Saturday, 28 January 2017

Bessler's Workaround - a method for overcoming a problem or limitation in a program or system.

Given that the search for the solution to Bessler's wheel has gone on for what seems like for ever with no real sign of any progress, and that all apparent alternative means of lifting the fallen weights has drawn a blank.....maybe its time to consider the impossible?

Despite the scornful comments which this post will doubtless engender, from those who (understandably) believe what they have been taught, that gravity cannot be used to drive Bessler's wheel, - and indeed see no convenient loophole which could accommodate my suggestion which follows -  I remain convinced that Johann Bessler found a workaround that allowed him to do just that. I will try to explain why, so please read on.

In the first place much has been made of the vagueness of his statements regarding his probable assumption that gravity drove his machine. The first, and final, impression that I got when reading Bessler's words was that he believed his wheel was driven by gravity.  He implied that it was the cause of the weight's movement. But..... .subsequent analysis by those who search for such nuances of expression, believe that he was not suggesting that gravity alone,  was the source of his wheel's energy, but some additional other unidentified agency.

Having considered the idea that gravity was the prime initiator of rotation, and also the cause of continuation of such motion, someone such as Bessler would have considered every conceivable method to achieve continuing action, including the use of gravity and/or some other agency to relift the fallen weights at the opportune moment, just as we who research this subject have continued to do so since before Bessler and after him.  He states that it was following a dream that he attacked the problem with renewed vigour and enthusiasm, which culminated in success.

This dream seem to have confirmed something he was considering, and the end result was success.  So what could have so inspired him to contimue his research with so much confidence?

This other agency has been extensively sought, and suggestions made as to its nature, but no one has come up with a convincing story.  The truth surely is that if a suitable energy souce had existed, it would have been found by now, and since it hasn't I must conclude that the other agency is the same as the one which caused the weights to fall, i.e. gravity, and that he devised a workaround to avoid the problem.  I'm not sure if Bessler was aware just how impossible his claim to have invented a machine which was driven exclusively by gravity was regarded by the establishment, but I doubt he believed it, even if he had been told many times.  In which case he just persevered with the search instictively searching for a workaround to access gravity  for all his wheel's energy needs.

We know that he was aware of the wall of scepticism around him, but was he aware of exactly why he was not believed?  Why gravity was utterly rejected as a potential sole power source?  He made his discovery before he became notorious and it is likely that he succeeded because he did not know in those early days, why it was impossible!

There were even fewer alternative forces available to Bessler than there are today, and to assume that he found some additional energy to lift the weights, due to changes in ambient temperature, magnetism, air pressure, steam, static electricity or some other force, begs the question why not take the simple route?  Use Occam's razor - when you want to explain something, make no more assumptions than are necessary.  Assuming that some additional source of energy was found, for which there seems to be no evidence, seems to me to be complicating an already puzzling problem.

To find the answer I think we have to dismiss the idea that there is absolutely no means of using gravity to be the sole source of energy for Bessler's wheel.  I believe that there is a workaround that will work, and when it is found it will be very simple in concept, but not so easy in design.  As some of you may know I believe I have found what seems to be that simple concept, which is why I continue to argue that gravity can be used to drive the wheel around for as long as the wheel and its components remain within the field of gravity, subject to certain design elements.

As long as we continue to deny the possibility that Bessler found a way of using gravity to drive his wheel, we shall fail to replicate his machine.  We must bite the bullet and seek a workaround for Bessler's wheel.

JC

75 comments:

  1. A work around, yes,
    for a while now I've been thinking, if you take a plain simple wheel and put a handle on it, all you have to do to keep it spinning is to push the handle a small amount whenever it comes to a convenient spot. Something like between 2 to 4 O'clock, so if all the other mechanisms stay un-activated, it would only take one mechanism at a time to function as they come to that position, a quick snap, and then return.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi John,
    I'll said it a few times, people don't listen, where have you been? ken's already solved besslers wheel.
    On a serious note - if i say something you want to hear we are good, but if I say something you don't agree with, it probably irks you.
    You been chasing besslers wheel for so long you deserve a gold medal, but ask yourself after all these years are you really any closer.
    If Orffyreus was successful then he left clues for people to compare, Once they had a working model, and not to try and build from.
    Without a gentle push the wheels going nowhere.
    When the so called wheel is revealed you can write a book on where you went wrong regarding besslers clues.
    I personally haven't read he's clues, but what is mentioned on your blog regarding the clues makes sense, but I'm only comparing.
    John I wish you well, and everyone on john's blog.
    Nothing can move on it's own, so give it a push.
    Kind regards to all.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bessler, essentially, was like a clockmaker telling the rest of the clockmakers that he had build a clock that was able to continuously wind itself up as it ran using nothing by gravity! Of course, they thought he was hoaxing because every clock they had ever seen required someone or some natural force to wind it up (like Drebbel's self-winding barometric clock of 1598). Obviously, to his skeptics, if Bessler was not secretly winding his "clock" up, some other natural force other than gravity had to be. It took a continuous input of energy to keep raising the center of gravity of his wheel's weights (which include the mass of the levers that held them!). I've mentioned before that energy could only come from the mass energy of the weights (and their levers!) themselves. But, how was it extracted to propel a wheel?

    One should think of the weights and levers inside of one of his wheels as being in a very delicate state of balance which, even when the drum was stationary, placed the center of gravity of the masses on the axle's descending side. Normally, that sounds impossible, but there is a way to achieve it. It requires maintaining a certain asymmetric configuration of the drum's masses using simple tension from stretched springs. Once this asymmetry is obtained, it will, of course, immediately cause the overbalanced drum to rotate to try to swing the center of gravity down and around to a position directly vertically below the axle's center. At this point the magic happens! As soon as the drum begins to move, most (but not all) of the springs involved contract a little and release the energy stored in them. That released energy then immediately alters the locations of the drum's internal masses a bit so as to raise their center of gravity right back to its starting elevation. This process is continuous and results in the acceleration of the wheel as its contracting springs constantly release some of the energy put into them earlier in certain other places within the drum where they were stretched by the drum's rotation which caused the masses there to drop and lose some of their GPE. Since the wheel is accelerating, its rotational kinetic energy is constantly increasing as energy flows out of most of its weights and levers (causing them to lose some mass) and into all of the parts of the wheel (causing them to gain an equivalent amount of mass).

