Monday, 4 April 2016

The Legend of Johann Bessler's Wheel.

I have replaced my usual blog with a brief account of the legend of Bessler's wheel.  I'm currently unable to maintain the frequency of my blog due to commitments which are keeping me exceedingly busy!  

Once I have found and bought my house, I shall return to the blog plus I shall have published my interpretation of a large number of Bessler's clues, none of which relate to Bessler's portraits. So there should ample reason for discussion.

4th April 2016

JC

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 that day.  Everyone was free to come and see the machine running.  It took the form of a wheel mounted between two pillars and ran 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. He is a man well-known in history as someone of the greatest integrity, and  the negotiations between Bessler and Karl took place against a background in which Karl acted as honest broker between the warring nations of Europe; a situation which required his absolute rectitude both in appearance and in action.

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, after some thirty years or more, 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 curiosity 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, so the wheel was genuine and the claims of the inventor had to be taken seriously.

The tests which the wheel was subjected to 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 shown that this conclusion is wrong.  There is no need for a change in the laws of physics, as some  have suggested, we simply haven't covered every possible scenario in the evaluating the number of possible configurations.

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

92 comments:

  1. "I shall return to the blog plus I shall have published my interpretation of a large number of Bessler's clues, none of which relate to Bessler's portraits."

    No need to worry about those portrait clues, John, because I've got that part of the Bessler mystery well covered. Last night I completed figure 25 for my forthcoming Bessler book and, with it, I have started on illustrating the most important clues in the first DT portrait. Actually, the first portrait repeats most of the clues in the second portrait, but uses different symbolism to do so. It takes great effort to locate and decode the many clues in these portraits and, incredibly, while working on figure 25, I actually came upon several I was previously unaware of! Let me here give another tantalizing hint about the first portrait clues.

    The center of attention of the first portrait is not actually Bessler, but, rather, that propped up book on the table in front of him. That book represents a weighted lever traveling from the 9 o'clock to 10:30 position of a clockwise rotating drum. Information is also given about how it is being shifted by the other levers as it moves between those two drum positions. But, what about the other seven levers in the drum one might ask? Oh, yes, they are also in the first portrait (with one exception), but very carefully disguised. In my just completed figure 25 all of the weighted levers are identified along with the precise clues, both geometrical and alphanumeric, that verify their identities. In figure 26, which I hope to get started today, I'll show the clues that give the parameters of the various coordinating rope attachment points to the levers. How he did this is totally amazing and the parameters given agree, of course, exactly with the same ones given in the second DT portrait. There are also many other clues in the first portrait that relate to such things as the number of springs used in his wheels as well as the spring constants used, the angles of certain levers, and, more importantly, information about the way the coordinating ropes were arranged into layers inside of a wheel. Well, providing clear and easy to follow illustrations for all of these vital Bessler wheel mystery clues is a monumental task, but I want to get it all out of the way before I begin actually writing the text of the book. That book will, basically, be roughly divided into three parts (sort of like DT!). One third will be an autobiography of my interest and involvement in the subject over the years, the second third will give detailed schematics for, mainly, Bessler's 3 foot diameter House of Richters prototype wheel (which should be the starting point for anyone seriously trying to duplicate his various wheels) and the conversion factors needed to then construct any of his other wheels from it, and the final third will deal with an in depth analysis of the many DT portrait clues I've managed to extract over the years. My goal is to produce a work that will, finally, solve this 300 year old puzzle and, hopefully, lead to greater interest in such "free energy" devices and research into them. If all goes smoothly, the book should be available for purchase by early next year. It will be available as both a physical copy (definitely in softcover and, hopefully, also in hardcover) and an ebook version for those who can not afford the more expensive physical copies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Ken. If God have given to me even smaller amount of same talent then you have here in writings. Then, beside you, I have turned this talent to some totally usual and practical thing, to build some real working wheel. I suggest to even lie here, in future, that you have "the REAL solution". Beside to teach others "how to do this and that ...", if you self do not even have it.(one story that you tell or teach to others, do not support your own belivings at the moment)
      If you know ALL correct theoretics, then there was no problem to build working wheel also. And theory, that is connected to some parallel pictures only..., and witch "translations" changes allways when some "butterfly farts" somewhere... Then anyone here, do not take your comments seriously anymore. Even how good they are :(
      Main part of the wold have saying: "He can build superb city with mouth, but in reality ... not even fly`s nest." Seems that you are not from/with same part of world here... at the moment.

      I wish you all best in you all future doings (not in writings ... at the moment).
      I change this wish totally only when there is some evidence that you have it ... or you have made your own blog.

      Delete
    2. I can assure you and everyone else that if I make the claim that I finally have "it", then you can be assured that I must have some very convincing evidence to make such a claim. I would never lie about such a claim if I knew I did not have "it". However, any claims I might make based upon simulations, no matter how carefully I've been to maximize their reliability, must ultimately await a physical duplication of one of Bessler's wheels to be fully verified. At the point I'm at now, what I hopefully will be publishing will be a reliable guide or map that will take others better equipped to build in the direction that will, I believe, maximize their probability of success. In a sense, John's efforts helped give me the information I needed to carry this subject a major step forward. My research, in turn, will enable someone else to carry on until Bessler's wheels actually turn again in the real world.

      Delete
  2. I'm still working away on those first DT portrait clue illustrations, but I did manage to come across this very interesting little video. It shows the simulation of suggested Bessler imbalanced pm wheel mechanics that actually works! Despite the use of springs, however, it is not, imo, what Bessler used, yet I think it's very impressive nonetheless and, perhaps, it might give others some ideas for a new approach to try.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n556Q-maAUU

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I`m still hoping on you Ken! You are not hopless case!

      Delete
    2. Ken is not hopeless. Quite the contrary, he is FULL of hope.

      He's just hapless.

      Delete
    3. Hmmm...let's see now. "Hapless" means "unfortunate, unlucky, luckless, out of luck, ill-starred, ill-fated, jinxed, cursed, doomed, unhappy, forlorn, wretched, miserable, woebegone, down on one's luck, or star-crossed".

      Actually, now that I am closing in on the secret of Bessler's wheels and about to complete a half century search for the truth concerning them, I have to consider myself one of the happiest and luckiest sentient, carbon based lifeforms in the entire cosmos! And, if my book on his wheels sees the light of day in print, everyone obtaining a copy (and actually reading it!) will be sharing this exalted state with me.

