The legend of Bessler’s wheel began on 6th June 1712, when
Johann Bessler announced that he had invented a perpetual motion machine and he
would be exhibiting it in the town square in Gera, Germany, on June 6th of that year. Everyone was free to come and see the machine running. It took the form of
a wheel mounted between two pillars and could run continuously until it was
stopped or its parts wore out. The machine attracted huge crowds. Although they were allowed to examine its
external appearance thoroughly, they could not view the interior, because the
inventor wished to sell the secret of its construction for the sum of 10,000
pounds – a sum equal to several millions today.
News of the invention reached the ears of high
ranking men, scientists, politicians and members of the aristocracy. They came and examined the machine, subjected
it to numerous tests and concluded that it was genuine. Only one other man, Karl,
the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel, was allowed to view the interior and he testified
that the machine was genuine.
There were several attempts to buy the wheel, but
negotiations always failed when they reached an impasse – the buyer wished to
examine the interior before parting with the money, and the inventor fearing
that once the secret was known the buyer would simply leave without paying and
make his own perpetual motion machine, would not permit it. Sadly the machine was lost to us when the inventor fell to his death during construction of another of his inventions, a
vertical axle windmill.
However, the discovery of a series of encoded clues
has led many to the opinion that the inventor left instructions for
reconstructing his wheel, long after his death.
The clues were discovered during the process of investigating the
official reports of the time which seemed to rule out any chance of fraud,
hence the interest in discovering the truth about the legend of
Bessler’s wheel.
My
own interest was sparked by the realisation that
an earlier highly critical account by Bessler's maid-servant, which explained how the wheel was fraudulently driven, was so obviously flawed and a lie, that I was
immediately attracted to do further research. In time I learned that there
was no fraud involved, which left me with the only other possible explanation, the
wheel was genuine and
the claims of the inventor genuine
The tests involved lifting heavy weights from the
castle yard to the roof, driving an Archimedes water pump and an endurance test
lasting 56 days under lock and key and armed guard. Bessler also organised demonstrations
involving running the wheel on one set of bearings opened for inspection – and
then transferring the device to a second set of open bearings, both sets having
been examined to everyone’s satisfaction, both before, after and during the
examination.
So the only problem is that modern science denies that Bessler's wheel was possible, but my own research has shows what might be called a loop-hole, a work-around that avoids conflict with the laws of physics.
So the only problem is that modern science denies that Bessler's wheel was possible, but my own research has shows what might be called a loop-hole, a work-around that avoids conflict with the laws of physics.
I have produced copies of all Bessler's publications, with English translations. They can be obtained by clicking on the appropriate links on the right.
JC
JC
10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.
One of the biggest obstacles to researching the secrets of Bessler's wheels is that there can be much disagreement as to what is and is not a "clue". A clue that one person would swear is the key to the mystery is often just casually dismissed as totally irrelevant by other researchers. That, coupled with somewhat subjective translations of the available Bessler documents, does not help matters. Unfortunately, at this time there is still so much ambiguity in the subject, that each researcher basically "sees" the solution he is looking for with that solution actually being subtly determined by such things as his previous education and work experience. But, sooner or later, a solution will emerge that seems to fit all or most of the "clues" (when they are properly interpreted) and, most importantly, leads to an actual working physical model of one of Bessler's wheels. I look forward to that day and hope I see it in my lifetime. I've only been waiting about a half century so far!
ReplyDeleteYes I agree Ken, that interpretation of the clues is a minefield and we don't even agree on which clues might be intentional. The other hurdle will be convincing the 'experts' that they have been wrong for 300 years.
Delete"New models of understanding are chronically marginalized by experts in the current paradigm'. (or 'Giovanni's rule') or to be honest not so much 'marginalized' as completely rejected.
JC
When the "experts" finally can see one of Bessler's wheels spinning away before their startled eyes, they will quickly "come onboard" and the world of physics will grudgingly embrace this subject. Until then, they will just sit back and proclaim it an impossibility only believed in by the pathetically deluded. After all, the burden of proof does not lie with the skeptics, but rather with the believers and extraordinary claims always require extraordinary proof. Like you, I believe that when the mystery is finally solved, it will be seen to not be in violation of any of our current laws of physics. Once we figure out how to routinely maintain the imbalance of weights within a rotating (or swinging or rocking) machine, the process will suddenly seem so obvious that people will wonder why it was ever thought to be an impossibility in the first place!
DeleteKen, do you believe in OU or PM or do you think Bessler found a way to exchange or extract energy from the Earth?
DeleteZoelra, I think the energy Bessler's wheels produced actually came from the lead weights they carried. All mass, according to E = mc^2, is equivalent to energy. Somehow, when the center of mass of a rotating wheel is made to persistently stay "out of the center of rotation" of the wheel and kept on the wheel's descending side, that energy can be slowly drained off and used to do work outside of the wheel. This does not violate any of our laws of physics. My question is whether this draining process would continue until the last erg of energy left the wheel's weights or is there some as yet unknown process that at a certain point begins to recharge the energy being drawn from the weights? If the first is the case, then Bessler's wheels were not perpetual. However, if the weights were somehow recharged by the energy of the surrounding universe, then they would be truly perpetual since the universe is infinite and could recharge them forever.
DeleteInteresting idea. For sure there is something unique about rotation - you only need to observe the movement of a gyroscope or the work of Eric Laithwaite to see this. The fact that a gyroscope, cantilevered and precessing about a supporting pedestal base, appears to have no outward centrifugal force and weighs less should have the scientific community jumping, but is not the case. It is if this subject is taboo or something.
DeleteKen I'm interested in how you came to the conclusion that the energy came from the conversion of mass. Maybe you can elaborate on this. I myself think the (or a) solution lies in a variation of a two stage oscillator. Bessler said he found the solution where others had looked so it is a possibility until someone can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it is not. This goes for all possible solutions, including the conversion of mass.