    Bessler did not have this explanation available to him. To him the chronic imbalance of his wheels combined with the gravitation force acting on it was sufficient to explain how his wheels worked and he was mainly concerned with protecting the secret of how that was done. But, he was smart enough to preserve the secret in his writings to establish priority to the method so he could contest any rival inventor's future claim to having found the same design first should Bessler's wheels not have been sold and had been destroyed. That information he left is still available today for those who know where to find it. This year everyone on planet Earth shall be able to know where to find it and what his method was!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ken,
    I think you have just describe I cuckoo clock

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure that Bessler's skeptics thought he was a cuckoo! But, the analogy between Bessler's one-directional wheel and a clock is somewhat appropriate. Obviously, both have rotating parts. But, the various positions around the drum, whether stationary or moving, of one of his wheels could be identified with the various times on a clock's dial. As a clockmaker, Bessler would have been aware of this similarity and, indeed, he uses it in some of the second DT portrait clues. If one carefully studies that portrait, he can find a total of three clocks. Most will only see one and just dismiss it as meaningless. How very wrong they are!

      Delete
  5. Again, it is energy from gravity only if the weight was raised while balanced against gravity - ie. without having needed to perform work against gravity, as opposed to having some other source pick up the tab for an unbalanced lift in which work HAS been performed against gravity. In the latter case it's "energy from" whatever paid for the lift.

    That gravity is the output FORM of energy is not contentious - it's the most obvious possibility for the static torque exhibited by the statorless one-way wheels.

    The key question is simply whether a corresponding tally of input work has been performed against gravity, or not. If it has, then whatever paid for it is the source of OU, not gravity. If it hasn't, then the lift must've been balanced against gravity, which usually implies and equal opposite weight drop...

    So basically it's only free energy from gravity if you have some kind of clever counter-balancing scheme. Transient rest mass, or effective teleportation, something like that..

    Usually mass and gravity are constant, and this is what ultimately enforces energy symmetry in gravitational interactions - ie. the practical reason why counter-balancing requires lowering equal GPE to that raised.

    Incidentally i realised this weekend how to break momentum and energy symmetries by mixing mass constancy with variable MoI, and so causing conservation of angular momentum to violate conservation of both linear and angular momentum in a lossless closed system. Paternosters and Robervals, squares and circles, scissorjacks and flywheels, linear and angular inertias... I kind of have to agree with Uneqk above - i'm currently getting extraordinary results from these very general clues.. i'm even entertaining the possibility of a straight-up gravitational asymmetry.. but if it works, it'll only qualify if the excess output work is unreciprocated GPE.

    If Bessler's trick was instead applying an effective N3 violation to buy cheap momentum, which was then cashed-in as GPE, that'd still be an inertial asymmetry, and energy from the Higgs field, rather than from gravity..

    You should also remain aware that a genuine gravitational asymmetry is also likely propelling the planet.. since more weight is falling than is effectively raised. Think about that for a second - pick something up from the floor, and you're also levering the floor downwards.

    But if you can instead pick it up when it's weightless, then you've performed no input work against gravity (bravo!), however upon harvesting that GPE, by dropping the mass we also accelerate the Earth up to meet it.

    This same issue also arises with certain inertial asymmetries, though if his source WAS inertial, then his statorless requirement likely means the system momentum is isolated, at least until an external load is applied.

    If successful, the power at our fingertips is likely every bit as cosmological in nature as Bessler expounded. We would truly be channeling the forces of Titans, of terraformers, and destroyers of worlds.. our peanut gallery vindicated, with all whirring gears and levers and stuff. We'll show 'em yet, huh?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "That gravity is the output FORM of energy is not contentious - it's the most obvious possibility for the static torque exhibited by the statorless one-way wheels."

      If that was the case, then one of Bessler's wheels should not be able to run in a centrifuge. But, since it could, that means that gravity is not necessary to his wheels outputting of mechanical energy. Thus, we must look for another source. I can think of only one source that, so far, no one, not even "modern" physicists, are considering. And that source is so painfully obvious.

      Delete
    2. A constantly "unstable platform" (Fletcher) as a function of directional rotation, will respond asymmetrically to gravity's pull.

      It is a simple, plain fact.

      Get one of those going, and you will have it, whoever or whatever you may be . . .

      Delete
  6. engy from weights? this guy found way to make weights float up in water!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8HKbjIIRRc


    boris

    ReplyDelete
  7. Suppose two persons A & B of equal weight take position on a see-saw they remain balanced initially...Then B pushes down..Then A goes up while B comes down...The question here is, from where did the energy or force come from to bring down B?...Was GPE in B responsible?...Or was it from the food consumed by B?... Question 2...Did B lose any mass?... Similarly, in a Bessler wheel when the weights keep falling down, do they really keep losing their mass...Question 3... What is the source of energy or force in this case?...The weights in BW incessantly work to ensure constant rotation... What keeps them going?.. Gravity or a combination of other factors like momentum, etc.,..

    ReplyDelete
  8. Your question is a little confusing.

    If A and B are balanced, then, if B pushes down with his feet, B will rise and A will fall. B's leg muscles lose energy and mass by transferring it to all of the atoms in the bodies of the two riders and their seesaw which collectively experience an increase in their rotational kinetic energy as they also gain the tiny amount of mass lost by B's leg muscles. As A drops and his end of the seesaw strikes the ground, all of the energy and mass that the two riders and the seesaw gained actually flows at light velocity to the point of contact between the seesaw and the ground. As a result there is a rise in the thermal energy of the atoms in the ground and in the end of the seesaw as the energy and mass removed from B's leg muscles finally flow into them. These concepts may seem a bit strange at first, but this is exactly what is happening if one believes in the equivalence of mass and energy.