      Delete
  3. Hello John, have you got some fresh news from your respectful examiners?
    "I have sent copies of the document to two people for whom I have the utmost trust and respect, and they are attempting to find something positive in my ramblings.", you wrote some time ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Michel, one response was highly supportive but he is not in a position to construct anything at this time and he is still of the opinion that without a proof of principle wheel it is all just theory. This guy is a widely respected scientist and I must take his advice and complete my version of the wheel. The trouble is I'm temporarily living with my daughter and have no workshop. Perhaps in about three months things will improve, in the mean time I will attempt to publish my work within that time.

      The other examiner and I are still conferring but again it comes down to needing a working model, because all the computer simulations you can get still do not provide adequate proof of the theory.

      JC

      Delete
    2. Without a real running wheel, nothing will change in the common mind. But, even if a real working wheel was built, most of the scientists would believe it is a fake, don't you think so?

      Delete
    3. @MG: I agree that, initially, any working OU device will be met with a lot of skepticism by the scientific orthodoxy. However, seeing is believing. Once they actually get to test such a device in their own laboratories with their own equipment, we will see them start to come forth and say "Yes, it is definitely outputting energy and there's no obvious source for it." The next question they will try to answer is where is that energy coming from. At that point they will, I am very confident, have to conclude, as I've already done, that the energy is coming from the mass of the device's active parts. They will have to weigh some of the parts and then, after the device outputted a lot of energy, say, for a year, they'd have to carefully remove those specific parts and then weigh them again to see if they lost mass. The problem is that they will have to be able to detect changes in mass on the order of picograms. A picogram is one trillionth of a gram or 1 x 10^-12 gram or, with the latest notation, 1exp-12. Quite fortunately, there are now experimental "scales" available that can accurately measure masses as small as a "yoctogram" which is one septillionth of gram or 1exp-24 grams. That's sensitive enough to directly measure the mass of a single proton which is about 1.7 yocotgrams! With that kind of sensitivity, it should be possible to easily detect the changes in mass of the atoms of the active parts of a genuine working OU device over time.

      Here's a short article that goes into the details of these new methods for weighing very tiny masses:


      https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21651-worlds-most-sensitive-scales-detect-a-yoctogram/

      Delete
    4. Interesting link, Ken. Thanks.

      Delete
  4. And as always, Ken takes the opportunity to hijack the blog while John's away.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yeah but at least he gave us a link that i found very interestig

      Delete
  5. It keels as anyone with any experience knows. Ken must not know this. Phun is unreliable as an interactive physics simulator.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it dont look like its keeling to me im thinking of building somethng like it

      Delete
    2. This is old topic here. Who likes daugter, who likes daughter mother. From my oppinion Phun is easiest and most userfrendly softw. available. Ok, it have some drawbacks, but I have seen keeling and other weird problems in other software also. Here is not ideal, problem free, software available.

      Delete
  6. Let Ken know when it keels.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sure interested in the next sequence of events....... QUESTIONS I have always wondered was why was the axle so large and why did the width of the wheels keep getting wider?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Merseburg wheel's axle was 6 inches in diameter and the Kassel wheel's was 8 inches. These wheels weighed, I estimate, about 360 pounds and over 500 pounds respectively. Those weights include the axles and their pivots. The axles had to have those diameters to support themselves as well as their drums and the weighted levers they contained when their end pivots where sitting in the bearings embedded in the wooden upright supports. When Bessler went from the Draschwitz to the Merseburg wheel, he introduced his two-directional wheel design. This, basically, consisted of two one-directional wheels in the same drum and that's why the drum thickness suddenly doubled.

      Update. I just finished up figure 27 for my book and it was a real challenge. In it I give a complete analysis of the clues in the first portrait associated with Bessler's left hand. I'm now starting to realize that there is a lot more information in that portrait than I first thought. But, I'll get it all...onward to figure 28.

      Delete
    2. To Gravittea ... for first, please see my question to JC from previous topic at 4 April at 06:24 (almost the last one)and especially my last answer to Ken. This gives real main reason for this..

      To Ken, "...This, basically, consisted of two one-directional wheels in the same drum and that's why the drum thickness suddenly doubled." Sometimes, when read your comments, there is a feeling that You sound like "top of nuclear physicist", whose ideas hard to beat and there is no doubt about what your are saying about. But here given comment "suddenly" do not fit your style anymore. This gives to You some "very suspiscious guy" reputation, at the moment. So take belly inside, strait your back, longer steps, smaller bushwa ...

      Eastlander

      Delete
    3. @Eastlander: Thanks for writing "You sound like 'top of nuclear physicist", whose ideas hard to beat and there is no doubt about what your saying about."

      Actually, I've read the same Bessler literature that you and others have, but I have seen more in it than you have...probably due to my particular education and experience. I try to tell everyone what I am seeing in the simplest language possible. When Count Karl said that Bessler's wheel mechanism was simple, I believe he was telling the truth. So, one must then ask, if it was so simple, then why has no one managed to duplicate it in three centuries? That's a very good question and there are really only two answers. Either Bessler and his wheels were fraudulent and the count was part of the fraud. Or, the wheels were genuine, but required precisely shaped parts that were very carefully balanced against each other so that, during wheel rotation, their center of mass would stay on a wheel's descending side as it rotated. I, of course, believe the latter. My research has reached the point now when, hopefully, I will soon be revealing exactly how Bessler's wheels worked. The description I will provide will be detailed enough so that a person with average crafting skills should be able to build one of his wheels. Well, time will tell. I'm hoping to publish the results of my research by early next year and, possibly, even a bit earlier if I'm lucky.

      Delete
  8. Anonymous comment to Ken Behrendt: " ... or you have made your own blog."

    He HAS his own Blog (with 9 "followers", even) - he simply refuses to post on it. There is no captive audience there. And no association with John Collins, either.

    https://plus.google.com/112697199776622459476

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol! I didn't even realize that was supposed to be a "blog"! I only set up the Google+ account so it would automatically log me in at various sites, forums, and blogs that allow that. I set it up so that my reviews of various youtube videos would be available publicly to anyone who wanted to read them which, surprisingly, I found a lot of people did.

      However, my idea of a "real" blog is something like this blogspot.com blog that John has. Currently, I just don't have the time to set something like this up and maintain it, especially when John already has one that is adequate. But, who knows what the future holds. If he decides to call it quits, retire, or drops dead (God forbid!) and my "ultimate" Bessler book comes out, then, maybe, just maybe, I will reconsider this blog matter and give it a try. The focus would be, of course, Bessler's wheels, but it would also be "friendly" to other forms of pm and even things of a paranormal or ufological nature since most of the research I've done in my life involved those subjects. I'll have to give much thought to all of these matters. Like John, maybe I can use the blog to promote my published works and encourage others to get into researching these matters.