Delete@Zoelra
DeleteWell, I can't see any other source of energy, either external or internal, that could account for the nearly two month long duration test of the Kassel wheel. The idea that Bessler's maid and immediate family were secretly powering a 4 or 5 hundred pound wheel while it was pumping water and running a stamping mill and were doing this through a thin barbed metal rod hidden in the wheel's vertical support seems totally absurd to me.
For an imbalanced wheel to stay imbalanced as it rotates, there must be a source of energy available to continuously raise the center of mass of its weights. I think that in a certain sector of the rotating wheel a falling weight at the end of a lever was used to stretch a steel spring. This then transferred some of the falling weight's kinetic energy to the spring which would store it temporarily. While this was happening, in other sectors the springs were contracting and lifting levers and their attached weights and constantly pulling them toward the descending side of the wheel. The resulting maintained imbalance then produced a torque that would drive the axle and could also power some external machinery. When a weight finally returned to its starting sector, its spring would be unstretched and ready to store more energy from the falling weight. Every time a weight completely a revolution around the wheel's axle it would experience a net loss of energy which would be equivalent to a loss of mass. The amount of mass lost by a weight after one revolution was nearly infinitesimal. But, after millions of years all of those tiny mass losses would add up to a significant percentage of the weight's starting mass. In practice, no wheel could ever run continuously for that amount of time unless it was routinely maintained with new parts when needed.
If besslers wheel work from gravity, does that mean it wasn't perpetual motion.
ReplyDeleteActually, it won't be very appropriate to term bessler's wheel as perpetual motion...Bessler's wheel, in fact, gets power from Gravity basically and also incorporates the advantages of lever principle, centrifugal/centripetal forces, inertia, etc., Hence, the ideal name would be Gravity Wheel.
ReplyDeleteYou are right!!!!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAccording to my 1774 English translation of Eric Von Klugscheisser's "Treatise on Trochilics and its application in various mechanical devices"
DeleteHe states, " So as not to appear a dullard when in the company of esteemed academics, any machine purporting to be a perpetual motion apparatus, would be better referred to as a " Diuturnal Verticity Device".
In my opinion, this is a most acceptable method of avoiding any cries of derision, and an excellent way to allay any doubts as to one's sanity".
;-D
A "diuturnal verticity device" is simply a device that continuously rotates which is exactly what imbalanced wheel type pm devices do. Von Klugsheisser is obviously trying to be jocular here and suggests that the way to overcome the derisive skepticism of academia towards the subject of perpetual motion devices is to wrap them up in a nice package of scientific mumbo jumbo. If one studies modern physical theories, much the same approach is still being used!
DeleteExactly Ken, I couldn't have put it better!
DeleteJC
John ,
ReplyDeleteIs there ever a mention of Wagner anywhere after the test at Weissenstein ? Did he ever shut up ?
Karl proclaimed that no one could speak against Bessler's claims or they would have to suffer the consequences, so Wagner, Borlach and GarTner lapsed into silence, while Bessler was under Karl's protection.
DeleteJC
@Chris
ReplyDeleteI've wondered about that myself. In one of his "Critiques" Wagner mentioned that his calculations, based upon the spring driven wheel he constructed, showed that, IIRC, the Merseberg wheel would not run for more than a day even if it was entirely filled with a huge wound up spring. This was his way of rationalizing the delays in an official testing of the wheel that would have lasted two weeks. After the Kassel wheel test that lasted two months, he seems to have fallen silent. Either we don't have his response or he realized that if he proclaimed that test a fraud, then he would have to implicate Carl as part of the fraud or as having been duped by Bessler. Doing that might have resulted in Wagner suddenly finding his professorship being terminated at the university he taught at and an immediate decrease in yearly salary. I don't think that Wagner was ever "converted" into becoming a believer in the possibility of pm or of Bessler's wheel being genuine.
In AP, there are several instances where Bessler rebukes the claim that his wheels use the type of springs that require winding up. Below are several examples taken from John Collins’ translation of AP and the page numbers where they can be found. If you read his statements carefully, I think one could argue that Bessler is not saying his wheels don’t include springs that require winding. What he is saying is his wheels don’t include springs that require winding by “someone”.
Deletepg. 254
A machine, in short, for use anywhere and everywhere, that will never, unlike other machines, require one to go to the trouble of "winding it up" -and which, so long as it is not deliberately stopped, will go on and on and on without damage or breakdown.
pg. 278
During my stay in Obergreisslau my detractors put out the cunning falsehood (in order to deceive the world) that my device, like a clock, needed to be wound up. This caused me to make some changes to the mechanism so that all intelligent people would appreciate the falseness of such a proposition. People then began to believe - and they freely admitted it - that the wheel did not require winding up.
pg. 317
In line 6 of section 13 of Part 1 I report on a matter that did not go as I'd intended. (...the vision of a roasting spit would not leave my mind...) But I kept on searching, and eventually found something
better, which did not need winding up, and until someone can come up with something better, I've got the true Mobile, and Wagner's got a barrel of filth for himself.
pg. 323
Now, if Wagner is not a liar, and my device really is as he says (with clockwork, weights, springs, etc.) then all the curses shall descend on me. Meanwhile I will pledge my blood, my life, my head, that my wheel does not require winding up, as Wagner claims it does.
pg. 326
Anyone with a bit of understanding will see that my machine works in quite a different manner. Yes, he’ll see that it really is a PERPETUUM MOBILE that doesn’t need winding up, that can drive things, and that despite WAGNER’S raging lies, no other (driving) wheel is linked to it.
pg. 345
“Springs and weights of the kind he describes” are not to be found in my machine!
If Bessler’s one-way wheels included large main springs like those found in watches, and the springs were wound by the internal PM mechanism, rather than requiring external winding by someone, then this could explain the self-starting nature of those wheels.