    In Bessler's wheels, each weight lost a tiny amount of energy and mass with each trip around the wheel's axle (only a fraction of a picogram per pound per wheel rotation). That energy and mass then flowed out of the weights and the levers they were attached to and was distributed to all of the atoms in the wheel including even a small percentage flowing back into the weights and levers themselves. Essentially, the mechanics of Bessler's imbalanced pm wheels created a situation in which the weights and levers behaved like they were in a state of constant free fall even though they actually each only traveled around in a closed path in the Earth's gravity field. Bessler's wheels prove that one can extract energy and mass from objects that move around a closed path in a gravity field.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It is bit difficult to digest..Anyway, coming to the besslerwheel mystery... Bessler was very anxious about losing the secret...He was very alert during the demos...He had his wheel covered..He wouldn't even allow anyone to get close...A peek was sufficient to get the idea...Karl also stated that an eight year old carpenter boy could easily recreate the wheel after a few minutes observation...All these amply state the simpleness of the mechanism... There is no doubt about it absolutely... Bessler also made it clear that it was the weights that were the main driving force...Then why do we complicate the matter by talking about secret codes or the precisely measured cords..Just why not visualize that artful arrangement and build the wheel..Cords would simply snap anyway...Cords would not make the wheel appear simple...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a suggestion in the Bessler quotes that he allowed skeptics to insert a hand into the drum of the Merseburg wheel to feel its internal axle section and convince themselves that there were no ropes wrapped around it that were attached to falling weights that powered the huge wheel. That was intended to prove that his wheels were not like the weight powered clocks of his day. However, he would have made sure that their probing hands did not touch anything else inside of the drum.

      Yes, the design is simple, but its more complicated than the various weighted lever designs shown in MT. Bessler describes the weights of his wheel in DT as:

      "...they are enclosed in a structure or framework, and coordinated in such a way that not only are they prevented from attaining their desired equilibrium or 'point of rest', but they must for ever seek it, thereby developing an impressive velocity which is proportional to their mass and to the dimensions of their housing." (page 191)

      The key word here is "coordinated". That coordination must be very precise or the center of gravity of the weighted levers will not remain stationary on the axle's descending side during drum rotation. Bessler was well familiar with the use of cords to coordinate the motions of different moving parts. He learned all about that from his work as an organmaker, a craft which he claimed was allowed him to finally develop a design for a working imbalanced pm wheel.

      Delete
  10. Well, coordination is important...But it can be achieved in a different way...The entire thing had to be very VB sturdy...I mean all metal... Bessler was paranoid...He used very chosen words...To protect the secret...He made sure he sounded genuine but at the same time discreet...The levers alone are strong enough on guided path for Coordination...

    ReplyDelete
  11. "VB sturdy"??? What is that supposed to be? "Vibration sturdy"?

    Yes, Bessler was paranoid, but with good reason. If someone had found out his secret, they wouldn't have paid him a penny for it and then pretended that they had discovered it so that he would get no credit at all. There are nefarious types like that in all centuries. On the other hand, Bessler wanted his secret to be preserved so that, if his invention did not sell or he died off, someone in the future would be able to figure out how his wheels worked. He put all of the specifications for his wheels' parts into the two DT portraits, but, even so, they are very difficult to find and interpret and that can only be done accurately if one is actively trying to use them to build a wheel. One must, literally, become another Bessler as far as effort is concerned and, then, when he takes a step in the right direction, Bessler will have provided a clue to confirm that move as being a correct one. Without that construction effort, the clues will appear totally meaningless to anyone just casually viewing the DT portraits. It's the most bizarre way of recording the details of a mechanical system that I've ever seen. The fact that no one has managed to figure it out in 300 years proves how cleverly Bessler hid the secret of his wheels. But, now, finally, that secret has been rediscovered. When the details are revealed, many will say that his design can not possibly be that simple and it can not possibly work. When the sims are produced showing the design working, many will say that the sims must be wrong. When actual physical duplicates of his wheels are constructed and shown to be working, many will still say they must all be fakes. When actual degreed scientists and engineers verify that the wheels are working, many will say that they are all lying as part of some bizarre conspiracy or have been deceived by hoaxers. Only after compact Bessler "super" wheels are actually electrically powering private residences will most people finally say "yes, Bessler's wheels were real, he was not a liar, and the design now working is, most highly likely, "the" one he used." This slow process of acceptance will not take place overnight. It will require several years and, perhaps, as long as a decade. I look forward to seeing this drama play out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The unspoken implication in your words Ken, is that you are an extremely clever person to have discovered Bessler's secret that no one else has discovered in 300 years, well done, except that It isn't a very attractive trait to observe in another person I believe that you are completely wrong about what you think you have discovered.

      I have already shared some of my own discoveries with another person to get some unbiased opinion and the feedback is that the facts speak for themselves, the encoded msterial is correctly interpreted but not yet detailed enough to go ahead with construction. What is undisputed is that my information does not relate to yours in the slightest way.

      This leads me to believe that you are fooling yourself Ken. I think you believe in what you have found but the scant details you've shared seem to me to match neither my own findings nor the ones we already are familiar with, courtesy of the eyewitness reports

      JC

      Delete
    2. Actually, John, I don't view myself as extraordinarily clever, but, rather, as extraordinarily lucky! After decades of zero progress, I just happened to stumble across the Bessler literature you produced which just happened to contain the two DT portraits. I just happened to learn how to make sims as my "passion" for constructing handmade models began to wane. I just happened to become obsessed with the two DT portraits and then just happened to notice something in the second DT portrait that I could not dismiss as accidental. Then I just happened to find the time and energy to produce about 1,500 sims guided by interpretations of other clues in the portraits that began to emerge. And, then, just as I was about to declare the task of reverse engineering Bessler's mechanics as impossible due to one failure after another, I just happened to stumble upon a design that worked! Yes, I feel like someone who just won the jackpot in your National Lottery every week in a row for an entire year! The probability of my having found success was probably something like one in a trillion!

      I do not know who you shared your discoveries with, but I see a major difference between yours and mind. You say yours are "not yet detailed enough to go ahead with construction." Mine, however, have resulted in actual schematics that the craftsman can take into his shop and begin building with!

      I agree that I have only released "scant" details at this point. That is due to the sheer number of them and my desire to just release it all at once in my upcoming volume. However, I can assure you that what I will deliver will fully agree with all of the correctly translated clues from Bessler's writings.