      Delete
  9. Update: I just completed Figure 28 for the book. It shows all of the clues in the first DT portrait that I could find which pertain to the number of springs used in each of Bessler's one-directional wheels as well as the spring constants of these springs. Needless to say, once again, I found a few surprises waiting for me as I researched the portrait for its spring parameters.

    Meanwhile, here's another video by someone who claims they have a "real" perpetual motion machine developed by a "team of scientists"!


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znk-_uskTvk

    ReplyDelete
  10. Question to JC
    What you plan to do next if Bessler secret finally reveled?
    This mean after some time, there is end of this blog also!?
    Do you really want to end this blog?

    Eastlander aka "Mac"A. P. R.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm looking forward to the day Bessler's secret is revealed - and the blog will continue without any doubt. There will be so much to discuss. This is a very exciting prospect Eastlander.

      JC

      Delete
  11. Update: I've been busy with the book's illustrations and, yesterday, finished figure 29 which delves into the first DT portrait clues concerning the mass of the weights and levers, the distances of the lever pivots from the center of an axle, and the lengths of the levers which is the distance from their pivots to the center of mass of their end weights. All of that information is in the first DT portrait and analyzing the central table book is critical to finding it. Next, I'm on to figure 30 which indicates the various cord layers found within a Bessler wheel. Again, the book is critical to bringing out that information.

    Meanwhile, in scanning through my future book's Table of Contents, I noted that I'll also need an illustration for the pendulums that Bessler attached to his wheels but which, for some odd reason, none of the witnesses ever mentioned. In studying Bessler's illustrations for the Merseburg wheel, its obvious that the pendulums are to always swing in opposite directions so as to balance out the torques they apply to the axle. In other words, they are "counterpoised" and neither contributed to nor impeded the rotation of a wheel. That can only happen for the opposite side connecting rod to pendulum cross beam connections shown in his illustrations if the two axle crank to connecting rod pivots are on the same side of the axle. That they are is difficult to discern in Bessler's illustration and, I suspect, that was done on purpose to confuse the reverse engineers reading this books.

    In studying an extreme closeup of the crank labeled #10, I noticed something very interesting. The "S" shaped crank goes into a rounded structure which is either a shaft retention washer or the brass axle pivot bearing itself. Also, notice that there is a small, almost horizontal seam in the vertical support near this rounded structure. I'm leaning toward the opinion that this rounded structure is a washer and that the pin through a small hole in the axle shaft that keeps it in place is not shown (the equivalent of a "cotter pin"). If that is the case, then it's likely that the pivots were not smoothly "tapered" as I've always assumed, but, rather, just abruptly cut down by lathe from either 3/4" or 1" to a smaller diameter, perhaps of only 1/4" or 1/2" and it was that smaller diameter shaft that then exited the bearing plate in the vertical support. That seam in the vertical support probably represents a section that could be pulled out to expose the brass bearing that supported the larger diameter of the pivot. I suspect that the brass bearing itself actually consisted of two "half moon" pieces so that the top piece could be lifted off of the pivot to convince examiners that nothing inside of the vertical support was driving the wheel through its pivots. Needless to say, Bessler would have used this design on both of the vertical supports in order to fully satisfy those examining a wheel.

    Below is a link to a youtube video that someone made in an attempt to show the swinging of a wheel's two attached pendulums. His model is nice, but shows what happens when one places the axle crank to connecting rod pivots on opposite sides of the axle. One then gets a situation in which the two pendulum tend to swing in the same direction. That imbalance of forces acting on the axle is undesirable and could result in certain axle positions in which there is a net lifting force on its end pivots. I think one of Bessler's greatest fears was that some force might be placed on the axle that would lift it up and, possibly, cause it roll out of its end pivot bearing plates and then fall onto the floor. Considering the weight of the axle and the weighted levers the drum contained, that might then destroy the drum!


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZvb2GqeV-k

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ken. As I'm also writing down my thesis on how I think Bessler's wheel worked, also derived from the numerous clues I've found and decoded, I too could give a running commentary on my progress in completing the document. I too have many illustrations explaining the details and providing supporting evidence that indicates the logic of my explanations. But I don't, because it would bore everyone to sleep, and I do not see why you should be permitted to inflict your own efforts upon us when it is all hot air and windy rhetoric.

      Upon that subject I merely note in passing that from the meagre clues you've provided so far I can say that in my opinion you are following a road to nowhere. I'm sure that you are determined to prove your assertion that you have the answer, but in my opinion you are going to be sadly disappointed.

      My own work relies upon some obvious interpretations of various clues which once seen and understood cannot be denied. I can, for instance provide just one example which everyone is aware of and it is this; Bessler's wheel had five compartments, not eight. It probably had ten in the Kassel and Merseberg wheels, due to the speculated mirror image configurations which I suggested drove it in either direction. This is not speculation - I can prove it!

      I'm not having a go at you Ken, for your beliefs in your theory, I just want you to stick to my request to stop talking about your book and try to keep things more general with regard to your sims and BRIEFER.

      JC

      Delete
  12. I second John's motion.
    Ken's theory is wrong. It was wrong 1480 models ago. Each one he does proves it is wrong.
    For someone who seems to be otherwise fairly intelligent, this is strange behavior.
    Everyone knows if a configuration of mechanisms doesn't work, then shifting the same configuration around into any possible combination they could have isn't going to make it work.
    The same can be said for any configuration that depends on internal motion for rotation.
    But for all we know, Ken isn't doing these variations; he could be making this all up.

    Anyway, we all look forward to your next publication, John. We just wish your examiners had been more discerning and you could show everyone what your theory is sooner rather than months from now, and spare us months more of the same. Maybe your timeline will shrink if you find a house sooner and finish your wheel with the suggestions provided by the examiners.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm viewing a house which we really like on Tuesday, so I hope we can get it, and I can get on with my life again.

      JC

      Delete
    2. Hope the house hunting goes well, John. Moving to a new home is a real headache. You need to have someplace to live while you're looking for the new home, yet you need the money from the sale of your old home to buy the new place. The person who sells you his former home wants his money upfront like Bessler while the one buying your old home wants you out as soon as possible so he can move in. If one does not have kindly relatives who can take him in or a big bundle of saved up money, then he may have to get a quick, high interest "bridge loan" that he can use to buy the new home and then pay back from the sale of his old home. But, what if the prospective buyer pulls out at the last minute?! Those interest charges can mount up quickly. It's a real "Catch 22" situation and very stressful.


      dougsubous wrote: "Ken's theory is wrong. It was wrong 1480 models ago. Each one he does proves it is wrong."

