Throughout the many years I’ve been researching the legend of Bessler’s wheel I have accumulated many documents which I was unable include in my biography about him. The first draft of the book was way too long even without the extra stuff, so I’ll try to post some of it here from time to time. Each one is not necessarily connected with any other but some may be of interest. Most are illegible so unless they include drawings I’ll leave them out.
After doing this blog for eleven years and a month it’s sometimes difficult to know what to write so there may be the occasional random content - like this one!
After doing this blog for eleven years and a month it’s sometimes difficult to know what to write so there may be the occasional random content - like this one!
1) I’ve read many books about perpetual motion and I was pleased to discover that one author whose book is called ‘Perpetual Motion; A Continuing Quest’, is commenting here occasionally. We corresponded many years ago and he kindly sent me a copy of his book, way back in 2003. So welcome Richard A. Ford.(RAF)
2) Another thing that has cropped up recently is the question of where did Bessler's death originate? Some thought that I was the source but on March 20th 1992, several years before I began to write my history of Bessler's wheel, a German local newspaper published details about a project to spend money on refurbishing Bessler's ruined windmill, from which they reported he had fallen to his death. They planned to make it into a tourist attraction.
The article appeared in the 'Neue Westfalische, Nr. 68, Freitas, 20, Mars 1992'. Although I think the page in question could be obtained online even now, (was unable to see that particular page even though I found the newspaper in question). Below I have included a very bad photocopy which was sent to me at the time and above it is a photo I took of the windmill from a similar position, so that you can confirm that it is the same building.
The headline in English reads 'Millions for Fairy tale and Legendary Mill'. The article is very long so have only quoted from the relevant text, 'Here originated a two story, half-timbered building with massive stone walls. The roof and interior came to nothing as the builder, Orffyreus fell to his death from the walls.'
In addition to the above, Rupert Gould, whose 1944 book 'Oddities' first informed about Johann Bessler's wheel also described Bessler's fall to his death. He wrote 'Bessler died in 1745, aged sixty-five, when he fell to his death from a four and a half story windmill he was constructing in Fürstenberg'.
'Rupert T. Gould, "Orffyreus's Wheel," in Oddities: A Book of Unexplained Facts, revised ed., (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1944), pp. 89-116. Reprinted by Kessinger Pub Co., 2003, ISBN 978-0-7661-3620-5.'
The windmill restoration was budgeted for and the local authority planned to translate my book into German and place it in the tourist office at Fürstenberg. Unfortunately the restoration and the translation of my book never happened due to “budgetary pressures”. You can see more photos of the old windmill at my web site at www.orffyreus.org
3) During my research I came across a large format book containing among other things photographs of items in the Kassel museum. The creation of the item below was ascribed to Johann Bessler and a date was provided, 1721. This particular device was not something we usually associate with Bessler but given his wide experience and unique number of manufacturing skills it is easy to imagine he was able to produce this device, but whether he also made the beautiful box containing the device is not stated.
The device is called a Hydrostatic Balance and the photo was taken by H.L. at Kassel, Hess, Landesmuseum. The book in which the photo appeared was called Mathematical Instruments 1960, and edited by Henri Michel. I thought its inclusion might be of interest. Bessler has given the impression that he worked on other devices and I assume that with his title of commercial councillor he might have advised or even made various items within the scope of his employment.
4) A slightly oddball character called J.C.F. Von Hatzfeld had offered several designs for perpetual motion machines to both the Royal Society and to Sir Isaac Newton directly. Mostly they ignored him and Newton didn’t even acknowledge the letter although it resides in the records. Von Harzfeld was persistent but he was treated as if he were little more than annoying insect buzzing around the heads of these important people. I thought I’d post one of his designs dated 1725, not that I think it has merit, but you can assume that this topic of conversation was very much in the news at the time. Von Hatzfeld mentioned Orffyreus several times in his previous correspondence which didn’t endear him to his recipients
JC
"A slightly oddball character called J.C.F. Von Hatzfeld had offered several designs for perpetual motion machines to both the Royal Society and to Sir Isaac Newton directly."
ReplyDeletePoor von Hatzfeld sounds like he found out about Bessler's wheels and then lost his marbles trying to figure out how they worked. Most likely he never built anything and only had drawings on paper. Newton and the rest of the Royal Society members would have realized he was a nut case and avoided him. I wouldn't be surprised if he corresponded with Bessler who also ignored him. Bessler's wheels and the fame they brought to him probably triggered a lot of Bessler wannabe's to come forward making all sorts of claims. That shows how powerful having something real that no one else has can be.
The same goes for many others in our era. It is the prototype that will bring you fame and recognition. Ideas are everywhere but that is not gonna be enough.
DeleteTrue. Results always speak louder than words.
DeleteI'm thinking of getting a copy of Ford's book, "Perpetual Motion Mystery: A Continuing Quest" from Amazon. But I discovered that its listing there actually comes with a WARNING by the publisher!
ReplyDelete"WARNING Remember that the materials and methods described here are from another era. Workers were less safety conscious then, and some methods may be downright dangerous. Be careful! Use good solid judgement in your work, and think ahead. Lindsay Publications, Inc. has not tested these methods and materials and does not endorse then. Our job is merely to pass along to you information from another era. Safety is your responsibility."
Looks like if you use anything described in Ford's book and are injured as a result, then the publisher doesn't what you suing them! Now I've got to get a copy to find out why it's so potentially dangerous! Lol!
Before you rush to get your copy, you might want to consider this article, based on Ford's book, that appeared in New Energy Technologies Magazine, Issue #4 (19) 2004:
Deletehttp://www.faraday.ru/net19eng.pdf
The section on Bessler starts on page 6 of the pdf file of the issue. It is so full of factual errors as to be almost laughable. It portrays Bessler as a wandering, troublemaking madman whose only pursuit was achieving pm. How did he get involved with Count Karl? By meeting with him after he wound up in his castle's dungeon! On page 7, right column it says:
"At Cassel, the circulating stories attracted the attention of Karl, the reigning Landgrave [Prince] of Hesse Cassel. Not being able to find work, the mechanic was soon arrested for a disturbance and found himself in the prison at the Ft. Weissenstein of Prince Karl. Today this is a part of the Castle Wilhelmshoehe in the city of Kassel.
Perhaps this was just a ploy by which Prince Karl could meet with the well known inventor."
Bessler did not move to Kassel until after he had a deal made with the count and it wasn't done from a cell in the basement of Weissenstein Castle!
If this is a sample of the accuracy of the writing in Ford's book, I will definitely NOT be getting copy of it!
Anonymous and PROUD of it!
I obtained both of those books, a long time ago. They present a lot of the same information that Collins did. But it's different some how. John Collins, to his credit, had the ability to describe the wheels in such a way as to make them believable. He left no doubt that they were successful. Sam Peppiatt
DeleteFollow up, Maybe the difference is; Collins provided first hand information by the people that were there. For other writers it's all past tense 2nd, 3rd 4th information presented long after the fact and some how has lost credibility-------------- Sam Peppiatt
DeleteThanks Sam. The trouble is that although I tried to use only documents written at the time for evidence, with speculation about the translations, and about what the writers meant, it all gets discussed and may engender further discussion until the facts have sometimes got mixed up with speculation which is repeated until it is potential fact. It’s a bit like Chinese whispers.