      Delete
  12. Hi John,
    I totally agree with what you said above regarding Ken ( no offence Ken).
    I think you are aware that I believe that for anything to move must be pushed or pulled, but nevertheless I hope you find the secret in Besslers wheel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know you have yet to be convinced that Bessler's one-way wheels started spontaneously Uneqk, but I remain utterly convinced that they did begin to turn as soon as the brake was released, and thence accelerate to their full speed.

      JC,

      Delete
  13. Yes, I agree... Bessler's one-way wheel started spontaneously...As the brake was released...The wheel had to be kept restrained always... This is possible... Gravity is always pulling...No other pull or push is reqd...This is the first wheel built by bessler...And this is also the most simple one..And, we should be trying to recreate this one now..

    ReplyDelete
  14. The key to producing a successful imbalanced pm wheel is to find a design that, when stationary, is out of balance and, critically importantly, stays out of balance as it begins to rotate. It is the failure to do this simple thing which has doomed all attempts at imbalanced pm wheels other than Bessler's over the last three centuries. On paper or in a constructed physical model it is very easy to produce a design that starts out of balance, but it does not stay that way upon rotation. To keep it out of balance during rotation, one must supply its mechanics with energy which will shift its internal parts around so that the wheel's center of gravity is constantly rising as the rotating wheel tries to lower it. Bessler's skeptics, then and now, simply state that the source of energy he found to do this was provided by some large clockwork type mainspring he wound up inside the drum when no one was looking or some other trickery. I even read one skeptic recently that said that his wheels were actually being propelled by their pendulums whose pivot rods had secret drive rods connected to them inside of their vertical supports. That explained why inspection of the axle bearings of the wheel itself showed nothing. This skeptic was obviously unaware of the real purpose of the pendulums and that they needed to be disconnected from the axle in order for the wheel to reach its maximum terminal rotation rate prior to doing a rapid load lift demonstration. But, there was another source of energy that his wheels tapped that no one suspected. He simply managed to use GPE that would normally be lost in one part of the drum to keep raising the center of gravity of all of the weights and levers in the drum and to do so at just the exact rate needed to keep that center fixed on the axle's descending side. To do that required a specially designed lever and precise coordination of all of the lever motions during drum rotation. While his design is simple, the details of it are critical to its operation. After studying the Bessler literature for many years, I have found where those details were hidden by him. They are actually in plain sight, but to "see" them, one must follow Bessler's suggestion. Notice all of the items in the second portrait that depict optical systems? There are actually six of them and their optical axes point to things that Bessler wanted the reverse engineer of his wheels to pay particular attention to. How many have actually done that? Probably not many and so the mystery remained unsolved. I, however, have made a specialty of studying them and have been well rewarded for my effort. Thanks, Herr Bessler!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi John,
    Looks like I'm out numbered already.
    I personally have an interest in bessler and he's wheels, so by completing a wheel that starts spontaneously you will put an end to any debates.
    If you don't succeed before you decide to hang your tools up, will you have any doubt that you could have been wrong regarding starting spontaneously, or whether bessler never actually had a working wheel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Uneqk, I hope I succeed before I hang up my tools, but the eyewitness reports seem to confirm the spontaneous start up of the wheels. One of the convincing features of the early demonstrations was the fact that the public could screw in and out a bolt to slow down, stop or release the wheel to spin. Another was the fact that the wheel accelerated from a slow start.

      Anyway I'm glad you are still interested in. Bessler's wheels.

      JC

      Delete
    2. Here's something from a letter written by Teuber to Leibniz describing a test of the one-directional Draschwitz wheel that was dated 19th January, 1714:

      "Having made an appointment with the inventor, we approached the machine and noticed that it was secured by a cord to the rim of the wheel. Upon the cord being released, the machine began to rotate with great force and noise, maintaining its speed without increasing or decreasing it for some considerable time. To stop the wheel and retie the cords required tremendous effort."

      All of Bessler's one-directional wheels were self-starting. It was only his bidirectional wheels, starting with the Merseburg wheel, that needed a gentle push to get them started.

      Delete
    3. Hi Ken,
      Thankyou for that valuable bit of information. Would I be right in saying that, that particular wheel was approximately 9-10 ft in size and weighing 358 kilograms (789.25 pounds).

      Delete
    4. Your quite welcome, Uneqk. The one-directional Draschwitz wheel was 9 feet in diameter. My best estimate gives the axle / drum combination a gross weight of about 180 pounds.

      Delete
    5. Thankyou Ken,
      Looks like I was miles out regarding how much the wheel actually weighed.
      That explains it then.

      Delete
  16. As you say, that even after going through your book, 999 persons will not be able to realize the secret...That only means it is highly impossible then... Isn't it?.. We could as well refer to the clues given in the poem and eye witnesses...And solve the mystery...Three centuries have passed without success...This could be because of non availability of clues in print form... Internet also recently began... No serious investigation done by authors until recently...The stigma attached to the Bessler riddle required time to wear off...And, time was needed for Bessler to take rebirth...Some of the clues left by bessler could be understood only by him in his new avatar...He is among us now... Believe it or not, but it is a fact... One needs to have an open mind... Work not completed in this life time is carried forward to the next birth... Bessler believed in all this but we may dismiss it as rubbish...

    ReplyDelete
  17. John, can I ask, if Bessler did hide clues in his documentation, was it to
    i)prove to the world (while he was alive) that his wheel was the first perpetual/gravity motion wheel should another individual create a machine?
    and /or ii) to leave the world the design to be found at a later date, after his death?
    It seems that with all the possible clues that there are probably an endless supply of ‘Red hearings’ , just to confuse.

    Ken, I think the work you have done is to be commended, but just as other have said, you have nothing without a working wheel – Why not take the clues, at least in part and build a working sim (No.1501??) – Have you honestly thought what you would do, if Bessler wheel was to be re-created(by JC or someone else), and your clues are incorrect?
    Thanks
    A.N.Other

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ A.N.Other

      I already have the working sim which is #1480 in my collection and while it is certainly not as nice as having a working physical replica, it is far, far better than what everyone else has which is no working sim or working physical wheel. I'm not convinced that Bessler's particular wheel mechanics is the only way to achieve perpetual motion. There, most likely, are many ways and more will be found in the future. Anyway, I wish all those pursuing those designs the best and if I can ever be of assistance I will be glad to do what I can to help them. As far as my clues being incorrect in concerned, it would only be my interpretations of them which would be incorrect. The clues are certainly there and it took me many incorrect interpretations before I finally arrived at the correct ones. I know they are correct because they led to a working sim. Soon they will be publicly available for others to evaluate. At this point in time I don't think the interpretations I've given to them will change that much.

