Monday, 29 January 2018

Johann Bessler had Five Mechanisms in his One-Way Wheels

I may have mentioned this once or twice before (!) but it’s a recurring bone of contention with me that researchers trying to find the solution to Bessler’s wheel, continue to stress the importance of having eight weights.  This is usually in a design using eight mechanisms.  I have tried over the years to point out that the only reference to eight weights occurred in Fisher Von Erlach’s report to Sir Isaac Newton about his two hour examination of the two-way wheel in the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel’s castle.  The words used were ‘about eight weights were heard...’. Given that the examination lasted for two hours one might have expected von Erlach to be more precise about how many weights he heard.  This implies that the sounds he heard were confused by the presence of a lot of other noise.

We know from other witnesses that the rotation of the wheel was accompanied by considerable noise, and we also know, because he said so, that Bessler deadened the sound of some falling weights with felt.  It is also worth noting that Bessler frequently expressed concern that people might somehow find out how his wheel worked and it seems perfectly understandable and reasonable that he would take steps to disguise any sounds coming from the wheel which might give a clue to someone with a discerning mind.  He could have added an extra weight designed to fall with a loud noise but no mechanical advantage/disadvantage, or he might have sound deadened one or more.

Some people have claimed to be working on a two-way wheel from the start, why would you even consider that?  The logical place to begin is surely with the one-way wheels as Bessler did.  He only researched the two-way wheels to try to disprove the accusation that his wheels were clockwork driven.

So we know that about eight sounds emanated from the two-way Kassel Wheel.  We don’t have any description of the sounds coming from the one-way wheels apart from the fact that they were noisy. So is there a way of discovering the minimum number of mechanisms required in the simpler one-way wheels? I say ‘simpler’ because Bessler complains at the difficulty he had in getting the Kassel wheel to work, because it was a more complex design.

There are clues which in my opinion reveal the number of mechanisms required.  Most people are aware of Bessler’s inclusion of the pentagram in more than one drawing.  They may also be aware of the numerous pointers to the number five in his name, pieces of text and other places too numerous to mention.  I have included below, some details from the ‘Toys’ page but there are many more examples where Bessler includes broad hints that there are five mechanisms in his one way wheels.



Notice that I have separated the items in the part labelled A by drawing red lines across, revealing that there five pieces of identical mechanisms. Part B looks similar but twisted and it too has five parts. Items C and D look roughly the same as each other and they bear similarities to each part of item A.

I should also point out that Bessler has added his usual alphanumeric clues by labelling the items A, B, C, D and E - and letter E also represents five, and not content with that, he labels the hand drawing as a number 5, when it should be labelled F,  This gives him his number 55 or 5 and 5.

I should point out that the order of the letters is deliberate and to read the clues correctly we must start with A and move through tto F and don't forget the spinning top labelled 5.

I don't want to say anything more about the Toys page other than that it contains almost every clue you need, to know what parts are required for his wheel, although the exact configuration is not obvious.

JC

26 comments:

  1. While we ponder over number of mechanism or weights needed we seem to be quite oblivious about the shape of the wheel components which is equally important...if one can first get the shape right then finding out the total number of mechanisms required shouldn't be a great task...I mean the lever-weight combination...the key is in getting to know how a weight is joined or fixed to a lever...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It may be that all four wheels were capable of turning in either direction. It's more likely,that he did something to prevent the first two wheelsfrom rotating backwards.

      Delete
  2. I have started to think that "Bessler wanted post humus acknowledgement" is just a myth. I don't see any evidence for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really??? Have you read AP, looked at MT, or his portraits. Based on all the oddities in them, it is more likely than not that he coded information into his works. Just because we can't figure out the clues is no reason to jump to your conclusion. What we haven't discussed is the type of person Bessler intended to find his secret. Clearly coding was a very guarded secret at that time, only used and understood by secret societies and the highly educated. He may have intended only those types to discover his secret, so it's understandable we struggle to find and interpret the clues.

      Delete
  3. I too agree with you but you need to consider Bessler's situation...it is but natural that he would have definitely longed for post humus recognition...by all means...after all the efforts which simply went vain... finally...this is the least he would have settled for...post humus recognition...who wouldn't???...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Suresh, what we think happened is not relevant. We have to look at the problem with an open mind. I don't see any evidence for any post humus acknowledgement effort. May be there is, but I couldn't find it. Most probably people refer to this passage in apologia poetica;

      "Those who are keen to ask questions should ask them of this little book. My deeds will not be revealed prematurely. Should anyone wish to speculate about the truth, let him ponder the rich pageant of words which I now cause to shower down upon him!"

      I am sorry but this passage doesn't point out any effort for post humus acknowledgement. Bessler is just having fun. Yes, with the poem, he define the wheel in a sarcastic manner, but that is just it. Beyond that is just speculation.

      Delete
    2. I understand your rejection of my argument that Bessler accepted the possibility of post humous fame, should he fail to sell his wheel. In Das Tri he mentions the idea more than once but does not specifically state that he is referring to himself. He writes at length about inventors who wished to keep their secret to themselves until they had received a just reward, even if they died without compensation for their hard work.

      So firstly we have the idea discussed above, secondly Bessler suggests we study his book, and also his drawings and thirdly the clear evidence of encoded material in his published works.