DeleteJC
John,
ReplyDeleteI would first like to thank you for gathering so much information and making it easily available, to all who are interested in the wheels of Orffyreus, saving us hundreds, if not thousands of hours research, whether you believe or not is up to the individual.
As you mentioned that you are going through your accumulated documents have you by any chance got an English translation of the full report on the Merseburg wheel published in the Acta Eruditorium that you have mentioned in your book, or know where it could be obtained.
I have copies of the original text plus it’s translations somewhere! Just give me bit of time to find them
DeleteJC
I can point you to a link which gives you the English version.
DeleteHenry Dircks included it in his second volume on the history of PM check out pages from 95
https://archive.org/details/perpetuummobile00dircgoog/page/n128/mode/2up/search/Orffyreus+
JC
Just read in your previous blog that Ken sent you a copy of his book. Think that the time you need to read his book would be better spent completing your wheel. Or do you just want to dream longer about having found the solution? (I am almost 100% sure that you will not read Ken's book completely. It's a torture).
ReplyDeleteHow can you be so sure you know the answer when you don't have a physical model that works? Ken is also under the illusion that he has found the solution. A "decoding" of the clues is no proof that the thing will work. We'd all like to see your results. To read Ken's book and write a review now is insane. It takes weeks, if not months, to fight your way through it, if you even manage to read Ken's fantasies. If your wheel works, that would be proof that Ken's "deciphering" of the portraits is total nonsense. He would have done better to write a novel with Bessler as the main character than this "building instruction".
ovaron
The first several chapters in Ken B's book are easy reads. But around chapter 5 and after that he starts to get into the construction details of Bessler's wheels. Those chapters will most appeal to someone wanting to actually try building a Bessler wheel reproduction and needing some schematics to follow. They are very detailed but that's a good thing for a builder type. After finally explaining how Bessler's giant 12 foot bidirectional wheels worked the remaining chapters deal with the many clues in the two DT portraits which fill the last third of the book.
DeleteWhat's so strange about it all is that he FIRST gives you the measurements of the various parts in the wheel in the earlier chapters and THEN gives you the portrait clues in the later chapters for them. In other words he does not go from the clues to the measurements, but from the measurements to the clues. But, how did he get the measurements unless he knew the clues first?! According to him the clues in the two portraits aren't really intended to tell you how to build the wheel because before you actually have the design Bessler used the clues will be meaningless to you. They are only there to verify that you have the design AFTER you have found it WITHOUT the help of the clues! So how did Ken B find that design?
Basically he tells you that he did it by using about 2000 computer models and simulations. To be able to locate and interpret the clues he had to FIRST find the design which when you think about it required him to cover the same ground Bessler did only by using wm2d models instead of hand built model wheels. It's really a bizarre situation in which the wheel's design, AFTER you finally find it, helps you then find and interpret the clues which then help you verify that you do actually have Bessler's design!
Understanding most of the clues needs you to understand a simple alphanumerical coding system Bessler used with the letters in the words under the two portraits. They are the key to going from the items in the portraits to the measurements of the parts in the wheel. It's difficult to talk about the clues because Ken B has found several dozen of them! You really need to read about them in his book to fully understand them.
I agree that making it through Ken B's book takes some time and effort. But if you want to know details about Bessler's wheels that have been unknown before you will have to make the effort. Think of it this way. The effort you make will only be a tiny fraction of the efforts originally Bessler and three centuries later Ken B had to make to find the details of a working pm wheel design. It took me about a month and a half of part time reading to make it through his book but I reread several of the chapters twice. I think it was worth the effort because it did answer a lot of questions I had about Bessler's wheels that I did not see being answered anywhere else.
Anon 00:15 wrote "According to him the clues in the two portraits aren't really intended to tell you how to build the wheel because before you actually have the design Bessler used the clues will be meaningless to you."
DeleteThis is something that never occurred to me and it explains why the general clues we all know have so far led nowhere. Aside from them not being specific enough Bessler wasn't really interested in telling anyone how to build his wheels using his clues. He only wanted them published so that if some other inventor found the same design Bessler had then Bessler would be able to prove to the world that he had it first. Bessler was only interested in being acknowledged as its original inventor. Despite that he does hint that eventually someone else would find his design.
But if that other inventor did find that design then how would he know it was the same one Bessler had? The only possible way would be if that inventor or someone else found those portrait clues, correctly interpreted them, and then realized they exactly described the parts in that other inventor's wheel. Has Ken B managed to do that? I don't know for sure at this time but I will be buying the download of his volume to try to find out. It's 800 pages? I'd gladly read 8,000 pages if it had Bessler's secret in it! I probably spent ten times that amount of time over the years looking elsewhere for a solution and got nothing back as a result. Maybe this time I'll finally get something for my effort. At least he's given me some hope.
DeleteTo ovaron, I agree so I did not waste much time ploughing through Ken’s book, it really is torture. I skimmed through the 800 plus pages, examined the drawings and rejected them, dismissed the clues as imaginary, and his conclusions as unsubstantiated and the whole towering edifice liable to collapse at numerous points. His need to express his thoughts in excruciating detail is exhausting. There are so many uncorroborated assumptions that one must dismiss the claims utterly. It is a monumental work of fiction.
On the other hand I mean no disrespect to Ken, it is obvious that he is sincere and he has put his heart and soul into this book, and yet it is the equivalent of a literary Victorian folly.
To the anon following ovaron, you wrote “ But if you want to know details about Bessler's wheels that have been unknown before you will have to make the effort”. There is no evidence whatsoever that Ken has provided any information that was previously unknown. He has made numerous surmises with out the slightest evidence, he has provided nothing new in the form of documented evidence.
JC
ovaron, you can rest assured I’m finishing my wheel as quickly as I can, no more distractions!
DeleteJC
John wrote: "There is no evidence whatsoever that Ken has provided any information that was previously unknown. He has made numerous surmises with out the slightest evidence, he has provided nothing new in the form of documented evidence."
DeleteThe problem is that the "documented evidence" that you think is so important has really led us nowhere so far. I don't think Ken B's goal was ever to actually provide any new documented evidence for us. Aside from providing builders with a detailed design to work with, I think his real goal was to take what we do have, mainly the two DT portraits, and then find new clues in them that no one else had noticed before. He does that and devotes the last third of his book to locating and describing about two dozen of these new clues. They tend to be more numerical than graphical which might not appeal to those who spend much time staring at MT drawings looking for a solution. He claims that finally finding a working design (although only in sim form so far) whose parts are exactly described by those new clues he's located in the two portraits proves that they are actually there and real. If it wasn't for that youtube video of his I would tend to dismiss his approach but I can't after seeing the wheel in that video which I have to agree shows a unique design.
"...it is obvious that he is sincere and he has put his heart and soul into this book, and yet it is the equivalent of a literary Victorian folly."
You may find something very similar being said about your wheel and its supporting clues someday if and when you actually reveal them!
Ken’s clues are indeed more numerical than graphical and therefore wide open to conflicting interpretations. But his clues are not self evident, by that I mean that even when he shows them and explains what they mean, there is no way of knowing even why his explanation is correct or how he arrived at his conclusion. He also relies on the self-proclaimed existence of two Gera wheels for which there is no evidence whatsoever and he even gets the size of the actual Gera wheel, in his mind the second one, wrong. It was six feet in diameter not three feet nor was it four and a half feet in diameter. OK, no more about Ken’s book please.