DeleteThere doesn’t appear to be much information from the investigators on the behavior of these wheels. It would have been extremely helpful to know if the investigators held on to the wheels while allowing them to turn slowly. Would the startup forces exhaust? Did the wheels exhibit a smooth or pulsating force of rotation? Did the force of rotation change with speed or time? Who knows, maybe Bessler didn’t allow this level of investigation, and that is the reason for the absence of such information.
This is all speculative, but with the absence of facts, it could be a possibility.
I think the torque of his one direction wheels was maximum when they were stationary and then began to decline steadily as they accelerated toward their maximum free running speed. Obviously, when stationary, the center of mass of their weights was displaced the most from the axle and then, as they accelerated, the center of mass would slowly swing down until it was almost right below the axle. I'm not sure of exactly why this would happen, but it might be that the increase in centrifugal force acting on the weights as the wheel accelerated was somehow interfering with or delaying the shifting of the levers that took place continuously during wheel rotation. Actually, this is not really a negative feature. If his wheels could accelerate constantly, then a point would be reached when the wheel would tear itself apart due to centrifugal forces acting on the weights and levers!
DeleteIf one side of the wheel is always heavy then the wheel would always be in a self-starting mode...now, the question is how to make a wheel whose one side is always heavier than the other....Bessler made it and it was very, very, simple unlike what Stevo describes about the wheel having cords and additional small weights besides larger weights...we need to figure out this simple design instead of so much of discussions on the spring....we are yet to conceive this mechanism and instead we are wasting valuable blog time talking about the source of energy and other such things which are not so much important...bessler wheel mystery can only be solved if we can figure out the secret internal mechanism which is not very dependent on springs or smaller weights or even cords for that matter...artful arrangement...we keep forgetting this....one thing is right what Stevo has described...free flow...the swinging should be free always...the weights must pull the levers freely...this flow must be very free....this internal movement must be very free...
ReplyDelete@Zoelra
ReplyDeleteFirst, nice compendium of quotes you've provided about Bessler's comments on the non-use of springs inside of his wheels.
I interpret his statements as confirming that his wheels did not contain the type of large spiral ribbon torsion springs or main springs found in clock movements and which must be manually wound up in order to make the movement operate. However, he did admit elsewhere that his wheels used "springs"...just not the type found in clock movements. That basically leaves conventional helical coil extension springs which store energy by being stretched and so-called flat springs which are just strips of metal that store energy as they are flexed from some starting shape. My model wheels all use simple helical coil extension springs, but I am also exploring the use of flat springs because they tend to resist metal fatigue better than coil springs (Bessler hints that he may have used these in the notes to MT 18).
In a sense, the "springs" inside of Bessler's wheels were continuously being "wound up" or actually just stretched by falling weights on a wheel's ascending side and "unwound" or just unstretched as they went up and over the wheel's zenith and began to come down on the wheel's descending side. The process was automatic and continuous. I'm now in the process of determining the spring constants that were required to make the weights and their lever like handles behave as they must have during wheel rotation in order to keep the center of mass of the weights on a wheel's descending side during rotation. The process of determining this is a slow and tedious one. But, by trial and error, I hope to eventually find the correct constants for the springs that are used. Right now, it looks like the constants are much greater than I ever thought would be necessary.
Stevo, I loved your definition from the 1774 English translation of Eric Von Klugscheisser's "Treatise on Trochilics and its application in various mechanical devices". But although I think the definition " Diuturnal Verticity Device" is excellent, I think Verticity relates to the way a magnetic needle always seeks North or South rather than just rotation anywhere. It maybe that the word did not translate as accurately as needed, from the original text which I presume was in Latin, or was it German? Thanks Stevo.
ReplyDeleteJC
On second thoughts the Latin word is 'verticitas', which means 'vertically' and you can see how that came to be applied to pole-seeking rotation of a magnetized needle, if you think as the north pole being 'up' and the south pole being 'down'.
DeleteSo perhaps it is an accurate definition. :-)
JC
John,
Deletemy copy is a third generation translation, German - Latin - English.
The authors name is C. A. Cosyntheton.
It's no wonder there's a few mistakes !
;-D
Thanks for the info Stevo.
DeleteJC
Don't mention it John,
Deleteit was required reading when I attended the University of Autodidactal Studies,it helped me to obtain my degree in philosophunculism.
I found this interesting youtube video of an attempt to build a Bessler wheel which appears to be based on MT 17:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uolz18oSseE
It's has, imo, two problems. First, the springs interconnect adjacent levers. The springs should attach the levers to the wheel's frame itself. Second, there are no interconnecting ropes between the levers to help coordinate their motions and force their weights' center of mass to remain on the descending side of the wheel during rotation as the levers are shifted about by spring tension. There are many other problems as well that I will not go into, but I was impressed with the craftsmanship the builder displays. With skills such as this, constructing a working Bessler wheel should not be that difficult a matter. Once the correct design is found, that is.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Michel, Bessler had several children by both his first and second wives, but as was common in those days, many did not survive to adulthood. He had one surviving daughter from his first marriage, and she married a preacher. By his second wife he had four surviving children. There is one piece of information which certifies that Bessler's second father-in-law, the court blacksmith, would accept him on condition that he share his secret with him. There is no evidence that he actually did, but there are some who believe that a certain descendant had in his possession an old leather-bound book containing many drawings of machines. I personally doubt that this has anything to do with Bessler's wheel, but I do not have all the facts, so I may be wrong.
DeleteI don't think Bessler shared his secret with anyone other than Karl because he trusted no one who might be tempted to sell it for a small amount of money, so he made provision for leaving the secret explained in his publications.
