next, I have been seriously questioning my interpretation of a previous DT portrait clue that SEEMED to clearly indicate that the 7:30 weighted levers were hanging vertically downward at that drum position. Yes, this orientation does maximize the OB of a wheel, but, now, upon further consideration, I realized that trying to maintain that verticality was probably the MAJOR cause of the failures of my various wheel designs so far! Again, I have searched the DT portraits and, in the second portrait I found something that suggests that the 7:30 weighted lever was NOT vertical, but, rather rotated EXACTLY 5 degrees CW about its pivot from a vertical orientation.
This slight non-verticality immediately reduces the horizontally projected distance of my 4:1 scale model "Contact BEFORE 3:00" wheel from about 0.22000 inches down to 0.17000 inches away a vertical line passing through the center of the axle. I'm not too thrilled about that, but, afterall, my recently failed "Contact AFTER 3:00" model wheel's weights' CoM was horizontally located about 0.18000 inches away from that vertical line so it's not too much of a change.
I'm hoping that this slight change will, finally, allow the 7:30 going to 9:00 weighted lever to provide the extra counter balancing torque to the 9:00 going to 10:30 drum position weighted lever so that it will be able to display the "Bessler Effect" as its weight smoothly and rapidly closes with its rim stop (but, does not reach it) during the "early" part of each 45 degree increment of drum rotation.
I've just completed a quick test of the previously failed "Contact BEFORE 3:00" wheel using primary springs having the new spring constant or k values derived from recently found and interpreted portrait clues and, happily, they are maintaining the stability of the model's upper half weighted levers with respect to each other WITHOUT the use of a gravity activated latch. They even maintain the stability when the design is jerked to a -1 rpm constant rotation rate by the assisting motor attached to its axle!
So, my next step is to "construct" another "Contact BEFORE 3:00" 4:1 scale model wheel that will have its 7:30 position weighted lever hanging so that it is rotated CW exactly 5 degrees away from a vertical line passing through its pivot.
Unfortunately, that change in angle also requires me to make a small modification in the shape of my "magic" levers. So, before the model will can be made, a new lever must first be fashioned.
I shall begin working on the modified "magic" levers tomorrow.
@TG
DeleteYou are having to adjust either the spring or cord connection points, lever design, and spring tension all the time, and you say you do this because you were misled by false clues or misinterpretations. Since you started posting here, how many changes have you referenced, maybe 50. I can't believe there are that many clues in the portraits, or that they are so vague as to allow any interpretation. You might want to consider that that the portraits themselves were devised to mislead.
Yes, quite unfortunately, one must be prepared to make MANY changes in his interpretations of the DT portrait clues as he proceeds along the "right track" to eventual success. This is the way Bessler intended the process of rediscovery to take place. One must, literally, duplicate ALL of the false steps Bessler made along HIS trip down that track!
DeleteMost of the symbols Bessler placed into the portraits were deliberately made ambiguous in the sense that one can interpret them in several different ways. Even more confusing is his habit of using the SAME symbol to represent several DIFFERENT mechanisms or mathematical relationships. One can really only successfully navigate through this dense forest of clues IF he actually has a FINISHED wheel right in front of him whose components and mathematical properties he can then compare to the portrait symbols OR if he is VERY ACTIVELY building / modifying a wheel as he goes along and then enters into a sort of "feedback loop" with the portrait clues wherein they suggest changes that must be made to the wheel design while the results of the tests on the modified wheel then suggest different ways to interpret the portrait clues which are then used to again modify the wheel design the tests on which are then used to again re-interpret the clues, and so on and so on. I am, of course, in that latter catagory as anyone reading my comments on this blog over the last few months will realize.
How many clues in the two DT portraits?
Literally, DOZENS, but, actually, practically EVERYTHING in those portraits plays SOME role in describing the important features of his wheels!
For example, one might briefly glance at the second portrait and note the two carpenter's planes hanging on brackets in the background and to Bessler's right side. Just some carpenter's tools with no real significance, right?
WRONG!
To properly evaluate the "Carpenter's Planes Clue" in the second portrait you must ask yourself what carpenter's planes are used for. If you've ever had wood shop in high school, then you know that they are used to shave off THIN LAYERS of wood from a piece of wood board.