      Delete
    2. Anon, your question is one I have asked myself many times. I think both your suggestions are partially correct. I think that Bessler did intend to leave encoded proof that he did invent his PM at a certain date and therefore before anyone else. But then later in AP he says that if he should fail to sell his machine he will be content with post humous acknowledgement, which implies that he intended to leave enough information behind him to enable the reconstruction of his wheel.

      JC

      Delete
    3. I found the year 1712 encrypted in the symbols of the first DT portrait. Bessler always talked about his second Gera wheel, the 4.5 foot diameter one completed and exhibited in 1712, as though it was his first wheel when, in reality, it was actually his second wheel. His first 3 foot diameter Gera prototype wheel was completed in late 1711, not in early 1712. I guess he didn't want the existence of that first prototype to become public knowledge. Maybe because he was a bit embarrassed by its low power output? It was never publicly demonstrated, but probably only used for brief private demonstrations to potential buyers during the months when he was "between" larger constructed wheels available for public demonstrations.

      Delete
  18. I'm confident that my book will provide students of Bessler with "the" actual mechanics he used and will do so with enough detail for them to duplicate at wheel if they make an effort to do so and have at least average crafting skills. But, of every 1,000 who read it, probably 999 won't make the effort. But, that's okay because I don't expect them to. They will be content just knowing the secret mechanics involved and how it worked. But, the first 1 in 1,000 who makes the effort will receive a special reward. He (or she) will be the first person in history to duplicate a working Bessler wheel. That's a rather awesome distinction. Right now, I'm probably only the third person in history to know how Bessler's wheels worked (if his brother Gottfried knew, then that would make me the fourth person in history). That's sufficient for me.

    There's an unbroken chain of events in progress here. If Bessler had not seen that roasting spit and read about other inventors' attempts to produce a working pm wheel, then he would not have made the effort and eventually have found success. If that had not happened, then he would not have written about his wheels and others would not have heard about his success and wrote about it. Without Bessler's books and the writings of others, then H. Dircks would not have mentioned him in his work on "self-motive machinery" written the 19th century. Without that, Gould would not have written his book and included a chapter on Bessler in it. That chapter inspired author Frank Edwards to make a largely fictionalized account of the Bessler story. The Gould book then inspired many, like John and myself, to take an interest in Bessler and actually make an effort to build one. John was inspired to write his groundbreaking volume on Bessler and his work along with his translations of Bessler's other writings helped inspire me to study the DT portraits in depth and, finally, to find the secrets hidden in them. Hopefully, my soon coming volume will inspire others some of whom will go on to actually construct working replicas of Bessler's various wheels. Who knows what their arrival will inspire. They could lead to a whole new era of overunity devices which slowly convert the masses of their active components into energy for use in their environments. No atmospheric pollution. No radioactive waste. No need for unsightly solar panels and banks of batteries to store their collected energies. This technology could not be coming along at a better time in human history.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have you constructed a working device ?

      Delete
    2. At this point all I have is a working sim whose parts' parameters are encrypted in the two DT portraits. That being said, though, I have checked the sim many times and I am convinced it is valid and that a physical prototype constructed from it will work. No absolute guarantees, of course, but if I was going to attempt to replicate one of Bessler's wheels, this sim is the one I would be using as a guide.

      Delete
    3. Thank you , does your sim self start or do you need to give it a push, also is it capable of lifting heaving weights ?

      Delete
    4. Yes, it self-starts, but the sim wheel will not reach a terminal rotation rate because I run the sim without any aerodynamic or bearing drag. However, with them present it would reach a top speed in excess of 60 rpm's. Because the wheel's axle and drum are so light with a mass of only about 3.5 pounds, if a cord was suddenly attached to a projecting screw head on its axle when it was moving at its maximum rotational speed, the axle might be able to lift a one pound weight through a distance of 2 feet from a table's top to the axle before the wheel completely stopped. I can not, unfortunately, test this with my sim.

      Delete
    5. Ken Behrendt on 31 January 2017 at 22:07 stated

      @ A.N.Other

      "I already have the working sim which is #1480 in my collection and while it is certainly not as nice as having a working physical replica, it is far, far better than what everyone else has which is no working sim or working physical wheel."

      and. . .

      Ken Behrendt stated too on February 2017 at 12:35

      "Yes, it self-starts, but the sim wheel will not reach a terminal rotation rate because I run the sim without any aerodynamic or bearing drag. However, with them present it would reach a top speed in excess of 60 rpm's."

      This constitutes unequivocally 'a claim' of it's sort and, to myself, seems a thing all-new.

      Is it? Did he ever assert this before just now???

      Delete
    6. I find that I must amend / clarify my "claim" a little. Yes, the computer model wheel self-starts as one would expect one of Bessler's one-directional wheels to do, but its rotation rate will not continue to increase indefinitely even though there is zero aerodynamic or bearing drag acting on its parts. As the rotation rate climbs into the hundreds of rpm's, the model will either tear itself apart due to the build up of centrifugal forces acting on its little weighted levers or, failing that, at some high speed the weighted levers will become "pinned" against their wooden rim stops. When that happens, the configuration of weighted levers will achieve perfect radial symmetry, their center of gravity will be located at the center of the axle, and the accelerating torque on the axle will become zero. In the frictionless virtual world of a WM2D simulation, the freely running wheel would then maintain this rotation rate ad infinitum. Of course, actually testing the virtual wheel to its pinning speed would require a far more powerful computer than the one I'm using. A super computer would be better suited to the task! When a real physical replica of Bessler's 3 foot diameter, one-directional Gera prototype based on this simulation's wheel design is eventually made, its rotation rate will only climb a little above 60 rpm's before the various drags acting on its parts equal its axle torque and the rate becomes constant. This wheel of Bessler's was only a toy and intended as a proof of concept model. It was simple to construct and allowed him to easily make changes to the mass of its weighted levers and the locations where its various types of coordinating cords (more like threads!) were attached to the levers while keeping effort involved and cost of parts to a minimum. One must think of the Gera prototype as, metaphorically, the acorn from whence the mighty oak of the Kassel wheel eventually grew!