      JC

      Delete
    3. "So firstly, we have the idea discussed above, secondly Bessler suggests we study his book, and also his drawings and thirdly the clear evidence of encoded material in his published works."
      -First idea belongs to you John. It is your interpretation. I do not see anything like that.
      -Second point, if you look at objectively, from that statement, jumping to "the code" idea is far-fetched. Please remember he was trying to sell the wheel, while he was writing the book. Why the hell should he code something? "He required some kind of patent" idea is good argument but are there any other examples of such thing happened in history? If not, then that is again just speculation which doesn't depend on any evidence.
      -the clear evidence you suggest is most probably just artistic tools (Golden ratio, Fibonacci series etc.) used by Bessler (and most artists) in that century.

      Let me elaborate something more about "the code" in the images. Look at the Merseburg wheel etching http://www.besslerwheel.com/images/Merseburg_wheel1.jpg. The perspective of the columns (denoted by 4) on the left is obviously different at the top and at the bottom. Is this a message? Is this a code? or a rather simple mistake.

      Delete
    4. You are entitled to your opinion, yellow, but I hope to prove things this year.

      Yellow

      Delete
    5. How do we know that he didn't get the recognition. It could be the people that could decipher his codes may well be aware of the solution. You are assuming you were meant to find the clues when that may not be the case.

      Delete
  4. To Suresh's comment about the shape of each wheel component, my best guess is it would look something like a slice of pie, maybe around 72 degrees in angle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You could be on to something Anon of 31 Jan 23:26. If there are 5 mechanisms of the size you suggest, 5 X 72 = 360. Now all we need to find out is what fits inside this size of slice. We are on our way for sure.

      Delete
  5. Maybe Bessler wanted people to "THINK" that his book was full of codes and riddles just to keep them guessing. It's kind of like politics. Some politicians try to keep people guessing as to what is the truth really is to the point that, people will start to form their own opinion as to how something should be or work.

    Maybe that's it! Maybe Bessler wanted people to use their brain to solve this mystery by building their own unique gravity wheel that actually work instead of spending all their time trying to figure out his little book.

    There are a lot of creative people on this forum that have really good ideas as to how a gravity wheel can work. Bessler found a way to make his work, so maybe he just wants or wanted people to think outside the book and come up with their own creative design.

    Perpetualman.

    P.S.

    I had to sign is as an "anonymous" because, for some reason I can't log in as Perpetualman.





    ReplyDelete
  6. Maybe someone can help me. I can sign in as perpetualman on my iPhone when I make a comment. But when I use a normal computer, it doesn’t recognize me as perpetualman, so I have to sign in as “anonymous”.

    Any ideas?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Updated due to spelling errors:

    Maybe Bessler wanted people to "THINK" that his book was full of codes and riddles just to keep them guessing. It's kind of like politics. Some politicians try to keep people guessing as to what the truth really is to the point that, people will start to form their own opinion as to how something should be, or work.

    Maybe that's it! Maybe Bessler wanted people to use their brain to solve this mystery by building their own unique gravity wheel that actually works instead of spending all their time trying to figure out his little book.

    There are a lot of creative people on this forum that have really good ideas as to how a gravity wheel can work. Bessler found a way to make his work, so maybe he just wants or wanted people to think outside the book and come up with their own creative design.

    Perpetualman.


    ReplyDelete
  8. One more question. If you know about this and guide me I'd be very glad. How do we know Bessler destroyed Kassel wheel and why did he do it? What is the source of this information? I want to read the original source about this if possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK I've found it :) https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com.tr/2013/01/why-bessler-smashed-his-wheel-to-pieces.html

      Delete
    2. It’s all there in my book, yellow. Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved? There’s a link to it in the right margin.

      JC

      Delete
    3. I know John. I bought it back in 2008 ( together with "Perpetual Motion: The History of an Obsession" from Arthur W. J. G. Ord-Hume) on Amazon and lost it somehow. Kudos to you, it is a great book, but it deserves a better cover IMO :)

      Delete
  9. In Bessler's time there were probably only a few classes, the Royalty (including the rich and famous), the learned, and everyone else. I doubt Bessler cared at all for the "everyone else" class. If he did want recognition for his works, it would be with the first two classes. He had to really hide his code from them, otherwise it would fall into their hands too early.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I could be wrong, but I think all of you are over qualified to ever figure it out. A big dummy like me has a much better chance. Sam Peppiatt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quite right Sam. Go for it!

      JC

      Delete
    2. Thanks John Collins! You should have told me to go to hell! Sam

      Delete
  11. Wow 😮, what’s that all about?

    Well, is there a really good and informative website that talks about overbalanced wheels that use rolling balls or wheels to offset the center of gravity.

    ReplyDelete
  12. We all have a really good source of information already available. You will find it in John's publications. He has tirelessly searched for 50 years and has much to offer of his knowledge, and as his life allows, will be helping us to solve this mystery. Have you read all of his books...? I know there is a lot of ranting words from Bessler himself throughout about the injustice that he was subjected to..... but there is also a great deal of valuable details. I believe that he shared as much as he could and not give away his treasure and that his words, are a valuable resources as well. Study what we know, ask the right questions and John will help us to connect the dots.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Gravittea. I guess that was a lame question. I know John has worked hard to write all these books and to study all about Bessler’s wheel. So I guess I’ll just start with his books.

      Delete

After 300 Years Bessler’s Wheel is Nigh.

One of the endless problems we face, researching Johann Bessler’s claims to have invented and built a perpetual motion machine, is the reac...