My family's health probems having ameliorated a little, I no longer have to go to hospital every day, and that leaves me time to return to building Bessler's wheel! It has been several months since I actually worked on it and in fact I had barely made a start when things began to deteriorate. My plans for 2018 were put on hold, but I am confident that now things are improving, but never forget, "Homo proponit sed Deus disponit".
The basic wheel or wooden disc upon which everything is mounted measures just three feet in diameter, and it will be no surprise to learn that it is divided into five equal segments. Each pivot point has been marked and drilled and each stop point located. I have fitted the pivot axles to all the necessary points, and can now begin construction of each mechanism.
These are complex for me to build but not that hard to understand. Each mechanism has two equal weights attached to it and there are additional features which I prefer to keep to myself for now, but as I have said many times, all will be shared once it works or even if it doesn't.
This wheel is designed to turn in one direction only; it will start to spin spontaneously once the brake is released. It would be tempting fate to fit a brake before I've tested whether it works - but it will of course!
I am well aware after all these years that gravity is not a source of energy, but I am still convinced that the overbalancing weights, provide the drive, as Bessler said, and you may tell me that gravity cannot provide energy, but without it there is no motion.
It’s a bit like saying petroleum provides the energy for the automobile, it doesn’t until it has been ignited and forced a piston upwards. Without the petrol you would get no action.
When I first researched the science which governs this subject, I realised straight away that a closed loop could not provide the energy from one falling weight, but several working together could in theory maintain an open loop, thus cotinuous rotation.
Initially I chose to experiment with over-lapping actions, and when it became too congested, I tested arrangements on both sides of a disc. Then it became necessary to test arrangements on two and even three discs on one axle. I knew that Besser’s first wheel was very thin but it seemed a logical step forwards if it gave me a clue to how he did it.
I tried to put myself in his shoes, designing wheels which might work but which could be refined and reduced to one disc once success had been achieved. Later I returned to the single wooden disc because the other methods were too complex and tests showed that the multiple discs weren’t necessary. But since those early experiments I have gradually broken through Bessler's smoke screens of misleading and ambiguous clues and I'm convinced that I have obtained the design which I believe will work. If it does, I will explain how and why it is identical to Bessler’s design.
People have asked me many times over the years how sure am I that I finally have the right design and I have always said, oh about 90 percent sure, but my certainty has always evapourated in the cold light of reality. But this time .................................?
JC
I am well aware after all these years that gravity is not a source of energy, but I am still convinced that the overbalancing weights, provide the drive, as Bessler said, and you may tell me that gravity cannot provide energy, but without it there is no motion.
It’s a bit like saying petroleum provides the energy for the automobile, it doesn’t until it has been ignited and forced a piston upwards. Without the petrol you would get no action.
When I first researched the science which governs this subject, I realised straight away that a closed loop could not provide the energy from one falling weight, but several working together could in theory maintain an open loop, thus cotinuous rotation.
Initially I chose to experiment with over-lapping actions, and when it became too congested, I tested arrangements on both sides of a disc. Then it became necessary to test arrangements on two and even three discs on one axle. I knew that Besser’s first wheel was very thin but it seemed a logical step forwards if it gave me a clue to how he did it.
I tried to put myself in his shoes, designing wheels which might work but which could be refined and reduced to one disc once success had been achieved. Later I returned to the single wooden disc because the other methods were too complex and tests showed that the multiple discs weren’t necessary. But since those early experiments I have gradually broken through Bessler's smoke screens of misleading and ambiguous clues and I'm convinced that I have obtained the design which I believe will work. If it does, I will explain how and why it is identical to Bessler’s design.
People have asked me many times over the years how sure am I that I finally have the right design and I have always said, oh about 90 percent sure, but my certainty has always evapourated in the cold light of reality. But this time .................................?
JC
You got this! Go for it!
ReplyDeleteThanks Bill, I certainly hope so!
DeleteJC
John Collins,
ReplyDeleteIf you don't already have them, you can make small parts "reasonably" accurate with just a flat plate and highth Gage. Especially when you need to make several parts the same, Sam
Thanks Sam, I have the raw materials available. I just have to cut the narrow mild steel strips to the right lengths, drill suitable holes, and make the right connections using stiff nuts washers and bolts and add the weights. Obviously the steel strips and their holes have to be rubbed smooth. But there are eleven pieces per mechanism, plus some other items. Time is all I need.
DeleteJC
John,
ReplyDeleteglad to hear your family's health problems are improving, even if only slightly.
One question, who's this Bessle bloke in the subject title?
Thanks Stevo,my banana fingers write things I never intended! And thanks for pointing out yet another typo!
DeleteJC
I think Bessler said that he learned a great deal when he made parts for organs. There is a tremendous amount of tedious, time consuming repitition of detailed precision parts. There is no thing like the actual fabrication of parts. Good luck on your build, we are all waiting to hear how things are going....
ReplyDeleteReplyDelete
Thanks Gravittea.
DeleteJC
Good luck John.
ReplyDeleteThanks yellow.
DeleteJC
"These are complex for me to build but not that hard to understand"
ReplyDeleteDidn't Bessler say that the mechanism is "simple"?
Not Bessler, but Karl described the principle as simple and was surprised that no one had thought of it before.
DeleteJC
Didn't Bessler say that he was concerned that if someone saw the inside of the wheel, they might want their money back.
DeleteWell, its simple alright...but aren't we complicating the matter?...I can still visualize this simple wheel...as seen by Karl...it is only that we haven't thought of it before...the key is in first understanding the right figure of weights... whether 5 or 8?... this is the point at which we often go off the right track...
DeleteI've a strong feeling that THIS ONE is going to be "it", John!
ReplyDeleteMy congratulations are offered beforehand.
* * * * *
Since the page from the last topic was pulled just after I posted to it what I did, here it is for review, for most who will not be at all interested:
John,
Have not been around since your 'new look' appeared here. I must say it really is swell! [But now all the nice color of last seems gone!}
Since 'the number' of this year seems to be "5", what if Bessler emphasized it here-and there so as to MISLEAD searchers away from the one actual?
Further, has any 5 combination of whatevers ever yet resulted in any delightfully anomalous results, that might be encouraging as to correctness of this choice?
Just another "naughty puppy" questioning thought.
Indeed! Yet another year of life churns it's way to conclusion . . . just before the very last.
Cheerio!
James
PS Over at BWF, the last PM there should have substituted "head of government" for "chief of state." QE II is doing splendidly as that last but, as for the first, very few QE I's and Iron Ladies have appeared in all of history, and throw-in here a couple of Russian Czarinas too. (Contrary to too kindly popular opinion, I am not perfect. Sorry.)
Thank you James, let’s hope you’re right!
DeleteWe will see how significant or not, the number 5 will turn out to be one I’ve finished it, but for me it’s a done deal, I understand it completely..
JC
John, your words are very encouraging to hear. Those of us ready to assist in any way are happy to see your confidence. We are also ready, willing and able to lift you and your work up for all to recognize the valuable contribution and your guidance has been all these years. The significance of a device powered by gravity is priceless to the planet. Good Luck
ReplyDeleteThanks again gravittea, I hope I live up to your expectations!..
DeleteJC