Saturday, 29 September 2018

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 reconstruction of his machine.

At my age I find time seems to be accelerating and weeks shoot past and I seem to have accomplished very little.  I am determined to finish it really soon so I can prove to myself, at least, that I am right and that there are sufficient clues from Bessler to permit anyone to build his wheel. Success would mean that the design I’m working on would match his, which I know many people doubt is possible.  Obviously I will post the information here first, if it works - or even if it doesn’t.

Please feel free to comment if you wish and I will try to check back daily.

So here it is again, the Legend of Bessler's wheel.

On 6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) announced that after many years of failure, he had succeeded in designing and building a perpetual motion machine.  For more than fourteen years he exhibited his machine and allowed people to thoroughly examine it.  Following advice from the famous scientist, Gottfried Leibniz, he devised a number of demonstrations and tests designed to prove the validity of his machine without giving away the secret of its design.

After more than thirty years he died in poverty.  He had asked for a huge sum of money for the secret, £20,000 which was an amount only affordable by kings and princes, and although many were interested, none were prepared to agree to the terms of the deal. Bessler required that he be given the money and the buyer take the machine without verifying that it worked.  Those who sought to purchase the wheel, for that was the form the machine took, insisted that they see the secret mechanism before they parted with the money. Bessler feared that once the design was known the buyers could simply walk away knowing how to build his machine and he would get nothing for his trouble.
This problem was anticipated by Bessler and he took extraordinary measures to ensure that his secret was safe, but he encoded all the information needed to reconstruct the machine in a small number of books that he published. It is well-known that he was prepared to die without selling the secret and that he believed that post humus acknowledgement was preferable to being robbed of his secret while he yet lived.

I became curious about the legend of Bessler’s Wheel, while still in my teens, and have spent most of my life researching the life of Johann Bessler (I’m now 72).  I obtained copies of all his books and had them translated into English and self-published them, in the hope that either myself or someone else might solve the secret and present it to the world in this time of pollution, global warming and increasingly limited energy resources.

It has recently become clear that Bessler had a huge knowledge of the history of codes and adopted several completely different ones to disguise information within his publications.  I have made considerable advances in deciphering one of his codes; the simplest one, and I am confident that I have the complete design.  Due to unfortunate family circumstances I am currently unable to complete the build I have undertaken but shall return to it as soon as possible and I sincerely believe that 2018 will see the reconstruction of Bessler’s wheel.

Johann Bessler published three books, and digital copies of these with English translations may be obtained from the links to the right of this blog.  In addition there is a copy of his unpublished document containing some 141 drawings - and my own account of Bessler’s life is also available from the links.  It is called "Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?"  Bessler published three books; "Grundlicher Bericht", "Apologia Poetica" and "Das Triumphirende..."

I have also published Bessler's collection of 141 drawings and I have called it Maschinen Tractate, but it was originally found in the form of a number drawings of perpetual motion designs. Many of these have handwritten notes attached and I have published the best English translation of them that I was able to get. Bessler never published these drawings but clearly intended to do so at some point.

For some ideas about Bessler’s code why not visit one of my web sites at www.theorffyreuscode.com
One last thing.  Perpetual Motion machines have been utterly proscribed and Johann Bessler’s claims ridiculed - however, it seems that more than a handful of scientists have now come to the conclusion that it might theoretically be possible to design a mechanical system which is continuously out-of-balance and therefore will turn continuously using the repeated fall of weights for energy.  Gravity but not directly.  These open-minded people remain tight lipped for now, awaiting proof of their hypothesis.

JC

50 comments:

  1. When someone says that he would post the information here first, if it works - or even if it doesn’t...

    What exactly can be accrued?...

    That it won't work...100 percent for sure...

    This is one of the greatest clue I have found... Pls don't be dismayed, sir...

    Because, the actual Bessler wheel design or mechanism is such that once it strikes in the mind one can be sure that it is the one even before the prototype happens... Take my word for it...

    You can blame its simplicity... People may not always agree with this but it is the ultimate bitter truth...


    Good Day...


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Stevo.