Properly interpreting that clue requires noting that the carpenter's planes both have the PLANES of their flat bases containing the projecting edges of their shaving blades PARALLEL to each other and separated by only a small distance so as to define a THIN LAYER or volume of SPACE. Thus, this clue is a reference to the thin parallel layers of space within each one-directional wheel's drum that contained the various interconnecting cords required by the "Connectedness Principle" so that no two of the cords would rub against each other and thereby fray and prematurely fail during wheel rotation. Also note that the two carpenter's planes point DOWNWARDS in the portrait which tells the portrait analyst that more information about these thin parallel layers will be found in the lower left side of the portrait which it is. I now have most of the details of the layering system that Bessler used in his wheels including the number of them and the particular cords that they contained (my current cord count per one-directional wheel or "sub wheel" is up to 56 which were strategically distributed amongst 5 parallel layers).
Anyway, all of the information I've released so far about the two DT portrait clues represents only a VERY small fraction of their total information content. The necessary complete information needed to reconstruct one of Bessler's wheels IS contained in the two portraits, but it is what, today, we would call "heavily encrypted"! I've been working on them for years and probably only have extracted about 90% of their valid content.
My work continues...
I note a posting some time back by Stewart on BW, in which he translated "Präpondium" to "Praepondium" (Latin) = preponderance.
ReplyDeleteHe goes on to say that that particular passage ends with Bessler advising us that "those people who sought nothing other than the classic overbalanced Mobile as being wise." So there you have it, continue to work on your "overbalanced Mobile"!
JC
@John
DeleteWhich book/page does this passage come from?
1st link is what I believe John is referring to. 2nd has more info.
Deletehttp://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=83468&highlight=praepondium#83468
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=88841&highlight=praepondium#88841
Zoelra
No I don't " have it " . I found the word but not any reference to a wise pursuit . Anyway my wheel will not take years to build so I will know soon enough whether I am right . As a matter of fact I am basically done with the drum and the axle ... next the crossbars .
DeleteJC wrote "So there you have it, continue to work on your "overbalanced Mobile"!"
DeleteI certainly intend to! LOL!
Considering these passages:
"All the wise ones were looking for the same principle (of 'excess weight') that I have described, and they sought it in things that were already familiar to them...They sought to bring a wheel into a state of motion, such that, without the need for winding, its innate virtue would keep it revolving as long as its materials might last." (AP, pg. 366)
"...by all intelligent people, who, with true understanding, have sought the Mobile in a place no different from that in which I eventually found it." (AP, pg. 367)
I can't even begin to understand how someone could read this and then conclude anything other than that Bessler found a way to make what would ordinarily be considered a "classic" NON-running OB PM gravity wheel into a WORKING one.
According to interpretation ... the second passage above could read something more like " with an understanding no different than I had when I found it " rather than " in a place no different " . John an I got in a lengthy name calling match over that one . Here's the google and bing interpretation of the reference above :
DeleteHört doch! Es wil dies Feindes Rachen
Alle kluge Leute zum Narren machen,
Dies da nicht anders mit Verstand
Das Mobile gesucht, als ich es fand
Listen carefully! It wil this enemy jaws
All smart people make a fool out
This is no different with understanding
The Mobile looking for when I found it. x.
Hört doch! Es wil dies Feindes Rachen
Alle kluge Leute zum Narren machen,
Dies da nicht anders mit Verstand
Das Mobile suchten , als ich es fand .
Hear yet! It wil this enemy's throat
All clever people make a fool,
This is no different with mind
The mobile searched for when I found it.
My humble point bring if I may , that he seems to not be referencing a " place " but rather a " level of understanding " .
DeleteBy the way : The first passage above ought to have you asking what Bessler was familiar with that " all the wise ones " weren't instead of using it to say that it implies something that it does not .
DeleteIt could also be interpreted as Bessler saying that when he found the mobile HIS motivation was the same as Wagner's .
DeleteIt's in Apologia Poetica Chapter XXXII my page 73, Bessler's page 58 - and Chapter XII my page P54, Bessler's page 39 and in the second part in the ANHANG section my page 230, Bessler's page 87.
