My wheel is taking shape but I realised that because of the other attractions over Christmas, I had not looked at it for about three weeks and had forgotten that I had made a small error on drawing in the mechanism and had turned the wheel over to start my drawing again. So on my return I was somewhat puzzled to know where I had got to - this is what happens as you get older, the memory starts to fail you! Fortunately I eventually turned the wheel over again and saw my error and was able to put it right on the other side.
Because I (believe I) have now got the complete design with angles and lengths and of course the secret principle, I am actually drawing it out on the wheel, and I can then drill holes measure levers etc., and fit them exactly where they should go and all the stops are located in their proper places. The hold-up occurred because I missed out a vital calculation which resulted in the levers being drawn on the wheel but incorrectly placed.
I have to confess that a younger person would probably have finished the wheel by now but I am aiming to finish this one in a week or so and thank goodness! It's been a long haul to get to where I am now. I have always said that if my wheel fails I will share what I know and I guess that moment is approaching, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed for this one. I shall be 69 next Wednesday, 5th Feb, and that would be a good day to succeed but it could be a few days after.
If it doesn't act as I designed it to do, there is one more additional movement to make which I suspect I shall have to incorporate which I think (hopefully) complies with Bessler's comment about 'connectedness' or as I prefer to say 'interconnectedness'. If these fail then I shall finish the document I have been writing and publish it and await the reaction. If my previous 'revelations' are anything to go by then a fairly muted response can be expected because no one accepts any theories without a working model, I know I don't.
But there will be one thing in the document which will hopefully get a more excited response, however I'm jumping the gun here - the model's not finished yet and I'm kind of optimistic about this one.
JC
10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.
John, the 'solution' you believe you have found is I think personally more likely than most people on the right track, its built on 'cracking' the original work over years of study and not your own created 'new solution'. I concur with you on some of your conclusions(if I recall them correctly...) ie: the pendulums never existed their a clue, that the mech includes more than simple falling weight(s) but some novel action like kiking/pulsing/harmonic/sprung etc. And more. If it works I will be as pleased for you as you should be for yourself, if some individual has to find it why not you? its deserved (I am not saying others havn't laboured or are deserving), so if it keeps spinning I hope you dont explode with excitement! keep a level head but ...enjoy.
ReplyDeletePS If it doesnt, I still think your not far away and the connecting spring may be required...
Regards
Jon
Thanks Jon.
ReplyDeleteJC
If you don't mind suffer this fool for a moment . John has done much to further the legend of Bessler's Wheel ; more than most ... allegedly in hopes of someone finding the solution . That being the case whoever applies themselves to the search and correctly finds what Bessler found will probably have John to thank ( unless they saw the online publications and know the German language well and have never heard of him ) . I for one have John to thank for furthering my efforts ... as an outcast , a troll , a liar , and a book beggar , lol . But with any war of words or weapons it is more difficult to tell who really cast the first stone than it will be to judge the" better man " . But if the better man tuns out to be someone of ill repute ( like Bessler was to some by his own admission ) then will there be less cause for celebration ? If the better man doesn't happen to be someone of high standing at the Besslerwheel forum will that be such a travesty ? I didn't make the rules but I'd expect anyone involved to honor their own suggestion . I now fully expect to be able to produce this device , but since I
ReplyDeleteam nobody it doesn't really mean much when I say that does it ? Or it could be the fact that I've been wrong before which is the reason my words fail to bend an ear or two . I admit that the obsession has got the better of me . It actually doesn't matter who discovers it , the same obstacles are in place already . But whoever is reading this I will say this indisputably : you will not find this device without some really serious thought . It's like Bessler said, " we were unprepared and still far from the truth ."
Well said Chris, and thanks.
ReplyDeleteJC
YW and all apologies .
DeleteJohn .. I'm pretty certain that your device could be simmed & then it could be discussed on BW.com.
ReplyDeleteThe mechanism inputs & variables could be changed at will - that process would be enlightening for all, whether it worked or not.
Best -fletcher
Hi Fletch, good to hear from you. You're right of course, this design could be simulated and the inputs varied to gain some insight into its workings. I would be happy to do as you suggest, but I want to build a model for myself first. If it fails I will share everything.
DeleteThe design configuration does not have much room for variation because it has to be built according to the principle I am working with. It's quite likely that improvements to its speed could be made by varying the angles slightly but not much more than that.
I know that you favour an additional force of some kind to enable gravity to complete the cycle but you may have to review that opinion ( hope!) Any way it should not take me too long to finish this prototype and then I'll have a better picture of the way to move forward.
JC
John,
ReplyDeleteI'll animate it for you if you decide to go that route .
Thanks Chris. I have had a number of offers to animate the design and I'll certainly consider all offers.
DeleteJC