      Hi Suresh, you make valid point and it would have been true every time until now. Actually I’m 100 per cent sure, it’s just my natural British reserve that constrains my public utterances. Watch rpthis space.

      JC

      Delete
    2. I am taking this opportunity to address Suresh or John or anyone else who claims to have solved the Bessler Wheel. But I will be addressing Suresh specifically in the following post:

      Suresh, about a year and a half ago (25 February 2017 at 12:06) I asked about what was the basic unit of the Bessler Wheel. John responded: In Apologia Poetica, Bessler wrote, "If I arrange to have just one cross-bar in the machine, it revolves very slowly, just as if it can hardly turn itself at all, but, on the contrary, when I arrange several bars, pulleys and weights, the machine can revolve much faster, "

      What I want to know is, in the Bessler Wheel, is it made up of a basic mechanism, which is entirely independent, which causes a certain amount of torque in the wheel. And then you can have say 5 or 8 of these units, equally spaced about the wheel, which would then end up pushing the wheel 5 or 8 times what one unit would push it. If that is how the wheel works, then that is very interesting! Because you only have the one unit to figure out. However, from what I have read of your BW idea, Suresh, it sounds like you have connections across the wheel between separate units. In other words, they are not INDEPENDENT units. Is that true? Because if that is true of your wheel idea, then that would seem to contradict what Bessler has said about how his wheel works. Would you be able to reduce your wheel idea to just what Bessler talks about in the quote John provided: "just one cross-bar in the machine, it revolves very slowly..."

      Delete
    3. Quazgaa, I think the quote, like so many of Bessler’s is designed to mislead while at the same time inform. The actual word for cross-bar was Creuz, and it went, ”If I arrange to have a cross in the machine, it revolves very slowly, just as if it can hardly turn itself at all, but, on the contrary, when I arrange several crosses, pulleys and weights, the machine can revolve much faster,”

      Notice I have replaced cross-bar with cross, but it could also mean crossings. The useful information tells us that he used crosses, pulleys and weights.

      JC

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

      Delete
  2. Guys check this out;
    https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/evaporation-engine-propels-tiny-car-power-water-vapor-n376536

    This engine looks like it is out of MT drawings :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Quazgaa, yeh, it is made up of a basic mechanism which is entirely independent... And, it causes a certain amount of torque in the wheel...

    You just have to figure out one first... Others are just duplicates...

    Hence, the simplicity...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you! So using your design, you could have a wheel turning, perhaps slowly, with just one of these mechanisms. A wheel containing only one mechanism. Correct?

      Delete
    2. Quazgaa... They work in pairs... Like aa seesa... You can't really make a wheel perform with just a single mechanism... There is a lot of coordination... Remember the eight banging sounds... Bessler must have definitely employed more mechanisms...

      With one mechanism you see that it comes to a grinding halt at 6 pm position... Unless it is lifted by the second mechanism... And so on...

      Delete
    3. Mechanisms have to be spaced at equidistant...

      Each mechanism exerts it's torque from 3 pm to 6 pm...

      Then this is repeated by the second mechanism...

      All the mechanisms are designed similar...

      A mechanism starts applying torque the moment the banging happens at 3 pm position...

      This mechanism has to be lifted from 6pm position...

      Several such mechanisms are reqd...

      In my opinion, it can't be five... Maybe four or eight... Or more...

      Delete
  4. John .. "I think the quote, like so many of Bessler’s is designed to mislead while at the same time inform".

    Creuz, Cross, Crosses, Crossings - what is the correct meaning in the context of the quote ?

    P.S. Best of luck with your build John.

    We suspect that it both informs and misleads. We suspect that Bessler plays mind and word games at times. Then we have the difficulty of translation nuances.

    So we are forced to consider other less literal (mechanical) meanings for the word creuz, because that might be more accurate as far as a mechanical device is concerned.

    One possible meaning of creuz is the figurative 'crossing', as in cross-wheel connectedness with rope and pulleys (crossing the wheel). In this context there seems to be a synergy with ropes and pulleys. Something to consider !

