Friday 31 May 2019

Bessler’s Wheel - The Future

When I first sought a publisher for my biography of Johann Bessler, I was asked to include a final chapter outlining the potential for Bessler’s wheel. I did add a short chapter on how I thought things might develop. This was over twenty years ago and things have changed considerably in that time, nevertheless my earlier suggestions are not too dissimilar  to my current thinking.

First we must establish the potential power from a wheel measuring, say six feet in diameter and less than one foot wide.  In my opinion turning in one direction is all that is necessary.  I cannot think of any advantage in designing a wheel which can turn in either direction.  I believe a bi-directional wheel would reduce the amount of power or speed available compared with a uni-directional device.

My research into Bessler’s connectedness principle has led me to conclude that in that particular feature of the mechanical arrangement there is much potential to re-engineer the design to increase the wheel’s power output.

Those who believe that the amount of power available from Bessler’s wheel  would be insignificant, seem determined to devalue the potential uses to which his machine could be put.   I on the other hand, see tremendous opportunities for such a device and I am certain that we shall see some amazing developments coming from the hands of those with more imagination.

Besides increasing the mass of each weight, Bessler implies that there can be more mechanisms, the reasons I think this, I will go into when I publish my forthcoming document.

There are many ways to increase the efficiency of the original Bessler wheel, indeed the inventor himself claimed to be able to make several wheels of differing size and power output and we have no reason to doubt his word. I can see possible ways of altering the kind of output obtainable and I look forward to seeing what happens in future.

I have discussed the potential for using a driven Bessler wheel to power an inertial thruster.  I have even debated it’s potential with some well-regarded people within the space exploration field and their final conclusion was yes, that would be of great interest, but first you have to prove it can be done.  An inertia driven space craft would undoubtedly be an attractive proposition.

The most immediate  benefit to be obtained from a Bessler’s wheel is in the urgently sought reduction of carbon emissions required worldwide.  If Bessler’s wheel can be shown to be a viable alternative to current energy production then I think the entrepreneurs, inventors and creative thinkers will run with it.

                                               Please share the following link and donate if you wish to aid
                                                     my granddaughter's treatment for CRPS and FND


Friday 24 May 2019

Update on My Progress Towards 6th June 2019

I’m continuing to work on finishing my version of Bessler’s wheel.  There is the occasional hiccup such as finding that I didn’t make the MDF disc big enough to contain the mechanisms!  It does not matter because even if they overlap the edge of the back plate, as long as they have enough of the backplate to provide somewhere to attach the various bits, it will be ok.  I must raise the two support pillars to increase the height of the axle above the base so that any parts which do stick out beyond the edge of the backplate don’t strike the base.

There are some angles and lengths of the various levers which are more difficult to assess correctly. It’s hard to explain in words but when you come to make your own version you will understand why I say this.  Bessler said that he had  (paraphrasing) got things to a state where an ounce or two out, did not affect the working of his wheel.  I hope I know what he meant! Apart from these very minor problems, the construction continues and I anticipate a successful proof of principle wheel.

My plan includes publishing my book on the deciphering of the coded information.  The book contains over 30 diagrams and more thant 50 pages of text. It is not finished yet so I am also working on that and hoping to finish it by the same date.  I suppose you could call it a booklet, or as Bessler called his Apologia Poetica, 'this little book'.  I intend to video the finished wheel and hope, of course that it works.  In any case I will post the video even if it doesn’t work, so I can demonstrate how it’s supposed to work!

I’m also taking time to visit my granddaughter Amy who is currently in a special clinic in Sheffield where she is combating the awful disease, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome which is supposed to be incurable. She also has something called Functional Neurological Disorder, which means that she has now lost the ability to hold her head up, sit up or walk. There is only one way to make progress and it involves intense exercise, removal of all analgesics and the acceptance of  pain which is worse than childbirth or amputation of a limb without anaesthetics.  But Amy is a spirited girl and it is my hope that we can raise enough money to allow her to continue at the clinic for as long as it takes to get her back to some kind of normality.  This is the impetus for my determination to see this wheel in action so that I can raise whatever finances will be needed.

Amy is also my number one supporter of all things Bessler, so she named her dog Bessler!  Hes a Hungarian Vizsler and has been accepted as a service dog, which means he can visit her in hospital. 