      Delete
    7. WM2D only costs 3000 euros, I will buy that simulation program to see if my Bessler wheel works.

      Delete
    8. Even though the Euro is currently down against the US dollar, that's equivalent to $3230.55 USD! Rather pricey, imo, even though it's very easy to learn and use. They used to give a free demo version on their website, but have done away with that practice. If you look around on the web, you might be able to find an older copy for sale with the serial key code needed to "open" it. And, of course, there are free simulation programs available like Algodoo which you can get by going to:

      http://www.algodoo.com/download/

      Delete
  19. The whole story would begin again...There would be distractors asking the inventor to unviel...Fraud cases would be filed... Hostile witnesses would crop up... Attempts would be made to steal the secret... Defamation will occur finally leading the inventor to the grave probably with the secret...

    ReplyDelete
  20. heres one for magnet builders to try!


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_8x_VskC50


    boris

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the link to the video, Boris. I'm interested in permanent magnetic motors and I was impressed by the device demonstrated. It's far simpler than the Yildiz motor and I can't see any possible way the demonstration could be faked. There is no obvious "assisting" motor attached to it and no wiring or batteries in sight. If it's a fake, it's a good one. Notice how confident and "chatty" the demonstrator is with the people looking on. Certainly doesn't look like a hoaxer to me.

      Delete
  21. To put it simply, the bottom line is, the secret principle is the 'workaround', the one that allows a 4:1 weight height gain.
    Thus only gravity drives tbe wheel!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wrong Trevor. Bessler describes a 16:1 gain.

      weight drops one quarter | lifts 4 weights 4 quarters
      WxQ | 4Wx4Q
      | 16WxQ

      Delete
    2. so much for formatting

      Delete
  22. An important clue analysis for all Besslerwheel enthusiasts....The internal wheel mechanism is very much simple...Eight weights attached to levers... Bessler's first wheel's speed was 50 rpm...But his last wheel's rpm was about 25 or 26 rpm approx...Just half the speed of the initial one...This implies that the same old basic mechanism bearing eight weights turned all his wheels... The two directional wheels were equipped with 16 weights... Eight weights on each side back to back...While eight weights worked always the other eight would remain locked or passive during reverse operation... This also makes it clear why the later wheels reqd a gentle push, doesn't it?...now we can also understand why Bessler was very anxious about losing the secret...Now take a relaxed breath and read this several times giving a pat to yourselves...Never get misguided that easily...Bessler was a genuine guy...And so was his secret mechanism...Have a nice time..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Every thing you mentioned has been known for several years already. However, the details are not yet know, but soon will be!

      Delete
  23. Correction: pls read as ; Bessler's later wheels were also equipped with eight weights...Four each side back to back.. While four performed always the other four would idle... Sorry about the mistake...My math is too bad..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that each of the one-directional wheels contained in a bidirectional wheel used 8 weighted levers. That's a total of 16 weighted levers in each bidirectional wheel. That is why his bidirectional wheels produced 8 thumping sounds per drum rotation regardless of what direction the drum was started turning in.

      Delete
    2. You could be right...But my opinion is we just contemplate on the first wheel...It is easier to achieve success this way...

      Delete
  24. The details are also known...Many times it has been discussed online...But everyone has his ego to fulfill...We are simply complicating the issue for our own good...I once again reiterate...No codes are reqd...Just mental analysis.... Trevor also made this clear...But who hears...Just rack the mind and keep comparing your design with Bessler's 141 drawings and poems...It really is as grand as a peacock's tail...

    ReplyDelete
  25. I would also like to declare that there is only one design...An unique design to recreate Bessler wheel..The eight weight one...Due to my bad math I get confused... Bessler learnt this the hard way...We needn't...

    ReplyDelete
  26. One of the reasons for so much delay in recreating Bessler wheel is also due to this confusion.... Bessler produced the larger wheels which could operate both ways to convince some who suspected fraud...But this has resulted in confusing many of us while trying to work it out.. Believe it or not...

    ReplyDelete
  27. I agree that there is much confusion about Bessler and his wheels and, as John has stated many times, much misinformation about them online that promotes this confusion. Even after studying the subject for years, it took me much, much time to get the Bessler story straight in my mind and, even so, every once in a while I find something that I thought was a "fact" was actually just a bit of misinformation that someone who did not know what they were talking about managed to slip to me! But, even with all of the facts one thinks he knows, he will find they will not be leading to a working design for Bessler's wheels. It's the most frustrating situation in which a person can find himself. There are dozens of websites talking about Bessler's wheels, millions of words devoted to the man and his wheels (a larger than average percentage contributed by myself!), and many, many pretty wheel designs that act like mandalas for pm chasers to meditate upon for hours on end. And what do they all add up to? A big, fat zero! But, that is exactly how Bessler wanted the situation to turn out if his wheels did not sell which, unfortunately, they did not. He knew they would be talked about for many years, perhaps centuries, after his death and that people would be desperate to find his secret and be able to duplicate his wheels. He also knew that would be impossible unless he could provide the specific information they needed to do that. Many faithfully quote his introduction to MT where he says that one can look at its designs and, by combining various parts, begin to look for a working design. Well, that's certainly nice, but is like telling someone if he looks in a hardware store, he will eventually be able to build a perpetual motion wheel! Lol! MT, imo, without the working wheel drawings he removed from it and destroyed, is only a distraction that can waste one's limited resources looking in the wrong direction. The "right" direction will be found in DT and it will be found in the first few pages! In a few months, many will believe me.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I do believe that Bessler was able to find the Work a Round. I also believe that once the veil has been penetrated there will be many ways to achieve this dream. I think Bessler said that he had used a different style of mechanism for the two way wheel as compared to the one way wheel. The options are wide open, and so we should keep our minds open as well....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bessler's bidirectional wheels did use a "different style of mechanism" as compared to one of his one-directional wheels. That difference was the use of two counterpoised one-directional wheels plus a system of gravity powered latches to disable whichever wheel was forced to undergo retrograde rotation. These latches have been a focus of my research for several years now. They had to function flawless for both of the bidirectional wheel's internal one-directional wheels and that required some very precise adjustment of them. Bessler complained that their adjustments gave him many a headache. While I want to encourage the physical duplication of his wheels, I caution craftsmen that his bidirectional ones should only be attempted by the most skilled of craftsmen.