      You exaggerate. It was only wrong the last 1479 times! Actually, it's not "my" theory, but, rather, Bessler's. My attempts to reverse engineer his wheels could have been wrong a million times before and that is really not relevant. It's whether or not it's right the next 1480th time that counts and, this time, I'm giddy enough from the successful, though admittedly partial, testing I've done on that model to begin writing the "ultimate" book on Bessler! I just finished the figure showing cross sectional views of the axle and pivot bearings as well as a unique way Bessler may have used to quickly expose the pivot in its "half moon" bearing plate for examination. Next, I'm on to the figure that finally explains how those pendulums worked and why Bessler only occasionally used them.

      Delete
    3. I'm living with one of my daughters, her husband and one of my granddaughters. Cosy but perhaps a little cramped, but I've cash in the bank just waiting for the right house to come along; maybe this one on Tuesday will be the one - hope so!

      JC

      Delete
  13. Sorry if my ongoing input here is proving to be tedious to some. Just trying to provide some material that will stimulate others to contribute. I'll try to be briefer hereafter. Anyway, I can only assure everyone that I have many very good reasons to believe that I finally have "it" although I still have not completed the full testing of my wm2d model #1480 which would convince me that I have. That must wait a while longer. Right now I want to complete as many of the illustrations for my upcoming Bessler book while I can. I'm afraid if I test #1480 and it keels, then that will so discourage me that I might abandon the book project altogether! At this point, I've completed all of the figures which reveal the most important wheel mechanics parameters hidden in the two DT portraits. The rest I'll mention in the text. Now I'm starting to work on some figures for the axle bearings, pendulums, and gravity latches needed for bidirectionality. It's a lot of work and only believing I have "it" is motivating me to do it.

    Speaking of pendulums, I decided to make a quick simulation of various pendulum to axle crank configurations last night to see if my interpretation given above might be wrong. Well, I think I was! I now am convinced that the two curved axle cranks shown in the Merseburg wheel illustration were opposed (as Bessler indicates in other drawings he made) and that is what he was trying to illustrate there, but did not do a good job either on purpose or because he got confused while doing the illustrations.

    After I finished the simulation showing four possible configurations, I suddenly thought I might be able to share it with others interested in Bessler's wheels and tried to upload it to my youtube account. It worked, but the resulting video is a bit "snowy" probably because the animation frequency was not high enough. But, it's still viewable and here is a link to it:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCa0DlEnmsc


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Ken, 1479 might have been wrong and maybe 1480 is wrong too. Who No's the next 520 could also be wrong, but loyalty or willpower to Orffyreus is amazing. I believe you only mean well when you write on John's blog, after all that's what it was set up for.
      The problem is you share everything with everyone and unfortunately not everyone appreciates it. I personally don't mind, but most people on Johns blog like to here different opinions from different people. I myself never followed bessler, never new he even existed, but then I came across John's blog and I have my own reasons why I follow it. I'm like someone outside looking in. I strongly believe that you, John and probably other people on this site also think their right (regarding the clues).
      I hope I haven't offended you Ken, since following this site I believe your a good guy, and would be missed on this site.
      Your all looking for clues and I'm not here to stir things up, but it came up about how big bessler's first wheel was? You mentioned it was 3 foot because that's what bessler said, but he could of meant 3 foot from the floor, or 3 foot off the floor, only bessler really knows.
      I'm certainly not telling you your right or wrong regarding the wheel, but no one, including myself likes to be told your wrong when you strongly believe your right, and that's the problem with clues, with clues your only guessing, and how can you guess some think if you don't know the answer? That why at times its so frustrating. Most important enjoy what your doing and let people know when your got something extra special to announce.
      Kind Regards.


      John, all the Best for Tuesday.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for your kind wished Uneqk. Ken and others you should know that in fact Bessler's first wheel was actually three and a half feet in height. "Drittelhalb" was the word used, but remember that this is 18th C German and modern German would read " dreieinhalb".

      JC

      Delete
    3. I can prove from the DT portrait clues that the drum itself of Bessler's House of Richters prototype was exactly 3 feet in diameter. I have no problem with the wheel being described as "drittelhalb" because his first and smallest working wheel was mounted on a stand that could be placed on a table and there was probably a six inch clearance between the bottom of the drum and the table's surface. That would then result in the top of the drum being 3.5 feet off of the surface of the table. Anyway, John, thanks for bringing this matter up. I think I'll include that "drittelhalb" description in my book's chapter that deals with that first prototype. I'll even give a nice design for a stand that someone trying to replicate that wheel can place his model's axle on and, in honor of Bessler, the stand will keep the bottom of the drum exactly six inches off of the table!

      Delete
  14. Mostly I agree with Uneqk's last post.

    I would like to know Ken when you are going to pull the trigger on model 1480? Don't you have to keep going until model 1712 or maybe 1745?

    I guess you are going to publish a book about your clue interpretations regardless of whether 1480 works or not. Otherwise who would spend the time and energy writing and illustrating a book before the proof of concept model was proven to work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mostly I agree with Uneqk's last post. - Anonymous 11 April 2016 at 04:28

      Me too.

      Until he is told by this site's master, this overblown techno-babbling, strictly ego and self based worshiping nonsense, will continue-on 'till model 10,001. (Or, alternately, when Nature proclaims that it all shall be at an end, finally and blessedly.)

      In the mean-time, in order to more thoroughly understand this ego-based on-going process happening in front of us all, as relating to the foolishness of this site's Peculiar Personage, I am putting together for posting here a lexicon of likely applicable terminology complete with definitions, some few being for example: boorish; overbearing, self maniacal, egocentricised to the point being a pathology; false ego; pushy; never knows when to back down nor off, announcing publications of premature books that have no real reason for being sans a working device, etc.

      This should help with our understanding of just what craziness is occurring here before us, to which many seem to be objecting-to now. I believe that much of it is understandable in view of the fact of the mercury poisoning that our blog P.P. endured some time ago.

      Obviously, this has created some long-lasting and apparently insuperable, social maladjustment of personality to which we are all subjected with regularity.