ReplyDeleteSometimes he uses "Präpondium" and sometimes "Präepondium"
John, I read Stewart's post and the thing that stands out for me is the comment
Deleteon one side it is heavy and full,
on the other empty and light
I struggle with interpreting "on the other empty and light" as meaning "slightly closer to the axle". Empty seems to have a clear meaning.
Zoelra
I assume he is speaking relatively or using poetic licence. One side is fuller and heavier than the other side which has less in it and is therefore lighter.
ReplyDeleteJC
Agreed. When reading AP it is easy to forget that one is reading a prose translation of a 300 year old POEM. Poets use various techniques such as the contraction of and diliberate mispelling of words (i.e., "poetic license") for the purpose of maintaining their rhyme schemes and, of course, they occasionally use EXAGGERATIONS for emphasis.
DeleteAnyone who tries to make a working OB PM gravity wheel that will keep ALL of its weights on the descending side of its drum is, IMO, wasting his time. That is just TOO extreme of an imbalance to try to maintain even though, obviously, it would maximize the wheel's torque.
Indeed, there is only ONE way that I can think how one could keep ALL of the weight on one side of his OB PM gravity wheel design. Bessler would have had to have had a small trained animal, perhaps a cat, that would continously run up the inner curving periphery wall of the descending side of his wheel's drum in order to provide an offset CoM whose torque would then accelerate the drum. Come to think of it, he mentions somewhere that some of those at his public demonstrations even accused him of using that method!
Bill Clinton said it all depends on what the definition of "is" is. Well I say, it depends on what the definition of "side" is.
DeleteZoelra
@ Zoelra
DeleteTo me, Bessler is using the word "side" to indicate either the ascending or descending side of a rotating drum. I think his poetic description, however, COULD be taken literally IF one simply assumes he is describing the location of the CoM of the weights within his drums which, of course, was always located on a drum's descending side in a one-directional wheel. Despite this, the weights were always equal in number on BOTH sides of the drum, but, of course, NOT all equi-distant from the center of its axle.
Good point Zoelra, the first thing one can imagine is left side and rigth side, one light and one heavy.
DeleteBut, it can be different, i.e. in my prototype the "heavy side" is located on the bottom (6:00) but not pushing down, instead id pushing to the left at rigth angle of the arm (in a cw view), and upper side it is not helping to rotate at all, instead pushes in the same direction of the main axis (at rigth angle of the arm).
So I could say my wheel it has one side heavy and another light but in a very different way.
Charly2
How horrible! My "IGNORE" button has just failed me!
ReplyDeleteAnd now, on this account, what foolishness is to be seen?
It seems we've now had our intellects (en)lightened by the alleged "technoguy" on 15 December 2012 at 07:55, his newest childish fit beginning with a delightful quote compliments of me own little self . . .
"You [Chris] HAVE a good sense of humor and as far as I am concerned (?), you're one of the good guys around here.
(Although . . . certain of pseudo-named 'hidden others' being not-so! I hit their "IGNORE" button long ago. I recommend this to others as well for those endless and boring Parts 1, 2 and 3 type things, too often put under our offended, overly patient noses.)"
I, likewise, recommend that others hit their "IGNORE" button on the tedious ravings of any pseudo-intellectual TROLL types that show up here.
(And hereat mercifully ends the true tedium that is mediocrity.)
Which . . . then allows the saner of intellects among us to wonder (pseudo OR not): Why, then, is the stinking, hidden troll itself here STILL, being not at all real in any way excepting for
1. it's grossest of irritation power;
2. it's endless trying of this blog's moderator's saintly patience and,
3. all the goddamn space taken up by it's uninteresting, self-aggrandizing, masturbatory nonsense?
Yes!
Why?
I think we may have arrived at the very nub of our matter, now. With any good luck, it will soon be at an end.
(And to this so say-ed The Echo: "On this count, dear James, best it might be to not abate your breath too much?!")
Obviously (naturally) odious trollery is to be disfavored. And so this the Gods do.
No, there'll be NO taking of Excalibur from a stony embrace, as done by this hiding fiend's grasping, hairy hand. (Best believe it!)
Ciao!
James
So, John, I have a couple of questions for you.
ReplyDeleteHow close are you to shutting off the Blog Comments function?