DeleteJC
In the last blog John wrote "Tell Ken I would give a fair review not a nasty one and send him a copy before posting". Also "I have just received a digital copy of Ken’s great work. It’s going to take me a couple of weeks to read it!"
DeleteLol! His "reading" of Ken's book then turned into just quickly skimming it and automatically dismissing everything as "imaginary", "unsubstantiated", "uncorroborated", etc. That is not a "fair review" in any way. It's just a quick dismissal by someone who thinks he already has all the answers so he doesn't really need to see the details of what someone else has to say.
But thank goodness he decided to "not waste much time" with Ken B's book. Without that "distraction" he can now get back to finishing his wheel "as quickly as he can" so he can finally reveal all to us. Lol! Yes, reading something completely as promised before giving an actual objective opinion of it can be so distracting. Good thing he didn't waste much time doing that!
John wrote "He also relies on the self-proclaimed existence of two Gera wheels for which there is no evidence whatsoever and he even gets the size of the actual Gera wheel, in his mind the second one, wrong. It was six feet in diameter not three feet nor was it four and a half feet in diameter."
DeleteKen claims that Bessler's first Gera wheel was the 3 foot diameter tabletop prototype wheel he build there and kept with him as he traveled from town to town until he finally destroyed it after his arrest. He claims that the wheel Bessler displayed on June 6th of 1712 in Gera was actually his SECOND Gera wheel and only 4.5 feet in diameter.
I found this photo of workmen carrying a replica of that second wheel up the stairs to put it on display in the Staadtmusseum in Gera, Germany. Comparing it to the workmen, it looks to be about 4.5 feet in diameter and not 6 feet. I'm sure that the people in the museum must have done enough research to convince themselves that it was only 4.5 feet in diameter and not 6 feet like you think.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B86i0AzIQAE-8ZU.jpg
Here's another photo of the replica of the second Gera wheel on display in the museum. The museum claims it is a "faithful" replica. It appears to be less than 6 feet in diameter compared to the guy in the background on the right who appears to be around 6 feet tall or maybe even taller.
https://www.gera.de/fm/222/IMG_1173-klein.jpg
I even found an interesting German language video of the second Gera wheel on display in the museum which is here:
http://video.telvi.de/videos/121/2015/09/1/57aa049ee070f2057206f208f959e096.mp4
At time 0:47 a visitor, a man probably around 6 feet tall, stands next to the displayed replica wheel and it is definitely not 6 feet in diameter. Keep in mind that the displayed replica wheel is actually on a low platform that raises the bottom of its supporting frame up maybe six inches above the floor which would make it look bigger than it actually is. I think Ken B's stated diameter of 4.5 feet is accurate.
Henry L.
I agree. That replica Gera wheel is definitely not six feet in diameter. But, maybe the museum people got the size of the wheel wrong?
DeleteOn besslerwheel.com's Portal:Chronology page they say about the wheel Bessler displayed in Gera in 1712:
Delete"The machine was in the form of a spinning drum, 2½ Leipzig ells or 5 Leipzig feet in diameter and about 4 Leipzig inches thick (modern measurements: about 4.6 feet or 1.4 metres in diameter and 3.7 inches or 9 centimetres thick)."
Their diameter is much closer to Ken's 4.5 foot figure than it is to John's 6 foot figure. I also go along with Ken's figure.
In Grundlicher Bericht Bessler describes the Gera wheel as being three and a half Leipzig ells in diameter. Grundlicher Bericht uses these words in the original German text "...brittehalv Leipziger Ellen im Diametro un 4 zoll in der Dicte.." which means literally three and a half Leipzig Ells in diameter and 4 zoll thick, a zoll being more or less identical to an inch. A Leipzig ell is 1.858 feet in length so three and a half Leipzig ells is equivalent to about six and a half feet in diameter.
DeleteJC
I did give a fair review of Ken’s book, but I found it too intent in the detail with what I felt was an obsessive need to over explain everything. But when it came to the so-called clues and his interpretation of them I found them unacceptable and I think the vast majority of people would agree with me. If you find them agreeable then please prove me wrong and build the wheel to his design. His design requiring 40 cords was just one example of the over complication of of something which is supposed to be simple.
DeleteJC
I think John must be suffering from some form of amnesia. Here's a link to his OWN blog of September 17th, 2013 where he assures everyone that the Gera wheel was 4.6 feet in diameter!
Deletehttps://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2013/09/besslers-gera-wheel-was-moved-by-modest.html
Maybe seven years from now he'll be back to telling everyone again that it was actually 4.6 feet in diameter! Lol!
Ovaron wrote: “Or do you just want to dream longer about having found the solution?”
DeleteI recognize that. It gives you peace of mind having finally solved it . No need to rush building it. It feels great knowing that you did what no one else succeeded. Until you build it and find out you can start all over again. You have to prove it to yourself first before you know for sure that you really killed it.
And also, knowing the exact outer dimensions of his wheels does not bring you closer to the solution. It is scalable and can have any size you wish.
The initial diameter of the Gera wheel was given wrongly and corrected firstly in the BWForum and then on Orffyre.com. This was due to a mistake in translation.
DeleteJC
I don't think John can really give Ken B or anyone else's research a fair review because he's too wrapped up in his own design and clues to do that. He will just put down anyone else's design that does not agree with his.
DeleteI noticed from that link that anon 18:45 gave that John was pushing his five lever wheel back in 2013 and now seven years later despite no success he's still pushing it. No doubt seven years from now he'll also be pushing it even with no success by then. Most people eventually realize that whipping a dead horse is not going to make it get up. When it's dead that means you need a new horse. I think for many that new horse could just be the design Ken B found in the portraits.
John does not think Ken's wheel is simple enough as Count Karl suggested Bessler's was. But Karl was used to seeing all sorts of complicated clocks and scientific gadgets. Maybe to him a wheel made of wood with eight levers and 40 cords but no gears or pulleys was simple? From that video of Ken B's wheel it looks like only 16 of its 40 cords are really needed to synchronize the lever motions. The other cords only serve to connect springs to levers or the levers to the drum. It might be possible to eliminate them. Bessler credited his work with organs as helping him make his wheels. How many cords in an organ back then? Probably way more than 40. That didn't stop them from building and using them.
“For, in 1712, during his stay at Gera in the Voigtland, he hit upon the genuine Prepondium, and so it was that on the 6th June of that year he set in motion the first model of his Mobile, three and a half Leipzig elles in diameter and four inches in thickness, for the very first timeperformance was authentic.”. JC
DeleteThere's a simple solution that allows KB's 4.5 foot diameter for his "second" Gera or June 6, 1712 Gera wheel to be correct and also for the Gera museum model to be accurate. Simply translate "drittehalv" as "three halves" or 3 x 0.5 which equals 1.5. Since there were so many "ells" of different lengths used all over Europe at the time, assume when Bessler said "Leipziger Ellen" he meant an ell of 36 inches. Multiply that ell by 1.5 to get 1.5 x 36 inches = 54 inches which is equal to 4.5 feet.
DeleteSayer of Sooths
Makes sense to me, SoS. Just look at those workmen in that first photo anon 15:25 above gave a link to struggling to get the four and half foot Gera wheel up those museum steps. It looks like it takes five guys!