I would like to say that I believe I have all the information I need to reconstruct Bessler's wheel. I obtained this information by decoding the clues in his published works. I am currently building the wheel according to my own personal convictions that I'm right, but you know how self-deluding this work can be, so time will tell if I'm right or wrong!
JC
John, didn't Bessler have a brother named Gottfried or something like that who lived in Weissenstein Castle with him as he was constructing the 12 foot two-directional wheel there? If so then surely Bessler would not have had him that close to him without trusting him to keep the details of the wheel's construction secret. Quite possibly Gottfried was assisting Bessler in the construction of the huge wheel. If so, then I wonder if Bessler would have required him to swear various oaths of secrecy before sharing the secret. I doubt if he would have required his own brother to pay a 4000 deutsch thaler fee to be let in on the secret. I agree with you that the secret was encoded into Bessler's writings but was carefully hidden so that only a very diligent wheel builder might ever be able to find it and use it to duplicate one of his wheels. My research indicates that the "secret" is a lot more complicated than most suppose.
DeleteGottfried left Kassel and went to London with his own family for a while and then returned. I see no reason to suppose that Bessler had to share his secret with his brother and I doubt that he did. He helped out at the demonstrations but that is all, Bessler was perfectly capable of making any parts he needed for the wheel himself. He learned the trade of organ-building and was assisted in this by Gottfried and in fact there is a remaining organ built by Bessler at Karlshafen.
DeleteJC
Well, if my brother had invented something as incredible as a pm wheel and expected me to help him promote it, I'd certainly expect him to let me in on the big secret. However, perhaps you are right and Bessler's word that it was genuine was sufficient for his brother. Just seems a little improbable to me that Gottfried was helping at demonstrations of the wheel and did not occasionally get an opportunity to take a peek inside of the cloth covering on a drum. Maybe he did and saw the collection of weights, levers, ropes, and springs in there and did not see anything else like a giant main spring that could be wound up. He would have accepted this as proof and looked no further. I suspect the same was the case with Carl. Bessler probably gave him a quick demonstration of a small model wheel. Carl saw it self start and run several times and he was immediately convinced. Such a demonstration is certainly convincing, but the real secret involves the special levers Bessler used and the way the springs were attached to them. Unless those factors are known to an inventor beforehand, he will have next to zero chance of duplicating one of Bessler's wheels, imo. Neither Gottfried or Carl would have had that precise information. That info was intended only for the person(s) who paid Bessler the huge amount of money he demanded.
DeleteI respect that your opinion differs from mine, Ken, but Karl saw the interior and understood the mechanism and how it worked, hence his comment that he was surprised that no one else had ever made it. What special levers and what springs? We know nothing of what was inside other than weights. The wheel will be duplicated Ken.
DeleteJC
Yes, I'm aware that we have different approaches to Bessler's wheels. That's okay. The design I am currently working on, which I am very convinced is the one Bessler used, is immediately understandable upon visual inspection. Actually, it's ridiculously simple. But it requires a precisely shaped lever with ropes and springs attached to it at precise points. Any deviation from these precise specifications and the design is useless. I have found many clues that, once decoded, give the shape of the special levers and the attachment points on them. These clues are very difficult to find and interpret, but, trust me, they are there. I believe Bessler left them so that, should he die without the invention being sold, which happened, someone in the future would be able to duplicate his wheels' "secret" mechanism using these clues. In another week or so, I should know if I've finally "found it" or if I've been barking up the wrong tree. If I've finally found it, I will announce it here. So far, I've only been working on a small table top sized wheel. If it works, then I will scale it up to the 12 foot diameter size of the Merseberg and Kassel wheels. If that works, then I will consider the mystery solved and the next problem I will have to deal with is what to do with this discovery. Well, first things first...
DeleteWell, are we very sure that Bessler left clues for someone to replicate the wheel or are these ones really clues at all? He might have left these clues just to ensure that his name would figure as the first to have invented the wheel...IMO, he didn't wan't anyone to easily know the secret...the clues were there just to ensure his name as the first...And I don't think any code exists either...But nevertheless, the wheel was true and we should work hard...At the moment, our approach is nowhere near the point...can't expect anyone to come up successful in the near future...what Karl saw is entirely different from what is being described here...much simpler than what is being described by Ken...wait and see for yourself...
ReplyDeleteSuresh, it sounds like you are referring to Frank Edwards' account of what Carl supposedly saw inside of Bessler's wheels. That account has been dismissed by many, me included, as fictional and intended to add some drama to Edwards' chapter on Bessler's wheels. Carl never really revealed exactly what he saw to anyone. All he said was that the design was simple and that he was surprised no one else had thought of it before Bessler. The design I am currently working with is very simple. It's basically a spring assisted version of the classic pm wheel design that has drooping weighted arms on the ascending side that flip over at the zenith of the wheel and extend outward on the descending side. It looks very much like MT 13 minus the half moon pendulum on the axle. That design does not work. But, there is a simple way to make it work and that is what I think Bessler discovered. If what I have works, it will truly amaze people with its simplicity. But that simplicity is very deceptive. There is a tremendous amount of planning that went into this design by Bessler and it even incorporates numerology! I really hope this is it. I need a rest!
DeleteMT 23 is much closer to the truth than MT13...springs wear out fast and won't be suitable for this type of machine...we need to get this into our heads...the prevailing delay to reinvent bessler's wheel is mute testimony to all this...we don't have the actual design and all of us are on the wrong track....my words may seem bitter but it is a fact...there is a real design, a very simple one, one which has no ropes and additional smaller weights as suggested by stevo...only levers and wts with springs playing a minor role...springs are not reqd for the flipping over act at the horizon...