    -fletcher

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Fletch. Yes I agree it could mean cross wheel connectedness. I wonder too, if he is thinking of the four arms of a cross, and implying more - you know my opinion that there were five mechanisms and some think there were eight, or two lots of four arms, IOW, eight.

      JC

      Delete
    2. You are mistranslating the word "creuze". It was one of the short horizontal metal bars that a pulley inside of the metal frame of a block and tackle hoist turned on. It was not located anywhere inside of a wheel's drum.

      Delete
    3. You know that for a fact? The word creuz simply translates as cross. There are many possible variations dependent on its context,

      The meaning implicit in the quote is that the word creuze applies to something inside the drum and is part of the mechanism, and with more than one the wheel turns faster.

      JC

      Delete
    4. To create a little bit more confusion, Bessler did not write that it is a cross, but is similar to a cross. Quite possible that there are three bars ( e.g. Cross of Lorraine).

      ovaron

      Delete
  5. Hi John .. specific words of importance are grouped together in "If I arrange to have a cross in the machine, it revolves very slowly, just as if it can hardly turn itself at all, but, on the contrary, when I arrange several crosses, pulleys and weights, the machine can revolve much faster.

    i.e. "when I arrange several crosses, pulleys and weights,"

    It is natural to initially go thru the more obvious permutations such as four armed crosses (and multiples) etc. But my experience is that it is hard to see what functional difference number of arms makes (and whether odd or even numbers).

    Having said that .. when I say I can't see the importance and/or relevance of something does not mean that it can't be so e'g' a gravity force as a source of energy for a gravity wheel. It simply means I can not see the answer.

    ATEOTD we are looking for asymmetric torque as the source of imbalance and excess momentum, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  6. FWEIW,

    The so called cross-bar, must be a long bar that extends across the wheel for the weights to slide on. They work in pairs, as one slides in the other slides out. More importantly; for the wheel to work, both weights have to slide up; at or about the 6:00 position. If both weights slide up the wheel will be top heavy. If it is top heav,y it will turn.

    All You have to do, is find a way to lift the weights up.
    Sam Peppiatt

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like your comment Sam. His cross bar might actually be a single bar that crosses the axle -vs- two bars that form a cross shape.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous,

      Gee, guess I have to be very careful what I say. It can be spokes and, probably was. But they have to be opposed, or opposite to each other. I.E., not odd number of spokes. The idea is, the weights slide on the spokes, or a long bar. They work in pairs and are connected in some way, so that as one slides in the other slides out. Then, after the wheel rotates one half turn, they swap places, just as Bessler described. But, what I know now is,it can't happen at the horizontal position. The reason is; by about 4:00 they have to start raising back up. And probably all the way up by about 7:00. I know, that is the hard way to do it, but that's what has to happen in order to keep the wheel top heavy.

      But, once you know the way it has to work, you have a better chance to figure it out.

      Delete
    3. Doesn't anybody get it? No, I suppose not------------Sam Peppiatt

      Delete
    4. Maybe each weight in the weight pair is actually on a different spoke. For example, one weight could move out at 2, and the other could move in at 4. Bessler said they move in pairs, but he wasn't specific about whether they moved along the same line.

      Delete
    5. Fletcher told me to keep my mouth shut; I should have taken his advice!
      Sam Peppiatt

      Delete
    6. Keep your mouth shut? That doesn't sound like Fletcher. He is all about open sourcing and collaboration. Anyway, where you are headed has been exhausted, but who knows, you may have found something that the others have missed.

      Delete
  7. The only cross like structure on his etchings is that curious pendulum...

    But I always assumed the cross as spokes of the wheel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (Creuz) - means: creator, which is a weight in the system.

      Delete
    2. I don't think it means weight. He used the German word for "weight" in his texts.

      Do you have any reference for this usage?

      Delete
    3. No it doesn’t mean creator. Look it up in any German- English dictionary, it means cross.

      JC

      Delete
    4. In my opinion :
      Not only reason and eye. (Creuz) look with your heart. When you look at it at the right angle, it reminds you that the cross is a burden in itself. In addition, there is a "weight" (Creuz) for the wheel rotation control.
      As for the 55 verses in chapter 55, it can mean 55 + 55 = 110 in the binary system is 6, and 11 is 3, 0 means that it does not exist. 6 + 3 = 9 = 1001 can mean that 2 weights operate at an interval of 180 °.