Deletehttps://pbs.twimg.com/media/B86i0AzIQAE-8ZU.jpg
Now imagine that it was six and a half feet in diameter and weighed about twice as much because of the bigger drum! It didn't have cloth sides but strips of wood nailed onto the sides. Bessler put that wheel and its supporting framework on some sort of cart to drag it to the public square in Gera for his June 1712 demonstration. I think putting the smaller wheel on a cart would have been a lot easier and more stable than a six foot one. I also go along with it only being four and a half feet in diameter. There's all kinds of confusions in the Bessler writings due to mistranslations, different witnesses reporting different things, etc. The only thing that I think we all agree on is that his smallest wheel was 3 feet in diameter and his largest two were 12 feet. But, most likely, there will also be some who will even argue against those measurements.
to anon 06:52. those five guys are busting to move the demo wheel up the stairs and it's hollow inside. no weights!
Deletejohn wants everyone to think the gera wheel was 6.5 feet across and only 4 inches thick. too wide and too thin imo. probably another mistranslation or misinterpretation like many others. there was wood slats nailed to the ribs of the drum on both sides. if they were 0.25 inch thick that's 0.5 inch for both sides of the drum. if the ribs were in parallel pairs and 0.5 inch thick each that's another 1.0 inch for the pair. that uses up total 1.5 inches of the 4 inches drum thickness to leave 2.5 inches. maybe the clearance on each side of a lever was 0.5 inch so for a lever that's 1.0 inch which only leaves 1.5 inch thickness of a lever. that 1.5 thick lever is supposed to have a weight attached to it and springs and ropes? total bs imo! not enough space inside the drum. i think the 4.5 feet across for drum is good number but make the thickness maybe 6 inches minimum. a 6.5 feet wide drum only 4 inch thick would be too flimsy. one good wind might wreck the whole thing! if it fell off of its cart that would have wrecked it too.
@SoS. I thought you were nuts for suggesting that Bessler used a 36 inch ell until I found this on:
Deletehttp://www.onlineunitconversion.com/ell.English_to_inch.international.U.S.html
where it says:
"The El (or Ell) is a traditional unit of length used primarily for measuring cloth. ... The history of the unit is not clear. Some authorities believe the ell was originally a double forearm length, that is, 2 cubits or 36 inches, the same length as a yard. The ell and the yard do seem to be identified in some medieval documents...This reflects a practice of cloth merchants of holding the cloth at the shoulder with one hand and pulling the piece through with the opposite hand."
Once again, SoS, you make a lot of sense here. Yes, a 36 inch ell IS possible. Keep up the good work!
That settles it for me. Bessler's first Gera wheel was his smallest 3 foot diameter one which he first got working. With that success he was then prompted to make a second larger 4.5 foot diameter one for his first public demonstration which took place outdoors in Gera in June of 1712. That was then followed by the Draschwitz, Merseburg, and Kassel wheels. There's even some evidence he made several other smaller wheels after the Kassel wheel was destroyed but couldn't sell them either. It's all one of the most fascinating parts of history that unfortunately the average person is never taught about in our "educational" system.
Delete@anon 02:17
DeleteYou might add that his second Gera wheel, the 4.5 feet diameter one, was the only one he ever demonstrated out of doors. I think I read that he originally planned to demonstrate the Merseburg wheel at some country fair and it probably would have been placed inside of a large tent to protect it from the weather. He probably changed his mind when he realized what a security risk that would have been. Someone could sneak in at night, cut a hole in the tent material, and then get in and cut another hole in the cloth covering the sides of his wheel to see the mechs in there by lamp light and steal the wheel's secret. They were already starting to get into body snatching in the 18th century and Bessler knew there were people who would steal anything if offered enough money. Even maybe they would tear a lever right out of his wheel's drum and take it to whoever paid them!
John,
ReplyDeleteTruthfully do you still have any doubt as to whether J.E.E.B. was legitimate. The reason I'm asking is because recently for me all the normal bells and whistles have been replaced with, well, BIGGER BELLS and Whistles!
for the "?"
DeleteNo doubts CW, what bells and whistles?
DeleteJC
I came up with a certain design/principle and I'm using Blender just to animate with no real physics built in... and only using common sense. Things that Bessler said about his machine seem to fit very well and additionally a few things also fit that I never thought were clues. Things are egging me on (Bells and Whistles).
DeleteThe problem with animations is, not being simulations, they don't have to obey the laws of physics. You can make any design look like it's a runner with an animation. Then if you sim or build it, you will quickly realize it's just another nonrunner...unless, of course, you just happen to have that one in a billion designs that actually is a runner! That could happen to you as it did to Bessler.
DeleteBut we never hear about the other almost billion who it did not happen for. I often wonder how they ended up. Did they quit before their lifeless decaying bodies were found slumped over their latest nonrunner? Did they commit suicides to end their relentless frustrations? Did they lose their minds and spent the rest of their days in mad houses? We'll never know for sure which is probably a good thing.
Fantastic post John. I really like this type of new info about BW. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteThanks yellow, more to come.
DeleteJC
2 things have always been curious to me while attempting to build a working wheel
ReplyDelete1 - what kind of springs did they use 300 years ago.
2 - how did the organs of that time period work
Everything else has just been trial and error and logical common sense for me
You could read the right side column at
Deletehttps://www.goart.gu.se/research/instruments/north-german-baroque-organ
The northern German organs were played by people such as JS Bach in Bessler’s time. I know the link is not very helpful for your question but it does give an idea of the complexity of the organ.
JC
Thanks John , Its good to be aboard ! Suresh gave my book a fine review several months ago on your blog; he did not remember the title tho. Anyone wanting to judge for themselves go to Alibris Books; they have 6 copies for sale now. It was important to get a Russian source for Bessler's story and Ya Perelman's book Physics for Entertainment (1913 , 1975) gave a different slant. His source was Andrey I. Osterman, German born Russian diplomat who served Peter the Great and who gathered all information he could on Bessler for the Tsar. Thanks John for posting both drawings!!
ReplyDeleteMy pleasure Richard.
DeleteJC
RAF, In your book at the very bottom of page 170, you stated that Bessler's wheel could only be viewed from outside through an open window, and later you stated that the room was dark. That wasn't true was it? I would like to know why, why, did you write that? Seams to me like John Collins is the only person ever to publish the truth about Bessler and his wheels. Sam Peppiatt
DeleteSam. Does RAF give a source for his "information" about any of Bessler's wheels only being viewable from the outside through an open window? RAF was just guessing and guessed wrong. Makes you wonder how much else he guessed wrong about in his 1987 book.
DeleteTime 17:35, No, not specifically; just the usual Reffs. I got the book in about 1987. Every thing else is pretty good. I'm afraid I put way too much value on that one statement. which I regret now. Anyway it did little to instill much faith in Bessler or the wheel(s). When dealing with the unknown it's always very difficult to lean in the right direction. Sam Peppiatt
DeleteSo, am I correct when I say that a gravity powered wheel (DOES NOT) break the laws of physics? There’s many conflicting ideas about this and no one seems to really know....as far as I know.
ReplyDeleteWell, what do you say? Does it or does it not break the laws of physics?
DeleteIt is a flywheel driven by a mechanism. It is a machine. You have to apply the laws of physics to make it work.