Have you gotten a chance to get back out in the workshop yet?
The comments section's safe at the moment although I have been close to abandoning the blog altogether a couple of times, but then I think why get stressed about it@ So I just keep going.
DeleteThe workshop is even more cluttered with stuff since I took that picture, but I'm working in there over the next few days to tidy up enough so I can get back to work on my wheel.
JC
Yes, this week the blog has reached a new level of entertainment.
ReplyDeleteThis is epic stuff, like watching kids playing or something, marvelous.
Cough! Gasp! Choke!
ReplyDeleteAm I the ONLY one noticing the POTENT stench of pseudo-intellectural TROLL excrement wafting through this blog entry's comment section???
Please...cough, cough, gasp...someone open some windows...gasp, sputter...and let's flush this out of here!
Meanwhile...gasp, sputter...I've got to don my emergency gas mask. Prolonged exposure to the noxious vapors emanating from troll scat can be hazardous to one's health!!! Oh, and also AVOID touching it unless you are wearing the proper protective gloves! The juices oozing out of this stuff can eat right through ordinary latex. You'll need to use a plastic snow shovel and either neoprene or vinyl gloves to clean it up safely.
Choke...Cough...VOMIT!
PART I:
ReplyDeleteThanks for opening the windows everyone. Now that the air is much fresher in here, I can finally remove my emergency gas mask and get back to discussing some of my ongoing Bessler wheel research!
Well, I just finished crafting my new modified "magic" lever and setting up what I call a "Source" wheel using them. This is a WM2D model wheel that is 36 inches in diameter and has eight 1 ounce lead weights attached to the ends of the new modified "magic" levers. All weights are up against their rim stops and awaiting the attachment of their interconnecting cords and primary / secondary springs. All levers are in alignment with their radial drum support members. At this point the CoM of the weights resides exactly in the center of the wheel which in the full sized Merseburg wheel would be at the center of the axle and there is no torque available to rotate the wheel (this is, BTW, the same configuration of the levers inside of the Merseburg wheel's two one-directional "sub wheels" when the drum and its axle were being "translocated" from one set of uprights to another to prove that the large wheel was not being driven by anything hidden it the original set of uprights).
As I mentioned previously, I've decided to take another crack at "constructing" the type of wheel which has the weights alighting on their rim stops by the time they reach the drum's 3:00 position, my so-called "Contact BEFORE 3:00" wheel. Now, however, instead of the 6:00 going to 7:30 weighted lever arriving at 7:30 in a perfectly vertical orientation, it will arrive there rotated exactly 5 degrees CW about its pivot from a vertical line passing through the pivot. Hopefully, this slight change will, finally, allow the 7:30 going to 9:00 weighted lever to deliver a bit more gravitational potential energy / mass to the 9:00 going to 10:30 weighted lever so that its weight will rise smoothly toward its rim stop early in the 45 degree interval of drum rotation and thereby display that "Bessler Effect" that I long to see (and which will indicate that I've finally arrived 100% of the way to the end of the "right track"!).
I complained previously that by making the weighted lever at 7:30 NON-vertical, I was causing the CoM of my model wheel's weights to be "pulled" closer to its "punctum quietus" and that the value I measured for its horizontal diplacement onto the model wheel's descending side was about 0.17000 inches. I'm not too happy with that figure and wish it was around 0.25000 inches. Interesting, my wish MAY come true!
I will soon be performing an operation that I call "draping". This involves pinning the 3:00 position weighted lever into place so that its weight is in contact with its rim stop. Then, interconnecting cords are attached between specific points on the levers whose pivots are located at the 1:30, 12:00, 10:30, and 9:00 drum positions. Once that is done, the cords are all sequentially increased by the same amounts until the 9:00 position lever makes a certain CRITICAL angle with a horizontal line passing through its pivot. I have not discussed this angle yet, but it is probably THE most important angle used in Bessler's wheels and it is given by SEVERAL of the DT portrait clues. There is NO possibility of the clues indicating it being false "decoy" clues and this angle MUST appear in any accurate replication of Bessler's wheels.