Amy will be 26 this weekend so we, her family, are going to visit her and bring some more support and encouragement.

 Please share the following link and donate if you wish to aid
                                     my granddaughter's treatment for CRPS and FND


Sunday 19 May 2019

Is Gravity the Weakest Force? - Not Always!

Many people have suggested that because gravity is the weakest force compared to the other three; the strong nuclear force, the electromagnetic force and the weak nuclear force; it must be unsuitable as an aid to generating electricity through Bessler’s wheel.  But this is not the whole picture. This kind of fact is typical of such erroneous generalisations which permeate this subject.

If, for instance, you could take two protons and hold them very close together, they would exert several forces on each other. Because they both have mass, the two protons exert gravitational attraction on each other. Because they both have a positive electric charge, they both exert electromagnetic repulsion on each other. Also, they both exert attraction via the strong nuclear force. Because the strong nuclear force is the strongest at short distances, it dominates over the other forces and the two protons become bound, forming a helium nucleus (typically a neutron is also needed to keep the helium nucleus stable). Gravity is so weak at the atomic scale that scientists can typically ignore it without incurring significant errors in their calculations.

However, on an astronomical scale, gravity does dominate over the other forces. There are two reasons for this: 1) gravity has a long range, and 2) there is no such thing as negative mass. Each force dies off as the two objects experiencing the force become more separated. The rate at which the forces die off is different for each force. The strong and weak nuclear forces are very short ranged, meaning that outside of the tiny nuclei of atoms, these forces quickly drop to zero.  

The earth and sun are far too distant from each other for their nuclear forces to reach each other. In contrast to the nuclear forces, both the electromagnetic force and gravity have effectively infinite range and die off in strength as 1/r2.

So when we say that gravity is the weakest of the four forces it depends on where and how it is being compared.  We already use gravity in numerous ways via an intermediary such as water, and in the case of Bessler's wheel the intermediary is a system of weights.

If one of Bessler's four pound weights was dropped on your foot, you might not think gravity was a weak force.

 Please share the following link and donate if you wish to aid
                                     my granddaughter's treatment for CRPS and FND


Thursday 16 May 2019

Bessler's Wheel - the Moral Issue.

Occasionally some people on the forum seek opinons about protecting their invention in the event that they succeed in designing and building a working Bessler's wheel.  Usually the focus of such research is on patenting their design.  As some of you may know, after some soul searching as well factual research as I decided against patenting the device.  This was not wholly a moral decision although that formed part of the consideration; no, I could see little of advantage and plenty of disadvantages in following that path.  I won't go into the arguments for and against  patenting again, it’s all here in old posts.

In fact if the main reason for patenting the device is the potential financial reward, I doubt if a patent would provide any significant difference in the amount of money obtainable, in either case, other than the immediacy of such reward.  Patenting is a relatively slow business whereas an announcement of success along with details of the design could generate immediate financial rewards.

Returning to the moral issue, some people have suggested that a patent could not be obtained if the  current inventor had obtained the design via the interpretation of a number of clues; this of course could apply to me, if I succeeded, but it does not seem very likely to me that such a conclusion would be valid.  But it wouldn’t matter if no patent was sought.

Also it has been suggested that a patent taken out on the design would be morally unacceptable because Bessler had the original design and should have profited from it himself, and because he was unable to apply for a patent in those early days, he forfeited what should have been his reward.  It will be over three hundred years too late for Bessler to receive his just recognition, but perhaps he suspected it might take this long before he won due acknowledgement for his ingenious invention.  Better late than never.

I am against patenting anyway because I think the planet earth needs free access to the design without any restrictions due to patenting laws, not that I think that they would stop anyone ignoring the patent restrictions making their own devices.

Despite the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change having set the world a clear target that we must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases to net zero by the middle of this century to have a reasonable chance of limiting global warming to 1.5C., nothing much has happened, hence the many demostrations in support of the IPCC's report.  The chief reason being that no one has come up with the answer to electricity generation by a clean, free energy source.....yet.

When I originally decided against applying for a patent if I was fortunate enough to reconstruct Bessler's wheel, I thought I would be content with a small amount of money.  But circumstances have changed so dramatically for me and my family in the last eighteen months. My granddaughte Amy Pohl's health requires a large sum of money just to keep her at the new facility in Sheffield.  Amy suddenly acquired two awful diseases; Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, which is the most painful affliction a person can get. 24/7 intense pain, super sensitivity to even a soft breeze.  But as well she has Functional Neurological Disorder which causes the loss of use in her legs and digestive system.