      Delete
  15. Thanks for the kind encouragement, guys. My instincts are telling me to complete as many of my Bessler book's illustrations as possible before I "pull the trigger" on my model #1480. I could probably test it in a matter of 15 minutes or so and, finally, know if this one is truly "it". But, something is holding me back and telling me to do the illustrations now. I can't really explain it except to compare it to that scene in the original "Star Wars" movie when Luke Skywalker is closing in on the single vulnerable spot on the Empire's planet destroying "Death Star". Luke wants to use his X-wing fighter's targeting computer to make the shot, but, suddenly, he hears the voice of Obi-wan Kenobi telling him to "Trust the Force" at which point he turns off his targeting computer and just lets the Force guide him. He takes the shot and, overcoming million to one odds against success, sends a missile right down the wazoo of the Death Star after which it explodes like a miniature super nova. Wonderful scene. Well, when I write a book, the same thing sort of happens. Actually, sometimes I think the book actually writes itself and I'm just a puppet who does the finger work on the keyboard for it! I've learned to trust this approach to writing and its produced some rather amazing material in the last decade or so. I've been wanting to do a Bessler book for a long time and now the time seems right. But, the "Force" is telling me to do the illustrations first before the final testing of model #1480. I am allowing it to have its way and, so far, I have close to thirty really interesting illustrations as a result.

    Anyway, as far as those pendulums attached to Bessler's wheels are concerned, they are what are referred to as "compound pendulums" and have their center of mass at a point between the bottom bob weight and those two larger weights on the cross beams. I want to know, as accurately as possible, just where the center of mass of the three weights was because that is critical to determining what the period and oscillation frequency of the pendulum was. I suspect that I'll find that it was much lower than the maximum free running rotation rates for the wheels was, but I want to know how much lower. I think, rather than doing the math, I'll see what happens to the center of mass of his pendulums when I set up the correctly sized pendulum on wm2d and then attach weights of different masses to them. Something is telling me that I'll find their center of mass right at the level of the axle when the pendulum is stationary. Just a hunch...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If there is ropes envolved ... then I am more then 100% sure here (now just recently) ... it will not work! Sry Ken!

      Eastlander

      Delete
    2. Yes, there are ropes involved. In fact, a one-directional wheel with eight levers requires a total of 40 ropes and they consist of sets of ropes of different lengths that are separated from each other within different layers inside of the drum. This is the price that must paid to achieve the coordination that makes one of Bessler's imbalanced pm wheels possible. But, when one sees the way I've illustrated it all, it really becomes quite easy to understand.

      Delete
    3. I just try to give you good advice, not lead you on false tracks.
      If you gonna go this way to end, use ropes, then you can go to even model nr 123 458, and no one of them will not work.

      Eastlander

      Delete
  16. Here's one I haven't seen before:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaiIfSxRDno

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I realized almost immediately that this novel approach to an imbalanced wheel was unworkable. At the bottom the weights on the arms are actually raised suddenly as they enter the elliptical path and again as they exit it near the top. That's equivalent to having diametrically opposed weights on a connecting rod that passes through the axle and then, when the rod is vertical, just suddenly sliding the rod up so that it raises both of its end weights at the same time. That lift takes a lot of power and exactly equals what the imbalanced wheel can deliver so that such a wheel remains stationary no matter what orientation it is placed into.

      I don't use the metric system of measurements because all of the measurements in the Bessler literature were translated into the English units of measurement which we in the US still mostly use. So, we use yards instead of meters, inches instead of centimeters, and pounds instead of kilograms. I also tend to favor the English system of measurement for historical reasons because it was in effect long before the metric system was first proposed by the French which was in 1791 and would have been in use, at least in England, when Bessler was working on his wheels. Also, there is evidence that Bessler was in communication with the British Royal Society who had expressed interest in purchasing his wheel. He even constructed a small demonstration model for them and probably would have been using the English system of units to describe it to them in correspondence. It's even possible he sent letters to various of their interested members and had those letters translated into English for them along with the units of measurement they were most familiar with: yards, inches, pounds, and ounces. Where is that correspondence now? Who knows...maybe it's in the library of the British Royal Society or in a private collection somewhere. However, even if John or someone else eventually gets their hands on it, we'll probably see the same thing we see in his published works: plenty of descriptions of the external features of a wheel, but only the most vague descriptions of its internal mechanics. Well, one of the purposes of the book I'm now working on is to dramatically change that last part!

      Delete
    2. I have been in correspondence with someone in Germany for several years who is not particularly interested in Bessler but his own historical research happened to merge with some of Bessler's own experiences. As a favour he has translated some of the seemingly untranslatable documents which were filed with MT and there are many letters to various people which look of interest. Among them is a 60 page section devoted to notes on his refutation of the maid's accusations. He also mentions a plot against him involving his mother-in-law and her remaining children and their spouses.

      But as well, he found some documents which, back in 2000 were legible but since have become water damaged and have gone for restoration and that may be some years before they reappear. In themis mention of Bessler's marriage and other details about which little is known.

      So my point is that there may be considerably more information surfacing through the next few years.

      JC

      Delete
    3. Very interesting, indeed, John. My fantasy is that a previously unknown work by Bessler will suddenly emerge. Perhaps it will be another work written during the 1730's in which he discusses his previous wheels and give some tantalizing clues about their internal mechanics. Perhaps there are currently only a few or even one remaining copy of this extremely rare Bessler work that, even now, is just sitting on a shelf gathering dust in someone's library in some old house in Europe. Maybe it contains some general internal diagrams of his wheels similar to what he burned and buried after his arrest and was intended to stimulate the interest of various members of the then existing scientific societies. I just can not shake the feeling that something like this might exist out there.

      Delete
    4. It always seemed amazing to me that Bessler did not leave the secret of his wheel or any explanation as a legacy to his own children. No one in his family ever knew or tried to know anything about it... Bizarre, bizarre...

      Delete
    5. Maybe in his mind the sale of his invention would provide a huge estate that his family would eventually inherit and he considered that a sufficient legacy for them. Then, again, if he failed to sell the invention during his lifetime, then what chance would his other family members have even if they knew how it worked? Anyway, as I'm sure everyone has surmised by now, I have found what I believe was his real legacy to the future. It is the various mathematical and symbolic clues he carefully embedded into the two DT portraits. I've just finished about a dozen illustrations that reveal most of these and when that material is published it will set off a firestorm of controversy. I wish I could just reveal it all now, but the time is not yet right for that. But, that revelation is coming and those who see it will experience what I call "Full Bessler Awareness" which means that they will quickly realize how his wheels worked and, with that knowledge, everything else he mentions in his writings will then make complete sense. Sort of like giving a scrambled Rubik's Cube a few twists and then having each of its six sides showing only its own color. The next step is to make working physical replicas of Bessler's wheels based on that knowledge. I don't, however, expect these wheels to be a commercially viable source of power. Their purpose will be to demonstrate that it is possible to extract the mass of a machine's active parts and then use its energy content to do work in the environment. Once that is undeniably demonstrated and acknowledged by the scientific world, the search for "free energy" will gain new respect and, hopefully, will lead to other more powerful devices that we can use. I'm feeling very optimistic about all of this and am quite confident that this very year will be a very important one for this field.