Yes, they break all of the laws; all of the laws that are based on Bull Shit, that is. Sam Peppiatt
ReplyDeleteThey do not break Archimedes Law of Levers i.e. Mechanical Advantage x Speed Ratio. And Newton's Laws as he originally defined them. However, a wheel that self starts from a stationary position and inherently accelerates, and then maintains an innate RPM causes problems of explanation for the Physics fraternity. CoE extrapolated from Newton's Laws (after him), and the Laws of Thermodynamics, and Noether's Theorem, assume that symmetry is complete and the Laws can not be violated because of this. The Work Energy Equivalence Principle (WEEP) of Physics says that f x d = energy. And GPE and KE = energy. Therefore f x d can interchange for either GPE or KE (including RKE). But the rub is that if Newton's Laws of Mechanics are complete then how can CoE be violated by a working PM wheel that harnesses conservative gravity force ? The answer is that the wheels were clearly mechanically arranged to be permanently OOB (in a gravity field), so that they must innately turn and keep turning. Their KE build up must be a downstream effect of this special mechanical arrangement of permanent imbalance. The source of 'energy' as yet undefined. Currently no such mechanical arrangement has been proven to exist. If it did it would conform to Newtonian Mechanics. So the answer is that the Laws of Physics must be incomplete and as they stand are both right and also wrong, depending on context and scope of question and answer.
ReplyDelete-fletcher
"The source of 'energy' as yet undefined."
DeleteKen B has no problem defining the source of energy in B's wheels. So far his explanation makes the most sense to me. That wheel he found described by the portrait clues also seems to have no problem keeping its CoG on the descending side of the axle. I just wish it had more torque and power. Right now I don't see any obvious way to make its CoG move farther from the axle center to increase the torque and power. Maybe with future improvements it will be possible.
The source of energy is gravity. Anyone who doubt that will never find a solution.
DeleteKen’s explanation off mass being lost ( or actually transferred into “the” energy ) is hilarious but understandable. After all E=MC^2. But since the gravity field of earth is determined by the mass of the earth, it should be the earth where the mass is taken from and not the wheel. But also this is wrong. Populating the earth with a lot of wheels would make the planet lighter and/or make everything float into space.
Since Einstein we now know that gravity is a geometric structure of space-time. We are not pulled back by earth but we are pushed back by space-time. Therefore the energy is coming from the universe itself. If the energy of the Universe is conserved, which I doubt, then we would not be able to measure that. How would you do that? Even if we would generate a million times the energy we use today with B-Wheels then it would still be negligible compared to the vast amount of energy the Universe holds.
"The source of energy is gravity. Anyone who doubt that will never find a solution."
DeleteNot really. How would you explain a Bessler wheel working if it was placed in a centrifuge on Earth or a rotating space station out in space away from any solar systems? No, the energy his wheels put out came just from the mass of their weights and levers like Ken says. There's nowhere else it could come from. Gravity helps the process but it is not critical to it taking place. It might even be possible to make a Bessler wheel that uses electric or magnetic force to enable the process instead of gravity. Maybe even have long springs pulling down on the weights so a wheel could run out in space and without a space station having to rotate!
If the gravity field is stronger (centrifuge) it would turn faster. On the moon it would turn 6 times slower. I agree that you can do the same trick with a magnetic field or electric field. They are all energy fields. You need gravity to establish push and pull on the weights. A besslerwheel in space will not work.
DeleteRethinking this, I wonder if the wheel would work in a centrifuge or rotating space station (artificial gravity field) because of the corioliseffect which will be considerable. For a besslerwheel on earth (or any planet) the effect will be negligible because the size of the wheel will be negligible compared to the size of the planet.
DeleteWhoa! 😮
ReplyDeleteOk, well that answers that. Now, I have just one more question: suppose only two weights are needed for the gravity wheel. If you can keep all the weight to one side of the wheel, will it continuously speed up until it flies apart? Could we get a couple thousand rpm’s out of it without it destroying it self?
As I see it, where there’s a wheel, there’s a way!
Perpetualman, I think that the answer has to be no. The speed of the wheel does not accumulate. I'm sure others are much smarter than me. But this is the way I think of it: The weights always start over at 12:00. That is to say, they always start or restart there fall with every revolution of the wheel. They don't keep free falling. So the most speed they can ever gain is falling from 12:00 to 6:00 what ever that distance might be. Sam Peppiatt
ReplyDeleteIf you can maintain the permanent imbalance conditions with just two weights, so that the two weights plus ancillary mechanics CoM is to one side of the axle, then it will accelerate at a rate proportional to the horizontal System CoM placement (horizontal) from axle. The wheel will then eventually reach and maintain a certain RPM depending on many factors such as wheel diameter etc. Other than 'size' related issues other factors come into play to limit top end RPM. They would be the amount of frictions present, including exposure to air friction (drag), and another factor latency. Latency is the fact that each weight must change radius at some time or another in a revolution, in and out for example. This takes time because that weight must accelerate and then be decelerated. Sometimes whilst in transition its torque contribution can be MIA of even counter productive. So larger diameter wheels with greater weight travel distances will have longer (time) transitioning phases. And this is like putting a break on the system limiting its top end speed capability. Many things can be improved with good and clever engineering to mitigate these things. But not eliminate them entirely. IMO.
ReplyDelete-f
Isn't Fletcher amazing!! Sorry Fletch; a gravity wheel is just a simple lever. You are over thinking it. Forget the scientists. If they tried to figure out how the wheel worked, instead of all the ways to prevent it from working; it would be done by now. Sam Peppiatt
ReplyDelete"...a gravity wheel is just a simple lever."
DeleteBut Bessler tells us that his wheels were a collection of interconnected levers not just a single lever. I think it will eventually be accepted as 8 levers because with less you probably can't keep the center of gravity of the weights on the descending side of the axle. That center must not be allowed to go under the axle during rotation or the wheel will have no torque then. Figure out how to do that and you will solve the Bessler wheel!
It is a system of connected pendulums.
DeleteYou can simplify it by considering it as a single pendulum.
Time 04:50
ReplyDeleteHow am I going to get out of this------------try to think of the wheel it's self as a lever. A first class lever. The axle is the fulcrum (F), the weights coming up are on the short end of the lever, which is the resistance (R), the weights going down are on the long end of the lever called the effort (E). The weights on the down side fall farther and faster, therefor they have more energy than the weights coming up on the short end of the lever. It's not complicated----------------------- Sam Peppiatt
Sam, what you said is Ken B's explanation in a nutshell. Yes, the descending side weights always lose GPE faster than the ascending side ones gain GPE with the net loss going to accelerate the whole wheel or to run attached machinery. No problem understanding that. The problem is maintaining the overbalance of your weights and levers as the wheel turns. When the wheel is stationary their CoG has to be on the descending side of the axle so the wheel will self start. When the wheel starts to turn the levers and their end weights have to then immediately and automatically shift around so as to always keep their CoG on the descending side of the axle. That's the tricky part that stopped everyone but Bessler. The levers and their end weights have to be very carefully counter balanced against each other and in a very delicate counter balance that shifts itself to raise the CoG just as soon as the wheel starts to turn and tries to lower it. You can't have eight independent levers doing that or a design using them would have been found long ago. The levers have to be connected together in some way so that they always work together to keep shifting their CoG as the wheel turns.
DeleteNo, it is not Ken B's explanation in a nutshell.
DeleteAnonymous 4 March 2020 at 02:50 wrote (previous blog)...
Here's a quote from pages 315 to 316 of AP that you may find of interest:
The design has, in fact, progressed to the point where there is nothing supercritical about the exact disposition of the weights...an ounce more or less, here or there, makes not a scrap of difference to the Wheel which will hold its course serenely without “turning a hair”.
