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 http://www.besslerwheel.com/wwwboard/messages2/3603.html  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.

                                                                  www.helpamy.co.uk/

JC



11 comments:

  1. maybe Bessler kept the weight hidden in a handkerchief and only let the observers 'test the weight' in their hands, because they would have seen the hole through the centre, and the groove(s)around it, givings away that its a weight AND a pulley combined?. If working like this (assuming it doesnt grip the rope)the weight can 'deform' a rope 'shape' and create a pull/push force elsewhere without actually passing any rope like a conventional pulley, without all the friction that entails?
    Regards
    Jon

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sometimes Stephen, I think you are pretending that you know more than you really do, then you post a comment such as this one and I change my mind, maybe you do know more than I thought you did!

      JC

      Delete
    2. Stephen, stop guiding us and just give us the answers.

      Delete
    3. He can't give answers because he doesn't know anything. Only hot air. If he had the answer, he would have built the wheel a long time ago. He is desperate because he has no idea how Bessler did it. He presents himself here as a knowledgeable man to claim later, if someone finds the solution, that he knew that much earlier.

      ovaron

      Delete
    4. He may think he has answers, but he dares not reveal anything specific because he knows it will quickly be shot to pieces here by skeptics and those with other ideas. Better to continually act all knowing and secretive while revealing nothing of value rather than risk revealing anything specific and then having his beliefs challenged and shown to be delusions which would really shake him up and depress him. Meanwhile, he gets some of the attention he craves without really having to say much. Many have shown up in the past on bw and other sites using this same game plan. His goal now is to see how long he can keep it going on this blog before the growing negative feed back forces him to disappear again. But, driven by his chronic need for attention, we can count on him appearing again on the next blog to try to continue his self-gratifying little game some more. Then we'll again read more from him about climbing ladders, ringing bells, and pulling curtains aside. When pressed for details, he will become vague, philosophical, and do his disappearing act until the next blog. Don't expect any specific information from him because that's not why he's really here.

      Delete
  3. from Page 334 of Collins' AP

    “Listen...my weights are not like those in turnspits and clocks. They don’t need to be raised up...it’s a different arrangement altogether from what you see in mill-wheels, turnspits and clocks”

    ReplyDelete
  4. please be careful John, the world is counting on you my friend

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. so, if he is not careful then what?

      Delete
  5. I only meant it jokingly. But you are right. Once the wheel is shown there will be many false claims.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Following the timing thought. Those first wheel were really amazing. I have an 8 ft wheel and when I spin it at 26 RPM (by hand) it is kind of a scary thing. If his largest wheel was around 12 ft in diameter the speed of the outer surface would be quite a sight to see. If there was a 4 lb weight involved and that slung off of the spinning wheel a lot of damage would have occurred.... but it never did. But a 4 lb weight at the perimeter would have had around 24 ft/lb of force. In my own experiments I have devised the most amazing of mechanism that never worked, but now, I am convinced that just shifting of weights will not assist the wheel with continuous movement, there Must be some additional energy that is captured through.... ie centrifugal or falling. The problem that I have always had is that while a weight is falling it disappears from the wheel. A weight slid horizontally does require less energy than trying to raise one for sure... but Once again, his mastery has evaded my best attempts and I look forward to your insight John.... Carpe Deum my friend

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Johann Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Mystery Solved.

The climatologists and scientists are clamouring for a new way of generating electricity because all the current method (bad pun!) of doing ...