ReplyDeleteWe'll have to agree to disagree about the use of springs in Bessler's wheels. Yes, they are prone to metal fatigue, but modern steel alloys produce springs with exceptional longevity. I've reached the point now where I do not think it's possible to make a working wheel unless spring tension plays a big role in its operation. You mention MT 23 and all I can say is that there have been many attempts to make wheels like that. None has worked because the wheel never puts out enough torque to raise the ascending side weights up the ramp and onto the supporting paddles attached to the axle. I don't see how the principle of MT 23 could have been employed in Bessler's wheels. MT 23 designs require something that remains stationary during wheel rotation and Bessler stated that "in a true perpetual motion nothing remains stationary on the axle". Using MT 23 inside of a closed but rotating drum would require mounting the lifting ramp on a heavy pendulum that hung from the axle as it does in MT 13. But, in the design I'm working on nothing is attached to the axle inside of the drum nor need be. It's a very simple design.
DeleteThe idea is to use gravity in such a way that we extract the maximum from it...not only for bringing the wts down and in making them swing but also in aiding their ascend and the flipping over act...if we can achieve this without thinking about springs use then we can assure ourselves on being on the right track...
ReplyDeleteYou are right and wrong here. A spring that winds as a clock, would run out and be of no real use, but a spring that supports a weighted arm and makes it easier for a smaller weight to put it back into position would be of great use.
DeleteEveryone dismisses the idea of a spring because the spring would eventually become unwound.
DeleteWhat if his wheels were not overbalanced (at least initially), then the startup force would have to come from somewhere else, possibly a large main spring. The internal PM mechanism would have to wind the spring, similar to the way a clock's mainspring is wound by it's wearer. Just a thought.
The key to this puzzle lies in the way the wts get turned over towards the descending side from the ascending side which has to be established using only gravity and not springs...the nature of things is such that inertia and centrifugal too lend a helping hand here...it is just an ingenuous way of designing the levers, wts and the internal wheel structure which makes the movement possible...
DeleteI have to admit that the self-starting nature of Bessler's one-way wheels pretty much suggests overbalance, but the wound main spring approach is a distinct possibility, assuming you have a prime mover capable of making this happen in the first place. This may or may not be Bessler's approach.
DeleteYou are right, pal....there is no doubt in the same...it is an overbalanced wheel by all means...and a separate prime mover is actually not required...the levers and weights are all that is reqd...the secret lies in the manner in which they are arranged...these levers and weights themselves act like the prime mover...that is why karl stated it as being very simple...it has not been thought of before by anyone...when there is some excess weight on one side always the wheel will remain in motion...
DeleteIt is interesting how the order of events can change your thoughts on a subject. Let me explain.
DeleteHad Bessler's early wheels required a push to get going, and his later wheels were self-starters, you could reason that his wheels used CF or inertia, and that in the later wheels, he found a way to store excess energy during rotation, and that energy was used to start the wheel when released from a stopped position. This was my point in posting about a main spring as a possibility (used as the starter).
John,
ReplyDeletegoing back a few articles about making money out of Bessler's Wheel,
how about writing the numbers 1 - 48 around the rim, and fix a pointer to the frame.
Give the wheel a spin, and whatever number the pointer lands on, mark that off on your lottery ticket !
Not as daft as it sounds, I read somewhere that the roulette wheel is a by-product of the quest for P.M.
;-D
Hello, I just thought I'd weigh in again, I used to use the name Alaskabobb, but now I am using the name CheaterBar because my research on the wheel led me to need a tool that I sort of reinvented (the Ratchet Helper) and am now marketing to make money to resume my work with the wheel. The wheel is possible and it does not break any laws of physics, indeed I think i am close and will continue when time and money permit. Is a lot of you that romanticize the idea more than discussing the actual motion as it relates to over balancing the wheel. I don't see harm in it and the advantage is that it may draw more people in and create a larger community to help solve the puzzle. But i would like to see more on actual work towards a solution. I believe that one weight has to move another out ( or in ) for a period of time and then return it for a otherwise balanced wheel. The connection theory that John has spoke of often is also key in that the motion of a previous set of weights may be necessary to initiate the motion of the set currently coming into position. More likely in a last minute yank than a push. Just a fast out and in on the down side or a fast in and out on the up side. Indeed it does not matter where on the rotation the motion is set to happen, it could happen on the top or bottom as well, anyplace as long as the wheel goes out of balance for a second as each set pass's that spot. it may be of advantage for instance to put it on top because it is neither rising or lowering at that moment and thus is not under higher or lower G's at that moment. Just some thoughts.
ReplyDeleteJohn glad to see you are still at it, I'm the guy with the same B-day as you and the 9' steel frame wheel I when under the name Alaskabobb and emailed you a few times. I have to sell my current invention to have the money to continue work, but I will.
Hi Alaskabobb, yes I'm still at it! Glad to know you are too. Keep at it, some one has to succeed soon!
DeleteI like what you said and I agree that more needs to be talked about the actiual solution but I think most of us are inclined to be reticent about our own ideas, which is probably a pity but understandable.
JC
John,
ReplyDeleteI've just been looking at the M.T. drawings again, mainly because of Suresh and Ken.
M.T.30's numbering box struck me as odd, then I thought, " what if there's a rolling weight inside the box ? "
Doing a quick scribbled drawing which placed the weighted lever mechanism at the end of each segment, it appears that the wheel would be overbalanced.
The weighted lever tilts the box of course.
Am I reading too much into it ?