3. the latter design is forgiving and tolerant of lesser workmanship.
-----
If the design would be critical, it would probably not be able to do any work.
Time 7:12, No, you are wrong. Sure that's what has to happen, but Ken's wheel isn't going to do that; if you will forgive me for saying so. Sam Peppiatt
DeleteOn the up-side, the weights are in free fall. In other words, weightless. On the down-side the weights are falling on the drum and driving it.
ReplyDeleteMarinus, How can they be free falling if they are going up? They still have weight-----------it's just that they are on the short or shorter end of the lever and are being lifted upward. It's the difference in mechanical advantage of the down side over the up side-----------------Sam Peppiatt (FWEIW)
DeleteIt is a fact that the weights(parts) are enclosed in cases (Das Triumphirende, pp 16-32).
DeleteIt is my guess that on the up-side of the wheel the weight is falling back in this case. In other words it is falling in free space and does not burden the drum. The drum is gently capturing the weight at the moment the velocity of the weight is 0.
On the down-side of the wheel again the weight will fall in this case adding extra momentum to the momentum it already had (the velocity of the drum). But now it is not gently captured by the drum but smashed/hammered at the edge of the case. Transferring (part of) its energy to the drum which will increase in velocity.
At a certain speed of the wheel the “system” will reach an equilibrium where the total mass of the wheel will be completely on the down-side of the wheel.
I am not sure if there will be a lever in the traditional way. But I do agree with you that the complete wheel will act as a lever.
Marinus I disagree but, don't know if I'm right. However, I like the way you said that,"the complete wheel acts as a lever". I wish I had thought of that, Sam
DeleteWell, you said to Fletcher; " a gravity wheel is just a simple lever". Which is almost the same. You are one of just only a few that I fear in this quest. ;)
DeleteI have a question for you Sam. If I have a simple pendulum that starts at 12:01. How far will it swing?
Marinus wrote: "It is my guess that on the up-side of the wheel the weight is falling back in this case. In other words it is falling in free space and does not burden the drum. The drum is gently capturing the weight at the moment the velocity of the weight is 0."
DeleteThe wheel will only accelerate during the brief time that the up-side weight is falling. As soon as the drum hits it all of the extra kinetic energy the wheel gained will be lost as it then accelerates the stationary weight to bring it up to speed with the wheel again. This approach will not work. Keep guessing!
No Marinus, I don't think you have too much to worry about. That's a good question. They go around and around in a circle but don't rotate. I think there velocity is changing every 90 degrees of rotation. Increasing in one direction and decreasing in the other. Anyway the effect of centrifugal force is different. Maybe Fletcher could answer that question he if he is about. If, I give my wheel a big spin they swing out about 45 degrees on both sides. The trick is to get them to swing out on the down side and in on the up side. And; they have to hold the out position for about 45 degrees. This problem I have solved, by using a one-way clutch. But I sill haven't found a good way to swing them out. But not for the lack of trying. Sam Peppiatt
DeleteThe pendulum will swing to 11:59. You only need a little energy to push it over the axis. That could be provided with a flywheel (the drum). It is the timing that is important. Not the weight or leverage.
DeleteI think I misunderstood your question, Sam
DeleteMarinus is right... the outer size of the wheel can be any size and it is not the deciding factor... what matters is the arrangement of the inner parts which is critical...
ReplyDeleteAnother point making the rounds is that when someone comes up with a working Wheel how do you know that it is the genuine bessler design...well, since there is only one design that can work it has got to be bessler's...also, the clues in the poem would match...
The core idea is one only and it is very simple yet we don't really get to know it... because, it is not employed or used normally anywhere... once you hit upon this idea you will be pretty sure that it is the one even before the build... this is a fact despite most everyone here insisting on seeing a working model... there is always the risk of leaking the secret once you have a running model...
Marinus is right again... the upward weights have a free fall and they become weightless during upward movement and the downfalling weights, from 12 to 6 o clock, drive the wheel powered by gravity...
JC sir is right... there is no point in going through the volumous book written by Ken...it is not going to help anyone...We know this from interaction with Ken so far...
Poor Ken...he will never come to terms...he has worked very hard but we aren't benefitted by his lengthy sermons... rather there is always the chance we may be misguided...
Sorry Ken...no illfeelings...
unlike john maybe you should read ken's book so you will actually know what you are talking about?
DeleteActually I read Ken’s book albeit speed reading, but when you come the portrait clues, his finds are, in all honesty, unbelievable. He tells us what each means, but he does not say how he arrives at the meanings. He does not say why something he thinks looks like a mouse means this that or the other. The detailed calculations are meaningless.
DeleteBut there is one more thing, I have found and deciphered numerous real clues and they are clear and unambiguous.
JC
"I have found and deciphered numerous real clues and they are clear and unambiguous."
DeleteSo when the hell are we going to see them??? Your unrevealed clues are really just as meaningless to everyone here now as your claim KB's portrait clues are meaningless to you! Only after your clues are finally revealed will they possibly become meaningful to anyone else. Also only after someone sees KB's portrait clues in his book will they possibly become meaningless to him. Just because you believe something is meaningful or meaningless does not mean every one else will agree with you. Some will and some won't and you can only hope that the majority will agree with you. Right now I think the majority here think your five mech wheel is total nonsense. So the "clear and unambiguous" clues you have to support it had better really be good ones! Some here may think you don't dare reveal them because you are not really that confident that they are as "clear and unambiguous" as you claim. It is up to YOU to prove that they are. So far you've proven nothing to anybody here!
I’ve said that as soon as I’ve finished my wheel I’ll share everything, and I will.
DeleteKen’s portrait clues are not just meaningless to me they are also meaningless to the vast majority of people who try to consider them. Mine will be immediately understandable and accepted and Ken’s will be blown out the water. 😀. JC
JC
"Ken’s portrait clues are not just meaningless to me they are also meaningless to the vast majority of people who try to consider them."
DeleteOther than you, most of the others here who have actually read Ken B's book and mentioned it have praised his effort and the wheel design it reveals. But, then again, unlike you, they are not trying to put down and reduce interest in his rival wheel design. Could that be due to what he's found being much different from what you claim you have found elsewhere but continue to hide from everyone? Most here see your skim read "book review" of his work as nothing more than an expression of your enormous envy of someone who took the subject more seriously than you and then beat you in the race to find the secret of Bessler's wheels.
If those DT portrait clues Ken found are meaningless as John says, then it would be impossible for them to describe a real world wheel that actually works. However, if a real world wheel described by the clues does works, then that would virtually guarantee that his portrait clues are valid because the chance of random nonsense describing something that works in the real world is virtually zero.
DeleteI think it's still way too early to decide whether his portrait clues are meaningless or not. Ken obviously believes they are real or he wouldn't have written so much about them in his book. If he proves to be right, he will be hailed as a genius. If he's wrong, then he may at least be credited with having made a maximum effort to solve the Bessler wheel mystery and that could then inspire others to take up where he left off.
Whether right or wrong, liked or disliked, thought to be humble or narcissistic, he's now part of the colorful history of those "seekers after perpetual motion" who Leonardo da Vinci thought were only wasting their time with their efforts. An opinion he formed after wasting much of his own time with it!
"... because the chance of random nonsense describing something that works in the real world is virtually zero."