      Delete
  17. And here's my video selection for tonight: the "Spring Gravity Motor"!


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sZGRNfASDk

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That looks pretty good

      Delete
    2. It might be easier to construct by attaching the springs to the rim so they pull the dumbbell pair of weights toward the rim while a rope attached between the inner weight of the pair and the axle restrained the pair's motion. Then, as a dumbbell pair began to move onto the wheel's left ascending side, they would slide out of their compartment and be restrained from falling out of their compartment by the rope. This is so simple, I'm tempted to try making a wm2d model and see what happens even though it is not, imo, what Bessler used.

      Delete
    3. Actually, this "Spring Gravity Wheel" is just a variation of Bessler's MT 18 design about which he wrote:

      "No. 18: This is the previous spring-model, and it seems to be good, but seeming is different from being. In the meantime, the principle 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."

      Apparently, Bessler tried this approach and found out it was a non-runner. But, notice how he mentions that the "principle" should not be "disdained or entirely disregarded"? That's his way of saying that the use of springs is important and he used them in his wheels but in a different way.

      Delete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Michel. We loved the house and put in an offer and must wait 'til tomorrow to see if it's accepted. This quaint legal system here means that once the offer is accepted it takes about eight weeks 'til completion, at which point we can move in! Fingers crossed. You're half way there Michel.

      JC

      Delete
    2. It sounds like pretty good news, indeed, John.
      (Oh... sorry, I've deleted my post once more... as usual! maybe a compulsive habit?)

      Delete
    3. Hi John, Are you looking to move in Eight weeks.

      Delete
  19. Speaking of houses, I found this google map of Gera, Germany and have been searching around it looking for that Niclaus Hill upon which stood Herr Richter's house where Bessler first found success in early 1712 and then later that same year exhibited his first somewhat larger wheel publicly. There's no mention I can find of the particular hill and I guess things have changed a lot in three centuries. Would be nice to see what the area looked like. Maybe I'll try the google 3D satellite view and see if there are any conspicuous hills visible on it. Also, I've seen one illustration someone did which shows the Gera wheel mounted on a cart and being exhibited outside, possibly in a public square. That would certainly eliminate any suspicions that the wheel was powered by a source in the house, but not in the cart itself unless it was a very small cart.

    https://www.google.com/maps/dir//D%C3%BCrrenebersdorfer+Stra%C3%9Fe+104,+07548+Gera,+Germany/@50.8839313,12.0803885,14.93z/data=!4m8!4m7!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x47a6cf2aaab50265:0x7c916dd56e0dc87a!2m2!1d12.03524!2d50.85101

    ReplyDelete
  20. Well, the 3D map shows a hilly section with a "Richterstrasse" (Richter's Street) running right through it. That's got to be it! Nice if I can get a street level view.

    https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gera,+Germany/@50.8732661,12.0879531,691m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x47a6cf602bedd70f:0x4208ec174333610

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, there are no street level views available from google maps for this particular location in Gera, but I did find this address which is Richterstrasse 1. From the satellite view, it appears to be a large apartment building. Possibly, it was labeled as #1 because it was the site of the oldest dwellings on the street. So, although I can not prove it, I would have to consider it as a probable candidate for the location of the building in which Bessler first found success. As I mentioned before, there is a town museum in Gera that supposedly has a scale model of the first wheel that Bessler exhibited in Gera. I'll see if I can find that.

      https://www.google.com/maps/dir/50.8743924,12.0876775/50.8743911,12.0876874/@50.8742169,12.0878405,177m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e2

      Delete
    2. I should be working on my book now, but I can't let this go yet. I found this interesting photo of some workmen dragging the scale model of Bessler's Gera wheel into the town's museum. Note that it is on a frame that is small enough to be placed on a cart and removed from the House of Richter for an outside demonstration. Also note the opposed cranks at the ends of its axles. Well, of course, this is a non-functional replica for the tourists to view which means it has a lot in common with all of the other more serious attempts to duplicate his wheels over the centuries!

      https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B86i0AzIQAE-8ZU.jpg

      Delete
    3. Ken, you need to look for Nicklausberg, in Gera, but as Bessler says in DT, "by the said Orffyreus, for the first time, in Herr Richter’s house (and in a footnote at bottom of page “where now a church has been built”) on the Nicklausberg." I was unable to find it in Gera.

      JC

      Delete
    4. Right across from that much larger apartment building at Richterstrasse #1 there is a large building with a very ornate roof on it. It's on the corner of Richterstrasse and Kleiststrasse. It's separate from the other houses on the block and has a large parking lot behind it. That must be a modern church built over the one mentioned in DT! Interesting that, as one crosses Kleiststrasse, Richterstrasse turns into Nicolaistrasse. Isn't "Nicolai" a variation of "Nicklaus"? Maybe the Soviets renamed it after they invaded Eastern Germany at the end of WWII?

      Delete
    5. I also found this St. Saviour's Church at Nicolaiberg which is the evangelical main church of Gera, built between 1717 and 1720 by David Schatz in Baroque style. Maybe this is what Bessler was referring to in DT? It's construction time seems to fit with the publication of that work.

      http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/95f13c836f77481fa1c050138737f777/protestant-salvator-church-on-nicolaiberg-1783-staircase-of-1898-gera-ep16d0.jpg

      Delete
    6. Got it! I found St. Saviour's church and its street address is :

      Ev.-Luth. Pfarramt Sankt Salvator
      Nicolaistr. 2
      07545 Gera
      Germany

      If one speaks fluent German and wishes to chat with one of their pastors, he can try this phone number: 011-49-365-8001517

      The church is located about 800 feet north of the intersection of Richterstrasse and Kleiststrasse and at the end of Nicolaistrasse. The address above is for a building across the street and just south of the church building and is an office rectory for the church. You can see the church itself just above and to the left of the red marker in this google satellite view:

      https://www.google.com/maps/place/Nicolaistra%C3%9Fe+2,+07545+Gera,+Germany/@50.8741953,12.0865571,476a,20y,354.73h,32.71t/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x47a6cf6f823f9003:0xe6834f59818272ea

      Well, this must be "the" place where Bessler first found success in early 1712. They built a church on top of Herr Richter's house and something tells me that is not accidental. Most religions like to think they will last forever and continually grow in size and power. What better place to construct a religion's church than on top of the site where a genuine perpetual motion wheel was constructed?! Sort of like building it there will bring the good luck that will guarantee that their Lutheran version of Christianity would last forever!