I'm not sure what you are describing here. But Bessler earlier in MT says that wheels using rolling spherical lead weights will not work. In the notes for MT 9 he writes: "Because one has learned that little is to be accomplished with the sphere-wheels like those just now seen in the figures and diagrams, one speculates on another principle, namely: on weights!" He then produces his first illustration that uses lead weights attached to lever arms. Most of the weights at the end of levers wheels he then illustrates have interconnecting ropes between the levers in an attempt to coordinate their motions. This is what I believe he used in his final wheel design that worked. Also notice the hint given in MT 18 about the use of spring tension: "In the meantime, the principle (i.e., spring tension) should not be disdained or entirely disregarded, for it says more than it shows. I, however, will show more than speak of it at the appropriate place." The "appropriate place" was supposed to be at the end of MT where he was going to supply the illustrations that revealed how his "true" perpetual motion wheels worked. Those pages were eventually removed, burned, and buried. But, the point is that his wheels used levers near their outer perimeters with the weights attached to the ends of the levers, the levers were connected together for coordination of the motions (required to fix their weights' center of mass on a wheel's descending side), and, most importantly, used spring tension in a unique way to continuously raise the center of mass of the weights as the wheel rotated.
DeleteSo, my advice to you and anybody else out there is to not waste time pursuing "rolling ball" type wheels. One of the first designs I worked on decades ago was a wheel with 8 radial arms on it. At the end of each arm was a square box that contained a heavy ball bearing that could roll around in the box. I convinced myself that, once started, the boxes at the 3, 6, 9, and 12 o'clock positions would allow their ball bearings to smoothly roll from one side of the bottom of the box to the other and the center of mass of the ball bearings would always stay on the wheel's descending side. The nice thing about the design was that it was two directional and required a push to start it. It looked perfect on paper, but, of course, did not work in practice. After a few degrees of rotation, all of the 8 ball bearings wound up in the bottom corners of the boxes and their center of mass just fell into an equilibrium position below the axle. That was the last rolling ball wheel I ever built!
The key words in MT9 could be "like those just now seen". Bessler introduces more sphere models again in MT43 thru MT49. MT44 has many similarities to the Keenie/Buzzsaw wheel and he says "This problem looks good, but as sketched it does nothing special as long as no other application is present...". So what does "as long as no other application is present" imply? Maybe a repositioning of the desks and gearing change.
ReplyDeleteBessler also said the internal parts retained the power of free movement. "Free" can mean many things. Free as in no contact such as with a rolling ball, or free to fall such as in a pendulum type movement.
MT 44 through 49 are basically mechanical versions of what are known as "recirculation mills" which are just water pumping devices that use the weight of falling water to raise water from a ground level reservoir back up to an elevated supply tank. These devices all work just fine so long as the amount of mass descending exceeds the amount being raised. At some point, however, the amount of water in the elevated tank is all drained away and the motion of the device stops. To run continuously while performing work, the amount of water (or sphere weights) falling must always equal the amount rising. That is only possible, as Bessler notes, when another "application" is present. In other words, another source of power must be attached to the device to make it run. That other device, I believe Bessler is hinting, would be one of his perpetual motion wheels.
DeleteBy saying that the internal parts of his wheels "retain the power of free movement" I think Bessler is telling us that the levers and weights inside of his wheels could move or actually swing around their pivots independently of the drum that housed them (until they encountered a stop that blocked their motion). However, being connected together by ropes, these levers could not move completely free of each other.
Ken, Zoelra,
ReplyDeleteI was thinking more of a rolling cylinder, as seen by the witnesses, and the "other application" the tilting box.
The only time the weights would move in/out would be at 3 and 9 O'clock.
But it doesn't matter anyway, as a closer look at my scribbled drawing shows it would only turn 22 1/2 deg.
Not the 45deg. required.
Your approach is right but Wrong conclusion, stevo...re-look and redesigning the wheel structure should produce results...
DeleteIn the design I'm working on there are always 4 levers on each side of a one direction wheel. But, the weights on the ascending side are always a little closer to the axle than are the weights on the descending side. This imbalance is maintained as the wheel rotates. Needless to say, this imbalance is, ordinarily, not a stable one. However, by using spring tension in a special way, it is possible to stabilize this imbalanced configuration of levers and their weights. The stabilized configuration then automatically retains itself during wheel rotation and keeps the weights' center of mass on the descending side of the wheel. I wish I could give more details and, if my design passes its next set of tests, I eventually will. Again I can only state that the design is very simple, but requires a very precisely shaped lever in order to work. I probably spent several years just finding that shape and without the clues Bessler left I never would have found it despite using computer modeling / simulation software.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you mostly but the spring part... the spring tension factor does not play a special role to stabilize the imbalance act...Gravity is a stable force and if we can design the levers and weights in an appropriate manner then the magic will happen..
DeleteSuresh, I tried many, many "gravity only" model wheels over the years and never even came close to maintaining the imbalance of a set of weights inside of them. Only when I started to use springs back around 2007or so did I see any hope of maintaining the imbalance. And, don't forget that Bessler stated that his wheels did use springs, just not the type found in clocks. When that loud bang was heard during the Merseberg wheel test, I believe it was due to a lever that accidentally slipped out of Bessler's hands while he was trying to reattach a weight to its end. The spring attached to the lever made it violently smack into another part of the drum. It was a very loud sound indicating to me that the lever was under a lot of spring tension. I think this is a very important clue that any serious student of Bessler's wheels must always keep in mind.
Delete" And, don't forget that Bessler stated that his wheels did use springs, just not the type found in clocks."
DeleteAgreed, at least not the type found in clocks that require someone to wind them up. Sorry I'm not prepared to give up on the possibility that a large mainspring may have been used.
@Zoelra
DeleteYou think there might have been a large main spring that was used? I'm a bit confused by this. Are you saying that you think Bessler's wheels were hoaxes containing manually wound main springs or are you saying they were genuine, but contained large main springs that were somehow self winding? In my design only helical coil extension springs are used, but they are self stretching and there was no need for Bessler to access the inside of a wheel's drum except for occasional repairs such as replacing broken springs and routine maintenance such as lubrication of pivots, replacement of worn bearings, or replacement of ropes that were starting to show signs that they were nearing the end of their service life. I've often wondered how long one of Bessler's wheels would run if it was constructed using modern materials. I think once we begin constructing these wheels we'll see such modern materials might let them run at full speed for several years. Maybe even a decade or more before repair or servicing is needed.