      Delete
    2. You're doing it again Ken! 'Gravity latches'? You don't know that other than in your opinion. How many times do I have to ask you not to make statements as if they were facts and not merely your opinion,

      JC

      Delete
    3. ".........I caution craftsmen that his bidirectional ones should only be attempted by the most skilled of craftsmen."

      ??? And, what happens if they don't? Do they explode?

      Delete
    4. Sorry, John. But, without such a latching system, it becomes very difficult to disable a retrograde wheel and also return its center of gravity to the center of the axle. Imo, if one posits the existence of two one-directional wheels contained within a bidirectional wheel's drum, then these latches absolutely must exist. I might also point out that they are actually depicted in the two DT portraits!


      @ Anonymous

      Craftsmen who opt to attempt the construction of a bidirectional Bessler wheel with the information I will provide are certainly free to do so. However, I felt it my duty to caution them, in advance, about the difficulty of such an undertaking. Although Bessler's basic one-directional wheel design is fairly simple to construct, there is a huge difference between it and a bidirectional wheel in terms of the amount of construction time needed, the number of extra parts involved, and the precise adjustment of those parts. In fact, I advise anyone interested in duplicating one of Bessler's wheels to start exactly where he did with the little 3 foot diameter "toy" prototype wheel of Gera. It should be considered as basic training for more ambitious future efforts. As they say, "One must crawl before he can walk and walk before he can run." Those who try to start out running should not be dismayed if they trip and land on their faces. Of course, if one is highly confident of his abilities and has proven them to his own and others satisfactions over the years, then possibly he could advanced directly to the construction of a Bessler bidirectional wheel and find success. I will, of course, wish the best of luck to anybody who makes any effort at duplication even if it's only with the little toy wheel.

      Delete
  29. Hi Vibrator,
    A couple of post back John thought you was very clever, but I personally think that could actually be an understatement.
    Can I be nosey and ask weather you are actually chasing Orffyreus Besslers wheel, or simply following the blog and adding your views.

    Kind regards.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Replies
    1. Seek and ye shall find. This assumes, of course, that what one seeks actually exists. Sadly, many seek things that do not exist and can waste a lifetime doing so. I have found what I sought and so shall everyone else who has sought the same thing.

      Delete
  31. I think safeguarding the wheel's secret is going to be more daunting than the invention itself...In any case, Bessler proved this already...Till his death... Unfortunately, his complete date of death is not known...We could have carried out some sort of observation of silence...As a solace to his soul...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My major goal is to not safeguard the secret of Bessler's wheels!

      He fell off of that windmill on Tuesday, November 30, 1745. However, the fall did not immediately kill him. He probably died a day or two later from internal hemorrhaging caused by his injuries. As blood accumulates in the cavities of the body, it interferes with blood flow through one's organs and that can then cause them to shut down and die. He may not even have regained consciousness after his fall, but, if he did, he would have wanted them to notify his wife. Even today, effective treatment for such an accident can require a first class trauma care which would not have been available to Bessler. I like to think that if he had not died at the age of 65, then he might have lived to 100 and, possibly, finally managed to sell his imbalanced pm wheel design. One wonders how today's world might be different if that had happened.

      Delete
    2. So the same gravity killed him...A tragic and violent death... What is his complete date of birth?... Anyone who invents such rotating wheel would most probably wouldn't want another person to take credit without getting sufficient compensation...It is quite natural...You are probably saying it differently because you don't have the entire secret design...That is what I could make out so far...I am cocksure about it... Bessler could have revealed it but he didn't...Why so?...He was very intelligent...But this is once in a lifetime achievement...No one in his right senses would give it away for free... Everyone has his dreams and desires...Which is what makes them come out with such fundamental and ground-breaking discoveries..Just tell me how many sleepless nights you have spent for achieving success....And when that didn't happen you have decided to publish what you have learnt for book sales revenue... Isn't it...It is difficult to believe when you say that your major goal is not to safeguard...

      Delete
    3. At the risk of upsetting Ken's fans, I wish to warn you that he makes many, many statements as if they were established facts, when in reality they are figments of his imagination. I have asked him over and over again to make each and every statement for which there is currently no documentary evidence clear that it his opinion.

      You may ask why I am making such a fuss, well the reason is that I have strived to produce Bessler's books with the best translations into English that I have been able to do. Our research depends on being able to rely on established facts and I have strived to correct false impressions where ever I find them, but Ken, you insist on pushing your book for which we can only rely on your research, without the slightest piece of evidence to support your conclusions.

      It's no good saying, for instance, that without gravity latches it would be difficult to disable the retrograde motion, maybe, maybe not. There is conflicting evidence and no one knows what evidence you have that assumption.

      Please allow your book to speak for you, Ken. Until then please rein in your enthusiam for confusing speculation for facts.

      JC

      Delete
    4. @ SK

      The exact date of Bessler's birth is, unfortunately, not known. My best guess would be that he was born in the early part of the month of May of the year 1680. That would mean the Sun was in the constellation of Taurus when he was born. The Taurus personality is attributed to people born between April 20th and May 20th. They are known for their reliability, practicality, ambition, sensuality, and independence. However, they also have some negative traits and can be very lazy, stubborn, materialistic and possessive at times. All of these traits could certainly be applied to Bessler. Interestingly, the symbol for Taurus looks somewhat like the way Bessler made the "O" for his professional name of "Orffyreus". Perhaps he was influenced by the astrological symbol because he was well versed in astrology?

      http://www.holmastrology.com/Taurus-1.jpg

      https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZKPPQU4hRjQ/UYNtMVCLXZI/AAAAAAAAAp8/22Me_9bc-G4/s1600/Bessler+signatures.JPG

      Actually, I do believe that I have the "entire secret" of his mechanics. If I did not, then I would not be publishing anything. Aside from making some royalties off of book sales to help recover production costs, I am not interested in getting rich off of Bessler's discovery. After 300 years it belongs, as I'm sure he would agree, to the world and if those that are willing to invest in developing it can profit from their efforts then I wish them the best.