PART II:
ReplyDeleteNow, once the cords have been increased until the 9:00 weighted lever has that critical angle, then the 7:30 weighted lever will have its angle adjusted so that it is 45 degrees + 40 degrees = 85 degrees rotated CCW about its pivot from a horizontal line passing through the pivot. The 3:00, 4:30, and 6:00 position weighted levers all have their weights in contact with their rims stops. At this point, with the wheel and its weighted levers pinned so that they can not move, the simulation is briefly run so that the CoM symbol appears on the model wheel. When that symbol appears, it's easy to determine the exact horizontal displacement of the CoM from the center of the wheel's axle. The farther that distance, the greater will be the torque acting on the wheel.
But, there is another detail involved in the displacement location of the CoM which involves the orientations of the weighted levers at drum positions 10:30, 12:00, and 1:30. If they happen to be angled a bit more toward the wheel's 3:00 or descending side, then this "pushes" the CoM of all of the 8 weights out farther onto the descending side. If, OTOH, they happen to be bit more toward the wheel's 9:00 or ascending side, then this "pulls" the CoM of all of the 8 weights in closer to axle on the descending side. Exactly what will happen depends upon the shape of one's "magic" lever and the locations of the various cord attachment points on it.
There's no way, at this early stage to tell where the CoM of my new "Contact BEFORE 3:00" model wheel will wind up. That must await the "draping" of the weighted levers which, hopefully, I'll get a chance to work on later today. If I am lucky, then I just might find that this recent modification of the "magic" lever's shape will result in a CoM that is displaced horizontally to that 0.25000 inch distance away from a vertical line passing through the axle and onto the wheel's descending side that I would like to see. That would, indeed, be VERY "good" news and further evidence that I'm still on AND progressing rapidly down the "right track" to success!
In any event, regardless of where the design's CoM winds up, the next step will be to, once again, see if, during a 45 degree increment of drum rotation, the 9:00 going to 10:30 weighted lever will display the "Bessler Effect". At this point in time, I'm feeling optimistic.
I've changed the font to 'arvo', is that better, worse or no different?
ReplyDeleteJC
WORSE!
Deletea capital i (I) does not resemble a lower case l (L). I and l are common variables used in rotation mathematics
ReplyDeleteLooks good
Anyone else?
ReplyDeleteJC
Well lets see, I will type a capital i and a lower case L and see how they are displayed when published.
DeleteI l
Seems to work ok. Can the font size be increased a point size or two to help us old guys with reading?
DeleteZoelra
Anyone know if there is a way to produce superscripts and subscripts?
DeleteZoelra
@John
DeleteI noticed a comment earlier asking you "how close you are to closing the comment function". Please don't allow the actions of the few disorderly Anon's out there to silence this forum.
I just got my Google account working. I have had to use Anonymous to post but I always try to add my username (Zoelra) at the bottom of the comment, but this does not always happen, as in the 16 December 2012 15:38 post above, but I do try to add a follow up so I can be recognized.
Can you eliminate the Anonymous option and require a member login?
What the...?! This "arvo" font is so small it looks like the print on the back of a medicine bottle!
DeleteWhy don't you just leave things the way they were instead of making this annoying change just so someone won't confuse a capital "I" with a lower case "l"? Posters can just use capital "I's" and "L's" in the rare formulas given here that might use them and that should end any confusion.
I have done so in the past, Zoelra, but the consensus opinion seems to be that its best left open to all.
ReplyDeleteJC
You can still maintain anonymity using a Google account so I'm not sure how this does not allow equal access to all. Unless someone just can't be troubled with making an account.
Delete@John
DeleteCan an Edit option be added to member posts (like Delete) so if a typo is seen or a modification is needed, it can be done without having to add another clarifying post?
Zoelra, people don't want to bother with opening accounts to sign in which is fine by me. I just have to be a bit more careful about deleting those that are undesirable. There isn't an edit option for comments, not even me, except that I can delete them and rewrite them.
ReplyDeleteJC
Ok, Thanks.
DeleteUnfortunately, putting up with the occasional spammer, Anon turned "Anony-mouse", or odious troll, is the "price" we must all pay for an easy exchange of opinions and facts. IF they really do get seriously offensive (as by using, say, foul language), then you can always delete their comments. Meanwhile, we can have some fun dumping on them with our own snide counter comments!
Delete