Ken,
Deletegod luck with your project, but don't forget, helical springs weren't invented until the 19th. century.
I think you're mistaken about the history of the helical spring. Coiled springs were invented in the 15th century and Robert Hooke, a contemporary of Newton, was describing their action in the 17th century. In MT 60 you will see that Bessler has included helical springs in the design to assist in the opening of the sector bellows as they pass the zenith of the wheel.
Delete@Ken,
DeleteI think Bessler’s wheels were real and not a hoax. That said however, I don’t think they demonstrated PM or OU. Let me explain. First, the Earth’s gravitational field exerts a centripetal force on objects around itself, free of charge, with no apparent effect on the Earth. Second, the Earth with its relative “infinite” mass acts like a wall to bounce off of, or an anchor to grab on to and swing around changing ones direction. So here we have two forces, compliments of the Earth. We only need to design our wheels (or apparatus) to take full advantage of these forces. In the end, I believe what Bessler’s wheels were doing is exchanging momentum with the Earth, and with the effects on the Earth being so miniscule and undetectable, his wheels were perceived to be PM or OU.
To me, the perfect device to take advantage of these forces is the two stage oscillator, but not the same design demonstrated by Milkovic. The basic movements within any 2SO are oscillation, weight reset, and feedback to keep the device working. Assuming all of this can be done, and there is left over force, you would have a pumping or pulsating force to perform work.
If you place this 2SO inside a typical OB wheel like MT9 or MT15, and timed its rotation with that of the wheel, once sufficient speed of the wheel has been achieved, the 2SO could lift the weights in the wheel to the OB position, creating torque thus maintaining rotation of the wheel and 2SO. Now you have a self-propelling wheel. This design is consistent with the external observations made of Bessler’s two-way wheels, excluding the two-way turning. Now for the sketchy and unproven part. Add a mainspring and artificial horizon, and use the 2SO to also wind the mainspring. You then have stored energy to start the wheel. This device would behave similar to Bessler’s one-way wheel – self starting and self propelling.
I admit what I presented may not be what Bessler did, but the first approach I mentioned, a 2SO inside a typical OB wheel would be very simple in appearance and function. The 2SO would be the prime mover inside the wheel. The magic (or secret) is in how you handle the oscillation!
Again I agree...springs were attached to the levers only for giving them a shove at every swing and it was this spring that made the noise...pls remember one thing....gravity can do a lot...it makes planets and stars go round and round...and this has been happening since long...this is known to every student....we need to take a cue from this...
ReplyDeleteJohn & All,
ReplyDeletesince a lot of people are into springs, how about this for a simple idea ?
Three discs, the two outer ones just plain wood and both fixed to the axle.
The middle disc is like an eight spoked cartwheel, but the spokes are spring steel, and have a large weight fixed to the middle, the cartwheel is also fixed to the axle.
Between the two outer wooden discs are eight short shelves, just for the spoke weights to rest on.
Of course, on one side the spoke weights will rest, but on the other side they will hang down, making the springs effectively shorter.
Voila ! one mechanical version of a rubber band heat engine.
Oops
Deletenearly forgot, the springs are "S" shaped, so they can expand on the supported side.
Sorry.
Stevo...there is only one design in this world for mechanical PM wheel (Bessler Wheel design) that will work...
ReplyDeleteNot one design, one universal (repeating) movement within the wheel.
DeleteKen...If you are really serious in recreating the bessler wheel you should think of visiting India sometimes in future so that we could get our skills together and produce the magic...I have a feeling you are more close to the truth than many...but alone I am sure you won't be able to do it...and take my word for this...Bessler wheel recreation requires a very accurate approach...what is happening at the moment is people are trying out various versions and this could take years if not decades....
ReplyDeleteThanks for the invitation to India. Yes, it is a fascinating country and I am impressed by the various Vedic texts that indicate they had advanced civilizations there around 12,000 BC. If true, that's about 7,000 years earlier than ancient Sumer in the middle east which is "officially" considered to be the earliest example of civilization. These texts describe wars between "sky gods" that involved things like aircraft, missiles, death rays, and even A bombs! It's easy to dismiss this as nonsense, but then they found remains of destroyed cities in northern India that were radioactive and stones and bricks that showed signs of "vitrification" which means their surfaces had melted and turned to glass. It takes a temperature of about 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit to do that. Under the first A bomb test in Alamogordo, New Mexico in 1945 they discovered that the heat of the blast had fused the sand of the desert floor into a glass like material and it was radioactive...just like the material found in India! I think they called this material "atomite" or something like that.
DeleteAnyway, my only goal at the moment is to get a computer simulation of what I think is Bessler's "secret" mechanism managing to keep the center of mass of a wheel's weights on the descending side of the wheel as it rotates. So far, I've constructed over 1,000 computer models without success, but I have a feeling that, this time, things will be different and I'll finally find success. Unfortunately, I don't have the facilities to construct a wheel using the design even though it is very simple. I will leave that to others who are better equipped than I. At least I will give them a direction to head in that seems to work in simulation form. What I have so far looks very encouraging, but it still awaits some further testing before I can feel confident enough to release it.
Alfred Reisenauer, the famous pianist (Liszt schule) commenting on Paderewski (Leschetizky schule), the even more famous pianist:
ReplyDelete"Yes . . . he knows EVERYTHING! . . . except for music."
James Miller, the modestly-known peppery Iconoclast, commenting on Kenneth Behrendt, the well known expositor par excellence of wind-raising-supreme:
"Yes . . . he knows EVERYTHING . . . except for how to make a Bessler Wheel of itself go."
If one received a penny for every word written by Behrendt variously here-and-there, on how The Thing might be gotten to animate self-wise, then that one could retire a millionaire sure.