You can read about her at

The unit she is in is a private facilty offering treatment which is not available anywhere else in the UK, and it costs £5000 a week.

Amy is an amazing person with tremendous strength of spirit and she will recover if she can complete the treatment and return to her job teaching young children.  If you wish to donate or share her plight please visit her pages above.


Saturday 11 May 2019

Inside Bessler's Wheel?

What follows is pure speculation but hopefully of interest.

When I read about the speed of Bessler's first two wheels turning at more than 50 revolutions per minute, I thought that it should be possible to configure the mechanism so that it caused the wheel to turn at precisely 60 rpm, to measure the passing of one minute.

Since the 17th century, clocks have been regulated by the swinging of a pendulum to obtain accurate timing.  They were notoriously inaccurate at first, but since those early days improvements in the design of clocks has been made over the years to narrow the accuracy down to a fraction of a second per day.

Several witnesses to the demonstrations of Bessler’s wheel’s remarked on the great regularity of their rotation and I thought that this could be indicative of the presence of one or more pendulums.  Given this possibility perhaps we might estimate the approximate length of any such pendulums used within the one-way wheels at least.

The time that it takes a pendulum to swing is governed by just two factors: the mass of the Earth and the length of the pendulum from the fulcrum to the centre of gravity of the weight. Nothing else is of significant importance.  The earth’s mass is a constant so it’s just the length of the pendulum that governs its swing speed.

I’m not suggesting that there were pendulums inside the wheel, but I believe there were weighted levers.  In falling these might behave like a restricted  pendulum.  We know that modern clocks use shortened pendulums for greater accuracy as they swing faster but knowing that a one second pendulum is just under a meter long, or about 39 inches suggests that the levers inside Bessler 's wheel might have been longer to account for the speed of over 50 rpm, but less than 60 rpm.

One Leipzig Ell equalled 22.4 inches, so two Ells would give a length of 44.6 inches which might just give a speed of over 50rpm. The first wheel was six and a half feet in diameter which could perhaps accomodate pendulums of three foot, four inches.
 (First wheel size corrected, see  and if you click on the link you will perhaps notice that I mispelled the so-called original German text for 'three' which should begin with the letter 'd' not 'b'!  I just added this in case someone notices the error and brings it up here.)

So if Bessler simply chose to use levers of two Ells length or 44 inches and then built the wheel around their action, we can understand something about the size of the first wheels and what potential speed and power each might be capable of achieving.  Contrary to intuition, shorter levers might generate faster rotation?  Heavier weights more power?

In addition to the weighted levers, Bessler casually gives us more information about what is inside his wheels. In AP,XXXIII part 2, page 340 in my edition, he comments about Wagner, "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,." In my opinion the bars he refes to are weighted levers, and he includes pulleys which implies chains of cords or ropes to run around them.

 Please share the following link and donate if you wish to aid my granddaughter's treatment.



Monday 6 May 2019

Considerations about Johann Bessler and His Wheel.

The basic requirements for building a successful gravity-enabled wheel can be quite simply described, although obviously not as easily achieved!

The scepticism that we face includes the well-established “fact” that according to the laws of physics we cannot design and build a perpetual motion machine. Well, this is true if you make it completely isolated from any form of energy; an isolated system.  This is not my definition, but it’s what we are taught and yet what kind of fool would even imagine that it might be possible?  No external energy source! But I have never believed in that, nor wanted to do so.  No, it has always been my belief that gravity holds the key; a force of nature which could enable a perpetual motion machine, or a gravity-enabled machine to run continuously.  Which of course means it can’t be a closed system.

Yes I know gravity is not a source of energy!  But to my mind it is!  Ok it’s not a energy source in the accepted sense, but it causes things to fall, and that means there is the potential to harness the energy of the fall.

You cannot get more energy out of a machine than you put into it, and when friction is added there is no spare energy to even complete a single rotation. I only want to use the same energy from the machine that I put into it, not more - but I also want it to do work as well as run I need to put  more energy into the machine just to complete at least one rotation. If several weights could be designed to fall resulting in one complete rotation, and then repeat the action, we wouldn't have a problem.