      Delete
    7. Too busy to fly over to Gera, Germany and check out the church up close? No problem. Here's a google "photo sphere" which will let you do it virtually. Just press the cursor controls on your keyboard to pan around 360 degrees and also tilt the view up and down. Note the houses directly across the street from the front of the church. I wonder if these could be original from the time of Bessler? If so then that is the view he might have seen when he looked out of the windows from his rented home in Herr Richter's house!


      https://www.google.com/maps/place/Nicolaistra%C3%9Fe+2,+07545+Gera,+Germany/@50.8771367,12.0853806,3a,75y,17.34h,75.55t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1s-ahWsWqfwFCk%2FVO8KONsHpxI%2FAAAAAAAAXHY%2F0mtMkTWgQko!2e4!3e11!6s%2F%2Flh4.googleusercontent.com%2F-ahWsWqfwFCk%2FVO8KONsHpxI%2FAAAAAAAAXHY%2F0mtMkTWgQko%2Fw203-h101-n-k-no%2F!7i10240!8i5120!4m2!3m1!1s0x47a6cf6f823f9003:0xe6834f59818272ea

      Delete
    8. After I posted the above "photo sphere" link, I realized that the photographer could have been only 100 feet away from where Bessler constructed his first working 3 foot diameter prototype wheel and his next larger and first wheel for public exhibition! That thought is enough to give a Bessler pm chaser goose bumps. I wonder if they have a plaque or something on a wall of the church to let visitors know that is the site where Bessler made his first two wheels? I'm sure they probably mention this in the display devoted to him in the town museum.

      Delete
  21. Bessler, did not just make a wheel that would barely turn, this man really put together a magical mechanism, if we believe in the affidavits and the testimonials, then we must also believe in the fact that he had to secure the first wheels, because they just kept turning on their own. Have we been aiming out sights too low, or should we be dreaming a bigger dream, his first wheels we unbalanced all the time....... what would it take to do that feat ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "...his first wheels we unbalanced all the time....... what would it take to do that feat ?"

      All it takes is a system of self adjusting weighted levers that always keeps its center of mass on a wheel's descending side despite its rotation. Many have attempted to achieve such a design, but only Bessler and perhaps a few others have achieved it in the history of humanity.

      Delete
  22. Update: I'll keep this as brief as possible. I just finished the illustrations for my future Bessler book that deal with the pendulums attached to the Merseburg wheel. Wow, did they have a few surprises in store for me! First, the fulcrums on both pendulums are a real mess and I show what they were supposed to look like. If one tried to replicate what's shown Bessler's figure, his pendulums would be sliding all over the place. Next, the drive rod on the back pendulum is on the wrong side if the crank attachments are opposed which they are although this is difficult to see in his figure and the pendulums are to swing in opposite directions which they did. It's difficult for me to believe Bessler made such mistakes. These errors had to be introduced on purpose to confuse reverse engineers. I've now corrected all of them and in my illustrations depict a complete oscillation of each pendulum and show the correct orientations of the cranks at each stage of an oscillation. Now for the biggest surprise. Using my best estimates for the distances between the cross beam weights and the fulcrum to spherical bob weight and the masses of the three weights, I was able to accurately determine the position of the center of mass of a compound pendulum he used on the Merseburg wheel. Where is it located? Well, if you study that front pendulum on the right side of his illustration carefully, you will see exactly were it is located because Bessler gives you a very obvious clue to its location. Once you've located it, you will be able to compute the frequency of his Merseburg wheel's pendulums. When you do that, be prepared for another surprise! Once you digest that surprise, you realize exactly how his pendulums were intended to work and why they were not attached during most of the demonstrations of his wheels.

    That's enough for now. Next, I have to work on illustrating those gravity latches critical to achieving bidirectionality. Accurately and clearly depicting their actions in a few figures will probably be the most difficult hurdle I'll have to overcome in the whole book! I begin work on it now. As Confucius once said, "The journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step." I'm now at about mile 200 on the 1,000 mile journey to producing the "ultimate" Bessler book!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ken Behrendt on 13 April 2016 at 21:15 puffed-out variously:

      "Update: I'll keep this as brief as possible. . . ."

      It didn't work.

      "That's enough for now. . . ."

      It was that 1,000,000 words ago. Fraud is fraud ab initio.

      Delete
    2. Ken, I have been working on those compound pendulums, too (in WM2d). Would you care to share your insights? Big secret?
      Cheers Mimi

      Delete
    3. Hi, Mimi. Here some data for you to experiment with. Bessler's Merseburg wheel's pendulums are compound pendulums and mathematically analyzing them is a challenge. It's actually easier to just make wm2d models of them and see where their center of mass was. Make a thin "T" shaped pendulum that has a cross beam that is 8 ft across and a downward hanging pendulum rod that is 9.7 ft long. Give it a mass of 25 lbs. Next attach two rectangular weights to the ends of the cross beam and give give them a mass of 10 lbs each. Finally, attach a circle to represent the sphere to the bottom of the pendulum rod and give it a mass of 5 lbs. The total pendulum mass should then be 50 lbs. Pin the pendulum to the background of the work space with a pivot placed at the intersection of the cross beam and rod to act as a fulcrum. Next, use the wm2d setting to show the system's center of mass. You'll have to make the "T" piece transparent in order to see it. When you do see it, note its location. Compare that location to where it would be on the right side pendulum in the Merseburg illustration. You will see what I meant when I said that Bessler gives a very obvious clue as to where it is located along the length of the pendulum rod. Next, activate the clock from the measurement drop down menu and put it on the left side of your pendulum. Pull the bottom sphere weight out to the left until the pendulum rod makes about a 30 degree angle with the vertical and then hit "Run" and count the number of complete oscillations that take place during 60 seconds (an "oscillation" being two swings, one all the way from the left to the right and the second being its return swing). This number will be the natural frequency of the Merseburg compound pendulum in oscillations per minute or opm. If you've done everything right, you will be amazed at how low the value was...far lower than the free running speed of the wheel which was 50 rpm's. So, what happens when one connects an axle turning at 50 rpm's with a pendulum that "wants" to oscillate at a far lower rate? Well, that's exactly why Bessler used those pendulums.

      Delete
  23. John, how might this appear as a nice site address: "kennethbehrendtnews.blogspont.com ???

    I mean, it had might as well be such presently, no?

    Now as we see, it is to be the all-knowing "doctor professor" ministering to Mimi's inquiries. He's just pouring it on and taking-over truly, the more the opposition coming from us mere gallery peanuts.