By now it must be at least a hundred million vorten, that the wordy blow-hard has blown-out to the wind.
Said wind can take it, but not so all humans.
One, at least, does wonder WHEN the papers' obituaries might signal an onset of final, blessed relief.
"The Iconoclast, like the other mills of God, grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small." - Brann
James,
DeleteI think the word you are searching for is aeolist !
;-D
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aeolist
Deleteaeolist
English [edit].
Noun [edit].
aeolist (plural aeolists).
1. (rare) A pompous person, pretending to have inspiration or spiritual insight.
Yes, "(rare)".
Exactly.
It may be so as you suggest STEVO but, other than we two, what others might even have known of it's meaning before?
I am not here to teach word exotica, but rather to set the more crooked that is-so at least a bit straighter, and, to nicely pin hot air balloons to more agreeable de-gaseous states and, yes, similarly to the way Brann himself did it so beautifully so long ago.
(Did you know that a rat-assed coward shot him in the back in the street, those many years ago in 1898, when the assailant could not equally word Brann down? Should I be expecting a similar, high honor? I go giddy at the thought.)
And, a parting thought (shot) regarding our most tedious Behrendt, newly of this Blog of John's . . ..
Perhaps the Fukushima radiation (as aggregated) will accomplish what the fish mercury could not. One can hope. What a blessed relief such a new rainbow void could be, to the many that are anciently K.B. weary.
No, I think I'll leave the scarce ones to the down-talkers of us but, thanks for your interesting input just the same, STEVO.
"The Iconoclast, like the other mills of God, grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small." - Brann
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteDespite James' hope that I will be killed by radiation, I am still very confident that (a) Bessler will soon be vindicated by the announcement of the rediscovery of his secret wheel mechanism, (b) John, as a result, will then sell a ton of books and maybe even be featured in a documentary or two, and, most importantly, (c) the legitimate world of science will take note and focus considerable resources on the physics behind self motive devices. I, as a reward for my efforts, shall then be able to sit serenely back and bask in the blessed glow of knowing this damnable mystery has finally been solved. As for Bessler's wheels, I do in fact know far more now than I ever have before and, God willing, I will soon be able to prove that to the rest of the world. Big changes are coming to this field and soon.
DeleteBehrendt's inference and words, not mine. (With such use, he tends to be loose.)
DeleteHowever, to some, such a near-miraculous advent would be as a blessing might - the wearying blizzard of words leading to absolutely nowhere (except for more of the same) being finally abated.
We await delightful turning Bessler Wheels, not withering oceans of time-wasting blather. At such production, Behrendt has proven a past Grand Master without peer. (He was roundly drummed-out over at BWF, for this very thing now begun here.)
Just sayin' . . .
"The Iconoclast, like the other mills of God, grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small." - Brann
Actually, I don't recall being "drummed-out" of the BWF, but, rather, resigning my membership after I finally realized it was not a suitable venue for me to present my pm wheel research. I still do not regret my decision. My last post there was in November of 2006, IIRC and, after leaving, I actually found it helping to accelerate the pace of my research!
Delete"Actually, I don't recall being "drummed-out" . . ."
DeleteNow, THIS can be believed!
Recollections are often selective, and serving-to-self, which very many out-and-out worship these days, that and their pathetic wills.
Actually, there was a good deal of drumming happening then, and Behrendt got the thumps, plenty of 'em. He would not stop with his mono-drone, and irritated the c - - p out of very many Fourbe's and Fivers.
(By perverse twist of nature, some types just cannot get subtle messages. Our present subject would seem to be one such.)
All of this earlier fuss can be reviewed by any parties interested, and then fair determinations made as to whether this or that characterization actually.
And, as to that "resigning" bit, BWF is like the Mafia: The only way o-u-t from there is feet first.
No one resigns from BWF. Once joined you are numbered and green-rated FOR LIFE!
How nice. Soon enough all that our J.C. will have to do is just sit back and let 'im rip, as he'll have the entire Blog under his wordy, vapid thrall. Watch.
"The Iconoclast, like the other mills of God, grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small." - Brann
Anybody who wants the details of my alleged "drumming out" of BWF can simply read them for himself. You will find them in a topic by Scott titled "What to do about Ken" which appeared in the Off Topic section during the first week of November 2006 assuming the site is still in operation. And, despite what James says, after I officially made a public resignation of my membership there, I no longer considered myself a member and had no intention of ever returning. That is still my intention should they still be in operation.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlleged?
ReplyDeleteThe drumming was actually a veritable drubbing, and one done good and hard.
Honestly no, how many BWF members have ever had a topic started by the administrator, for the purpose of deciding what to do with a particularly offensive, blathersome member? I think only one, our present subject and object of some curious, light interest.
Behrendt's membership number shows as 185.
He did not leave feet first as he has three Greenies, not four Reds and thus is in good standing.
His last visit to BWF was "Hidden" If he did not visit still, as he implies, his visits option would not have to be set to "Hidden".
". . . should they still be in operation."
By this and all the rest, we may safely add 'disingenuous' to the pile of ever-aggregating near-infamy.
Obviously, the world turns dependent upon the importance of this most curious, dense individual, and the "vital subject" of his forced departure.
This subject has been now ground-down to the finest of chaff.
"The Iconoclast, like the other mills of God, grinds slowly, but it grinds exceedingly small." - Brann
James, apparently you did not find me to be a "particularly offensive, blathersome member" at the time because, IIRC, not to be outdone by my somewhat dramatic exit, you also quit the forum in support of me and to protest the unfair treatment I received there. Perhaps you are suffering from some of those "selective" recollections you mentioned? I do thank you, however, for your past supportive gesture.
DeleteIn any event, I'm currently here to learn more about Bessler and his wheels. I'm not here to rehash the unchangeable past. What happened, happened. I consider the matter closed.