How to put extra energy into the machine so that there is enough for it to overbalance and complete a rotation? Find a way to enable gravity to start the rotation and also take more energy from gravity to continue the rotation, by designing a system that resets the weight after each fall, before it gets to the point where it needs to fall again. Continuous rotation will cause it to accelerate up to a certain speed.

But when it's stationary, is it in a state of permanent imbalance?   It depends; if the first bit of rotation requires a fall before it begins to rotate a little, then without the fall no rotation can take place.  But if the wheel had been stopped after the fall had ocurred then the wheel will turn a little.  In my opinion, the fall takes place at the same time that the preceeding weight resets.  So the effect is for the wheel to be permanently out of balance, which is why Bessler applied a brake to keep it stationary.

To add more energy than the wheel needs to complete one rotation, it is not sufficient to increase the number of mechanisms or over-balancing weights, because each one has to be reset in order to fall again at the right place.  There has to be a resetting mechanism.

One more thing here.  Bessler made certain claims that were fully backed up by demonstrations and eye witness's accounts, many of whom were out to prove him a liar.  So why, if we accept his claims and almost everything else, do some people maintain that the wheel could not have been permanently out of balance.  Some have suggested that the wheel was stopped in a certain position so that it would begin to spin as soon as the brake was released.  Bessler stated more than once that the wheel started to spin spontaneously as soon as the brake was released.  This fact was reiterated several times by witnesses. Why accept most of the evidence and reject some of the rest?  Why would Bessler lie about such a thing, so trivial when considered against a backdrop of everything else?

In a few weeks I will know if my wheel works or not, but I do know that I have deciphered  a large amount of clues which I hope will astound and amaze you!


  Please share the following link and donate if you wish to aid my granddaughter's treatment.


Wednesday 1 May 2019

Necessity is the Mother of Invention. -

Everyone's heard of the old proverb, 'necessity is the mother of invention', thought to have originated with Plato, and there are plenty of historical examples of its truth in action.

It describes the situation where a need arises for which there appears to be no immediate solution, in the end someone often invents something that solves the problem.  If you really need to find a way to do something you will find a way ..........eventually.  It might take more than 300 years to do it!

All the developments in the field of medicine, for instance, have been achieved through research necessitated by the needs of people seeking longer, healthier lives.

Man first discovered fire to light the darkness of the caves he inhabited and to keep warm. The wheel was invented to help move himself and his possessions from one place to another; boats to move on water; sails to speed up that movement and reduce the need for oars and oarsman. Windmills to grind corn and pump water for irrigation etc. 

The list of inventions designed to relieve a human need is vast but now there is a need for a clean  and cheap or even free kind of energy, to produce electricity. This is not a desire, it is a desperate need.  300 years of fossil fuel-derived energy has resulted in global warming. The icecaps are melting, sea levels are rising, low lying lands will be submerged.  The weather is becoming more variable and extreme.

We have been taught that gravity-enabled engines that can work continuously without the assistance of streams of water, or strong winds, or specially arranged weights, are impossible, but this should not necessarily blind us to anything which might appear to contradict this long held opinion  on the matter.  If there is good evidence that the current view might be erroneous, then the evidence is worth re-evaluating no matter how certain the over-riding consensus is, that the evidence is misleading.

Johann Bessler went out of his way to provide the best possible evidence that his machine was genuine without allowing anyone to see the inside and learn how it worked.  Apart from his ruling prince, Landgrave Karl of Hesser-Kassel, a man of unimpeachable reputation, no-one ever saw the internal workings of his wheel. Karl stated it was genuine and we have no reason to disbelieve him, nor any doubt that he fully understood the device.

No matter how convinced the sceptics are that his wheel was a fake,  not a single one has come up with a sensible explanaton which tells us how he faked it.  No-one can explain how he managed to fool so many people for so long, including some of the brightest scientists of the age.

Ever since I first encountered the legend of Bessler's wheel I have known intuitively that such a machine was possible.

Yet despite the utterly convincing evidence that Bessler did not lie, we continue on our way seeking answers to a question which has already been resolved - how to obtain cheap, clean electricity.

  Please share the following link and donate if you wish to aid my granddaughter's treatment.



The True Story of Johann Bessler and His Perpetual Motion.

  On  6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) announced that after many years of failure, he had...