DeleteThe same can be said of JC's wheel and its clues. If it works, then his clues must be real and if it doesn't, then they probably are only a product of his imagination. Time will tell what the situation is for both of them. Unlike KB, though, JC won't have to face that if he never releases any information about his wheel and the clues for it. Many here are convinced that is exactly what will happen.
What if the weights are in a constant imbalance during every inch of the wheels rotation, from 12 o’clock to
ReplyDelete12 o’clock? Can this be done, given the current state of our imperfect human wisdom?
I think it is HIGHLY possible!
Sure. Why not? Not just possible but, it has to be, for it to work. Sam Peppiatt
DeleteI am gradually starting to get bothered by the anon's that question John's integrity.
ReplyDeleteAnon 11 March 2020 at 12:38 wrote: “john wants everyone to think the gera wheel was 6.5 feet across and only 4 inches thick.”[sic]
John only wants everyone to believe that more than 300 years ago there was someone who did the impossible that is still not explained. He gathered all the info he could get his hands on, translated and published it. If there are any error’s, so be it. He did a tremendous job and we should all be praising him for that (fortunately most of us do).
Now, I also do not agree with his theory of five mechanism’s and the way he derived that. But he is still trying to prove he is right. Unlike Ken B and some others. We should give him all the time he needs to do that.
I hope when he finishes his wheel, which will not work, he will leave his pentagram and starts anew with a blanc page. He told us he would publish his results. But if it is not working it will be meaningless/useless just like Ken’s recent book. If John decides that his pentagram still has potential then it would be stupid to publish (all) his findings because he does not want to give away the secret. This, of course, is very understandable. I would not do that either.
John is not fooling us. Unfortunately, he is fooling himself. I hope that in time he will understand. It’s better to turn around halfway, than to get lost completely.
Thank you Marinus. I remain confident that my wheel will work.
DeleteJC
I Know. When the time is right, I will tell you why I am confident that it won't.
DeleteHere again Marinus is very much right...Ken too is right... because, whoever knows the secret would simply go ecstasy... not just feel confident...
DeleteFrom all the interactions with JC sir we have had so far we can comfortably conclude that it won't be any different from what Ken has come up with... of course not that silly as that of Ken's...
Unless and until the solution matches with all the clues proposed in bessler's poem one can rest assured that it is another non-runner...
"Dog wags it's tail"... very simple but try matching it your prototype...
Bessler was always too worried in safeguarding the secret...it can be stolen in one give away glance...
Five mechanisms...I am not for it... Ken is very much right... people are too worried to talk in open... you must always be open to all criticism... bessler faced it despite having the real secret...
I want to be fair to one and all... that's all... not to be taken as demeanor...
The poem's clues are too good but if we can't relate to them then it is a certain wrong track...
JC sir made it clear just very recently when questioned about children playing among pillars he stated that it would become clear when the secret is known... this clearly indicates that the secret is not known yet...
"From all the interactions with JC sir we have had so far we can comfortably conclude that it won't be any different from what Ken has come up with... "
DeleteI think both John and Ken would strongly disagree with you about that!
Right;give it a rest-----------------Sam
ReplyDeleteHi john,
ReplyDeleteYou believe Bessler’s wheel used 5 mechanisms per compartment. Does your wheel use five mechanisms for each compartment and if so, are those mechanisms really complicated to make?
I have always said that Bessler’s wheel had five mechanisms. They are easy to understand but no so easy for me to make, but I’m getting there.
DeleteJC
Why don’t you have someone help you make those parts?
ReplyDeleteBecause I can do it myself and because I want to. JC
DeleteLol!
DeleteEveryone here should always keep Mr. Lepard Spot's 2029 Prophecy (actually more like a curse!) in mind as they read John's sporadic pronouncements of how "close" he's getting to "finishing" his wheel, how much "progress" he's making, and how he "can't wait" to "reveal all". That prophecy says that no matter what John does, says, or promises, he will NEVER reveal anything in detail about what he CLAIMS he's working on here.
The prophecy also assures us that if he's still alive and this blog is being kept up by the year 2029, then, while the people posting here will all be different except for him, the topics discussed will just be rehashed material from the past in different words and John will still be telling everyone that he's "making progress" with his five lever mechanism wheel and will "soon" be revealing all "whether it works or not".
According to Mr. Lepard Spots the only real work that John does is coming up with reasonable sounding "explanations" as to why he can't quite "reveal all" yet. IIRC, MLS even suggested that John doesn't really have a current wheel he's working on, only some hole ridden wooden disc failures from the past gathering dust in a corner of a storage space somewhere at his residence. It's been a year now since Mr. Lepard Spots delivered his awesome prophecy and it's STILL holding true.
Nine more years to go! Lol!
After 300 years it would seam that, Bessler's enemies, (and John's too) are alive and well!! Sam Peppiatt
Delete@Sam
ReplyDeleteJohn keeps telling everyone that he's going to reveal all whether it works or not. Fine. He's been working on his five mech wheel now from at least 2013 and it still does not work and probably never will. Everyone here except him for some reason realizes that. It's time to finally reveal it.
If he can't get it to work it could be either completely unworkable or it is workable but his build is just too crude or sloppy for its low torque to overcome all of the friction and other obstructions in it. Revealing everything now will allow the many here who use sim software to make models of the design he thinks his clues describe and then see if there is any way it can be made to work. That would be really good for him if they did and a valid sim showed it could be made to work whether he actually "finishes" his own wheel or not. If nothing can be done to make it work, then it's time for him to bury the whole thing and either make a fresh start with another approach or finally retire as gracefully as possible.
Constantly maintaining the pretense that he's "making progress" and will "reveal all soon" is really starting to sound pathetic and I think those here who like him don't want to tell him that for fear of offending or embarrassing him. But, it's the sad truth. Maybe he's afraid to reveal all because, if it proves through simming to be just another hopeless nonrunner, then he would be forced to admit he was only seeing things when he found his "clues" and have to find a new approach. Either that or just call it quits like so many before him were eventually forced to do. It is painful to have to admit failure and move on, but those who find the courage to do so often later wish that they had done it sooner.
I agree. But who are we to judge JC. What did we achieved so far. Nothing. Does he not have the freedom to chase his own ideas. He is confident and full of reliance that his solution will work. It is true that he is telling us for years that he is close to a solution and that he will share it in time. He is eager to do that but it is hard, very hard. You can't blame him for whisful thinking. If you are tired waiting for his solution, why don't you try it yourself. And if you don't believe it is possible at all, then what are you doing here.
DeleteThe whole prophecy of Mr. Lepard Spots is a farce of someone who probably had nothing else useful to do.
Yet, so far MLS has been right 100% of the time.
DeleteWhen he was here last year he said he had finally given up chasing pm after decades and was looking forward to retiring and getting away from it all. He started to post links to strange video gifs as a way of expressing his disgust with the subject. He could barely write understandable English and considered JC to be a big phony and a scammer. He really annoyed JC and his fans who managed to finally hound him off of the blog. He mentioned that he needed to get two artificial knee joints to replace his own that had finally worn out. Before leaving he delivered his scary 2029 prophecy and some here even wished him the best. He was probably the weirdest character who ever showed up here or ever will.
Time 01:51, I just don't think it's right that you should keep blaming John Collins for your unhappiness or problems or what ever "F" is that's bothering you-------------Sam
Delete@Marinus
DeleteHe was a previously anonymous poster who only started calling himself "Mr. Lepard Spots" on June 6th of 2019 when his prediction made months earlier that John would not reveal anything came true. He apparently did not know how to spell "leopard" correctly and his pseudonym was inspired by his nickname for John which was the "old lepard" who he compared to a tired old leopard who could not change his spots by which he meant being unable to finally reveal what he was working on.
