According to Wikipedia a conservative force can be identified by ’the property that the total work done in moving a particle between two points is independent of the path taken. Equally, if a particle travels in a closed loop, the total work done (the sum of the force acting along the path multiplied by the displacement) by a conservative force is zero’.
I have read that definition too many times to count and it has always seemed to me to be misleading. They mention one particle doing a loop, and several particles doing loops, all impossible if the work done equals zero, so no closed loop is possible. But it has always seemed obvious to me that if extra particles are added who do not need to make a loop, but whose sole purpose is to move the original particles away from their mind numbing loop so that they can actually complete a loop because work was done for them, then gravity has done some work on the extra particles resulting in the former particles performing loops.
This does not nullify the original definition of a conservative force, but it does leave the way open to using gravity as an energy source. At the end of the day, we are certain that Bessler’s wheel worked; he said that the weights were the actual perpetual motion; weights fall because gravity makes them; the wheel will turn when out of balance. Therefore I can only assume that the work in rotating the wheel is done by gravity.
If you wish to post a drawing on this blog, I have created a permanent page but you will have to email it to me so I can add it. The email information is there. Click on the ‘submitted Drawings’ link at the the top right side of the column on the right. If interest is scarce I’ll probably remove it eventually.
I have posted a drawing on behalf RAF, but I dont know whether all of it is present, pending confirmation that it is ok.
Link to my granddaughter’s
gofundme site https://www.helpamy.co.uk/
See the latest update. https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-our-amy-to-walk-again