      @ John

      A detractor that reviewed your statements over the past years might also claim that your belief (which I share) that Bessler's bidirectional wheels actually contained two one-directional wheels is also "a figment of your imagination"! They might further disparage your efforts by saying that there is no possible way that the sport of kiiking invented in 1996 by Ado Kosk in Estonia could have been used by Bessler in his wheels back in 1711! Indeed, the worst of your critics might even try to dismiss as useless the various "interpretive" translations of Bessler's written words that you worked so hard to obtain and provide to us by saying that they only reflect preconceived notions in the translator's mind as to how Bessler's wheels worked and probably don't describe their behavior accurately. This, of course, would then imply that all of the "clues" we think we know are worthless!

      I agree that I probably do sound somewhat dogmatic to many who read my general descriptions of what is going on inside of Bessler's wheels. But, I can only say in my defense that I have found these descriptions to agree completely with all of the correctly translated clues that Bessler did leave us openly in his writings. More importantly, I have found them to also agree completely with the many hidden clues he left us in the two DT portraits. The world of Bessler researchers is still quite unaware of this vast new supply of clues, but I am working diligently to put an end to that situation. Soon, there will be a veritable revolution underway in the field of Bessler research and a quantum leap in progress will take place and do so nearly overnight. If I am, in fact, wrong, then nothing will come of it all and what I have uncovered can then be safely dismissed as erroneous. If, however, I am right, then much will come of it and, indeed, a whole new branch of physics may be born! Time will tell...

      Delete
    5. But you still give the impression that what you say is fact, but you don't offer supportive documentary evidence. All my published work in which I offer interpretations is supported by documentary evidence and it clearly states that it is speculative. I don't assume it is fact, I just try to extract some meaning, and argue my case with the descriptions of my reasoning.

      You promised me a long while back in email correspondence that you understood my point of view and promised to curb this habit of yours. You even said you would lurk without comment, what happened to your promises, Ken? Just words with no real commitment? How can we trust anything you write?

      JC

      Delete
  32. @Ken...What exactly I believe is that everyone who is researching Bessler wheel is in possession of some degree of the secret... Of course, a few are much nearer to the goal...In your case, you seem to have done more research than many and finally reached a deadend... What irks us is that certain things you say are mind boggling of course but at the same time there are a few things you presume about Bessler and his wheel that have no bearing...and, you are too rigid to accept this point when pointed out... Some of the things you describe about the wheel are too absurd...You are simply carried away into the fantasy world which I am sure again you won't realize... Please take my humble suggestion... Sometimes, you got to listen to others also...You really can't be right always...It is very much evident... Visible... Personally speaking, I like you except when I notice about some irrelevant statements you keep making very often...To really understand Bessler wheel, one has to first get into the right track...Then carry out very intense mental activity... Figure out the secret movement and finally compare the results with the available clues... There is no short cut...i mean SIM based ones...It is very difficult because there is only one design and this was the one which Bessler ultimately arrived at...No offence...

    ReplyDelete
  33. John wrote: "How can we trust anything you write?"

    You can trust that I will not make any comments concerning Bessler or his wheels unless I have done much, much thinking about the validity and probability of them being true. The very idea of anything I write leading anyone astray is something that is totally unacceptable to me. Like you I want to see this three century old mystery solved and, most importantly, solved in our lifetimes. I believe that goal is now within reach. I will, however, admit that whatever anybody, including me, claims at this point in time must be considered only as an opinion until and unless it leads to a working duplication of one of Bessler's wheels that displays all of its performance characteristics mentioned in his writings and the correspondence they generated.


    @SK

    I can assure you that I have most definitely not reached a "dead end". Quite the contrary, I feel that I have finally reached a sublime state of mind I refer to as "Total Bessler Awareness". That is the point when, suddenly, all of the correctly translated clues in the Bessler literature make complete sense and one can actually close his eyes and "see" Bessler's secret imbalanced pm wheel mechanics in operation as the drum of one of his wheels turned. It's a wonderful feeling. It's so wonderful that it demands to be shared and so I am in the process of doing that.

    I'm sure that where I tell people that the energy Bessler's wheels outputted came from may, indeed, sound like "fantasy". But, I've concluded that if his wheels were genuine, which I certainly believe they were, then their outputted energy could only have come from one source. It was not Earth's gravity field and it was not something conventional that his skeptics assumed. It was from the mass of the very atoms that composed the levers and weights inside of his wheels! The energy they contained was enormous and could, literally, power a free running wheel for billions of years once a design was found that could extract it. But, his wheels only contained a finite amount of mass and energy and that means at the end of all of that time, they would stop. They were not "perpetual" in the absolute sense of the term. Bessler, however, would not have been aware of this limitation so, to him, they were perpetual in terms of being able to run for all eternity assuming they received routine maintenance to replace worn out parts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, publish your book and let us see your evidence for ourselves, but please desist from promoting it here Ken. I'm tempted to delete any more promos for your book, and deleting posts is something I don't ever do unless the language used is unacceptable.

      JC

      Delete
  34. We can never really know if his wheel has been replicated, because he never let the mechanisms be seen by the public. He was so clever with his presentations, that IF you can find anything in the portraits we cannot know that its the truth or not. The only thing that counts is if you have built a working wheel. There is no substitute for hands on, drilling, cutting and assembling. So, until you have a working wheel, you have no place to be making any claims like the ones that you have been spewing out. Build a wheel with all of this information that you have or wait until you do actually have one that works. This is a great forum and needs to be respected for the great foundations that it has built.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The validity of the many DT portrait clues will be established beyond all reasonable doubt just as soon as they lead someone (which will not be me, unfortunately) to construct a physical model from them that works. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at all if that happened before the end of this very year!

      Delete

The Legend of Bessler's Wheel and my latest Update

I'm putting the brief account of Johann Bessler's Wheel back up for a short time because I am concentrating on writing (rewriting!)...