      Delete
  8. By the way...I think MT137 shows a network of ropes. Has anyone considered this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Multiple MT27s make up MT137 if I remember correctly.

      Delete
    2. When you think about the equipment that he had available, you really have to marvel at his ability to build a wheel 12 ft in diameter. So the idea of spokes is probably correct. His knowledge of wood and its properties also have to be considered as a major point of his build. But to build something so larger,.....balance it and have it spin is just amazing.... Can you give us any new info on your build John?

      Delete
    3. After all, Bessler wrote that he had no problem with lifting weights because he knew how to do it and he wants you to try it out. The size of the wheel does not matter because it is scaled.

      Delete
    4. Sorry for the delayed response Gravittea, been very busy, and not managed to find enough time for the wheel, but I am making progress, albeit slowly! Things should lighten up a bit soon allowing me more time to build. Thanks for caring.

      JC

      Delete
  9. Good morning, I wanted to ask, did the wheel turn on a fixed pin or did it turn too? Thank you

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bessler’s wheel turned on its axle and at each end of it the bearing were open to inspection.

      JC

      Delete
  10. Das Rad, das sich nicht dreht.
    Dies sind die Versuche einiger guter Männer, die ein fast ununterbrochen rotierendes Rad erreichen wollen. Das einzige, was sich dreht, sind angewiderte Augen wegen des Fehlens einer kontinuierlichen Drehbewegung. Mach weiter. Lass es dich nicht schlagen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The wheel that does not turn.
      These are the attempts of some good men who want to achieve an almost uninterrupted rotating wheel. The only thing that turns, are disgusted eyes because of the lack of a continuous rotary motion. Go on. Do not let it beat you.

      Thank you for your encouragement, anon.

      JC

      Delete
    2. Only the test of the heaviness of evidence will show what it is.
      "as long as they remain outside the center of gravity".
      This is not a Bessler trap, but the truth.
      The scales roll for one purpose to regulate the speed of the wheel.

      Delete
  11. FWEIW,

    I've just learned that a slider will hit only once per revolution. The last wheel that Bessler built must have had eight sliders. People could here them hit eight times each rev. So, two weights per slider, equals 16 weights, at 4 lbs. each, would be 64 pounds. That's why he took them out to move the wheel. Supposedly there was a whole box of them. The long cylindrical shape would make them easy to slide on a spoke.
    Sam Peppiatt

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think you're talking about the bushings

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bushings?
      Not sure what you mean by bushings--------------------Sam

      Delete
    2. Let me back up a little bit. A slider with a weight on each end of it is the best way to over balance a wheel. A slider is the best method for resetting the weights, because all you have to do is slide it back and forth every one half revolution. It's just as Bessler said; the weights work in pairs, as one slides in towards the center the other slides out. Then, every 180 degrees of rotation they go on swapping places.
      So, I say again, only one end of the slider HITS per revolution. Sam

      Delete
    3. Follow up. They could here eight HITS per revolution. If I'm right, there must have been eight sliders, with 16 weights at 4 pounds ea., equals 64 pounds. This makes sense right. I never thought 8 weights would be quite enough, and all the more reason to remove them. Sam Peppiatt

      Delete
    4. A wise course of reasoning. As it goes on, John will not be the first. Who else will win the prize.

      Delete
    5. Right, we should have 3 or 4 of them working by Christmas------------Sam

      Delete
    6. Anonymous

      Follow up; you can have the prize, I just want to be rid of it!

      Sam Peppiatt

      Delete
    7. Peppiat himself, they say it is a great fortune to discover J. Bessler's principle. I think it's just trouble. The principle of the wheel is innocent and the reason for the removal.

      Delete
    8. I think you lost me-------------Sam

      Delete
    9. It's not my business. It's your decision. ---- Sam

      Delete

Was Bessler Prescient About the Year 2019?

Here we are on the brink of 2019 and, as I have done every year since I don’t know when, I think that this coming year we will succeed in r...