    You're unique style and way of presenting subjects are being literally subsumed within stinking piles of Behrendt, and HE-WILL-NOT-STOP until stopped. No mere 'hints' are going to work EVER!!!! (I can just imagine what his poor wife, or whatever he's got, must have to endure! Every day must be a new Hell!)

    Actually, he would be a smashing success, I think, with his own blog but it would be HIS, not yours. It would be HIS personality and unique clueless push, not your subtle way of provoking thought within others and kindly, considered responses to them. Your two styles could not be more differing.

    Behrendt is THE PUSHY CLUELESS BULLDOZER of informational impartation, and is on the account deeply offensive to various here, this because of his relentless striving for pathetic admiration and worship from his three fawning impressees, seemingly.

    I think it would make a FINE address.

    Just a thought. :-)

    James

    ReplyDelete
  24. Alass! James, thou hast finally persuaded me.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Bessler's pendulums did have natural oscillation periods lower than the observed rotational speeds of his wheels. As I pointed out (on John's blog, and my own, on 9 June 2014), Bessler's Weissenstein wheel, rotating at 25 to 26 rpm, i.e. with a period of 2.3077 to 2.4 seconds, had a pendulum with a natural period of about 3.8 seconds.

    http://perpetualmotion21.blogspot.com/2014/06/johann-besslers-perpetual-motion-wheels_9.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't work with the period, T, of a pendulum which is the time, in seconds, for a single oscillation. I prefer to work with the frequency, f, or oscillations per minute which is just 60 sec\T. In order to use a compound pendulum's natural oscillation frequency to slow down one's free running imbalanced pm wheel, it is always necessary for the frequency of any attached pendulums to be less than the wheel's rotation rate and the lesser, the better when you're trying to minimize the wear and tear on your wheel's internal parts. This results in a situation where the pendulum is constantly being dragged through its oscillations by the axle cranks and they, via reaction, experience a drag that slows the entire wheel down. Bessler only used two pendulums per wheel, but he could have used more in tandem arrangements though this would have complicated the setup considerably.

      Update. I was ready to complete the illustration for the gravity activated latches Bessler used to achieve bidirectionality, but I got sidetracked with another problem. No, I still have not completed the testing of model #1480 and the problem has to do with the mass of the levers used in Bessler's wheels. After doing many calculations involving part volumes and material densities, I've come to the conclusion that my assumption that his levers were made entirely of wood was entirely wrong! Now it's starting to look like they were fabricated almost entirely out of steel. I'm a bit uncomfortable with this possibility, but my calculations are accurate. I guess considering the centrifugal forces that would be applied to their end weights and the levers themselves, this makes some sense. I'm not done with the calculations yet, but, it's starting to look like I'm going to have to modify several of the illustrations for the book if the levers were metal. As for the pendulums he used, it looks to me like their parts were probably joined with a combination of bolts and forge welded joints, a job he probably handed over to a blacksmith to perform.

      Delete
    2. Perhaps you could provide me with a contact address so I can discuss things Ken? Rather than doing so in public.

      JC

      Delete
    3. I'll try sending you an email to an old email address I have for you, John. I thought you had my address because you have emailed me in the past. Well, perhaps it got lost along the way. That can happen. My email is on its way.

      Delete
  26. 1. There is used working Pendulums - right
    2. There are working T shape pendulums - wrong
    3. There was used latches - wrong (and there is reasons for that. One reason is, there is not possible to do good, reliable and fast switching mechanical mechanism, witch work just by gravity. it would lock itself with his movement when there was some change in speed. Like from free rund to work speed and vice versa. Because centrifugal force will switch this latch in some other "wrong place", where we do not want it and finally there may be not imbalance in system ... But there was no accidential wheel stops, at any time, as I understand.)

    There is very hard to "fine tune" just all lever lenghts, masses and spring tensions accordingly by math, at first place. Mainly if you do not now real working inner structure or setup. I just want to say it from my experience, there is very hard to predict final rotational speed just by math. In some near future I know that it will be done, as there envolved several different kind of forces. Like gravity envolving to masses from both side of the wheel as the wheel itself is turning, forces arising from rotational masses speeds - centrifugal forces, also forces from spring tensions. All forces must be "balanced" with each other. And this can be done only when there is possibilty to adjust afterwards all parameters accordingly.
    It all must be like very well balanced swiss watch mechanism or good pertlol engine. If something is not as it shoud be, there may not have so good rotation speed as you firstly predict or no rotation at all.

    Eastlander

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The gravity activated latches that Bessler used are affected by centrifugal forces, but, amazingly, they are not disabled by it and will function correctly even if a wheel is at its maximum free rotation rate. It's a very novel design. I'm still trying to illustrate it and having problems because the latches become active at two different locations within the drum. Each of a two directional wheel's weighted levers must have its own latching mechanism. That means a two-directional wheel must have a total of 16 latching mechanisms. Each must be carefully individually adjusted and tested to assure that it functions smoothly. Bessler must have put a tremendous amount of work into getting his wheels' latches to work properly. They were really not necessary, but he apparently became obsessed with the idea that unless he could produce a two directional wheel, people would continue to dismiss his invention as one powered by a spring wound clockwork movement and he would not be able to sell it.

      Delete
  27. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yippee! Got my new house!

      JC

      Delete
    2. Congratulations John,
      all the best with the move, and it's a good excuse to buy that new drill.
      Fixing shelves, hanging curtains etc.!

      Delete
    3. New house, new workshop! I wish you a lot of courage during your moving!

      Delete
  28. Just excellent, John!

    I must now add my own tiny voice of approval and congratulations to the mighty but faceless chorus singing same.

    Now, if you will, just tell us where and when, we'll all be over for that obligatory Inspection Tea.

    Tata!

    James

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's going to be at least a month James, but you are of course welcome to come for afternoon tea!

      JC

      Delete
  29. Does anyone actually know what year Bessler was Born, 1680 or 1681?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. His birth was registered at Zittaur Baptisimal Register on Tuesday 6th May 1681. (New Style dating was not employed here until 1752)

      On the other hand in the book entitled “Album of the Zittau Grammar School” published in 1886 it suggests that he was born in 1680 and perhaps it may be that his birth was not registered until the following May.

      JC

      Delete
  30. Thanks John, that's sorted out the confusion.

    Good luck in your new home.

    ReplyDelete

Johann Bessler and the Orffyreus Code

I’m temporarily recycling a previous post about the Legend of Bessler’s wheel,  because I need to concentrate on finishing my own attempted...