He posted links to what he called his "loopy vids" that were all short gifs and even made up little stories to go along with them. Here's the one that he thought depicted what the search for pm was like:
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/CalculatingTastyDeermouse-size_restricted.gif
He had a very pessimistic view of the search for pm and those who he considered delusional enough to still continue with it. His advice to them was to quit as soon as possible to cut their losses like he was doing! His comments were difficult to read, but very amusing. He even started to get some fans around here before he departed.
On a bizarro scale of 0 to 10, he was about a 73! Lol!
I have seen his posts and loopy vid's. The vid's where sometimes amusing but I found it very cheap to make fun of someone who make himself vulnerable by just being honest. Let him wallow and drown in his own misfortune.
Delete"Let him wallow and drown in his own misfortune."
DeleteHe didn't seem too upset about leaving pm research or this blog. In fact, he seemed relieved and encouraged others to follow him. He was bitter because all of his work over the decades had led to nothing. He had medical problems and, fawk, he could be dead by now. I respect him for "just being honest" although his honesty was depressing to those here who hadn't had his quantity of failures. One or two failed attempts is one thing, but one or two dozen failed attempts is something else. Too many failures at anything in life can make one very bitter and cynical. That's one of the biggest risks for the long term pm chaser that is rarely discussed.
And then there are those like JC who show more persistence than most. He has already done much for researching and promoting the Bessler Legend. It would be some sort of justice for him to also find the clues that lead to B's. solution, and then produce a working wheel. In the mean time we each have a choice. Park the brain and wait for the likes of JC and Oystein to tow us along in their wake, or show resilience and forge on ourselves.
ReplyDelete-fletcher
Thanks fletcher. I know how irritating it is for people to read that someone (me 🤔) writes so often that they know Bessler’s secret and then nothing is published. But it will be ready soon. JC
Delete"But it will be ready soon."
DeleteDoes "soon" mean like in THIS year?
Yes! JC
Delete@anon 10:42
DeleteLol! John knows that by next month everyone will have forgotten about his promise to you today to reveal all before the end of THIS year. However, he also knows that "Bessler Day" or June 6th is rapidly approaching and he will be under increasing pressure to make that "soon" occur on or before that special date. If he doesn't reveal anything by that date, then we probably won't see anything for the rest of this year. It will just turn into a repeat of last year as we see the mr. lepard spots 2029 prophecy continuing to accurately predict all of his actions.
Sorry. Above was meant to be @anon 13:04 not @anon 10:42. My bad.
DeleteI have grown accustomed to the frequent sarcastic responses to my comments in which in say that I will share what I know when my wheel works, or fails, ASAP. My skin has grown thicker and the textual sticks and stones do not hurt me because I know that I shall have the last laugh.
DeleteJC
As they say "He who laughs last laughs loudest!" We eagerly await your last and loudest laugh, John.
DeleteHello John, How many besides Fletcher on your blog do simulations? Hello Fletcher, My Engineering Professor here says to use SAM the Ultimate Mechanism Designer Software which does not need CAD Drawings!!! Would you comment on this? Thanks, RAF
ReplyDeleteI have never used sim. software but I would like to give it a try. I expect it to have a steep learning curve but I am willing to put in the effort. I do not want to spent money on it and wm2d is not free. I found Algodoo which looks nice but have not tried it yet. I too am interested in what other people use/think. Maybe a nice topic for a future blog John.
DeleteHi Richard I’m not the right one to ask about sims. I’ve never used them and at my age it would be too steep a learning curve. Fletcher knows about sims..
DeleteJC
Ken B says that he used wm2d for over a decade before he finally found what he's convinced is Bessler's secret wheel mechanics and that without it that never would have happened. It's the only sim program he recommends for OOB wheel research.
DeleteHenry L.
Does anyone know (RAJ)? He’s had several posts on overunity.com I read that he was really close to solving the gravity wheel mystery.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I believe that someone, weather on this forum or another, or somewhere out there on this beautiful blue planet has the answer. Who knows, it could be me?
The way I see it, “If you can conceive it and believe it, you can achieve it! Think about Muhammed Ali; when he was at the peak of his career, he kept telling himself that, (I am the greatest)! And you know what? He believed that he was the greatest. That’s why he won a lot.
I truly believe that I can build a working model of a gravity powered wheel. I have conceived it, and I believe it, therefore, the only thing left for me to do is.....Achieve it.
Ok, enough about me, let’s hear about your hopes and dreams!
Hi RAFORD and Marinus. Like all things you can get the Lada or the Rolls Royce in sims. I was fortunate many years ago to have a friend here where I live also interested in Bessler's wheel. His job at the time was to support WM out in the work place i.e. commercially. He introduced me to it when I was increasingly frustrated at how slow it was to fabricate real builds and then have to tweak them or start again. He also supported SolidWorks Cosmos, another commercially available kinematic sim program, but I never learned it. Anyways, using WM sent me into Warp Drive compared to what I was able to do with a white board only (which I still use) in terms of turning over ideas quickly. To make a short story long there are cracked versions of old WM programs to be found on the net with a bit of digging and perseverance. They have the activation key etc. Or you can get the latest WM program etc from a supplier with bells and whistles. You have to do the sums vs effort. Interactive Physics is the same program repackaged afaik, but a lot cheaper. Or you can get a monthly license etc. As far as Algodoo (Phun) is concerned I wouldn't touch it. I tried it a couple of times as a cross check to WM and it gave false positives after false positives. I wasn't an expert user of the program so that may not be a fair assessment. I found it hard to use by comparison to WM, by a country mile. You can be up and running with WM in an hour and the more practice you put in the better and quicker you get. And there is a tech support forum on BW.com where you can get help and ideas from other users to cut down learning time and give you confidence. Basically it will transform how you explore an idea and plan a build, not to mention that your knowledge of Physics goes thru the roof because you are forced to think and plan in those terms. There is no button that sprinkles fairy dust Physics ;7)
ReplyDeleteThis site has a free download of a cracked full version of WM2D for free. Beware because it might contain some malware that you don't want on your hard drive. After downloading, but BEFORE installing, scan the file with your anti-virus software to make sure it's clean:
ReplyDeletehttps://gist.github.com/anonymous/c980d4bd729c2a9b7126cdff897a5805#file-working-model-2d-full-md
Can a simulator guarantee, 100%, that a gravity won’t work?
ReplyDeleteSimulations cannot guarantee anything 100%. But, if a sim says your wheel is a nonrunner, then it probably is if your sim was very carefully made. Otoh, if it says it's a runner, then it probably is if your sim was very carefully made. You really need to work with sim software for a couple of months before you will know exactly what goes into making a "very carefully made" sim.
DeleteTo have the best assurance you have something real, you need to a build a physical wheel model and test it. But even then you might have a good design for a runner that just does not run because you did not build it carefully enough. That sounds like it could be JC's problem. The only 100% guarantee that you have a runner is if you have a physical wheel model sitting on your shop table in front of you and it's been spinning away for at least a quarter of an hour.
The problem is that every physical wheel model someone makes in his shop can take weeks or months of part time effort. Meanwhile someone making sims on his laptop can make and test a dozen or more different wheel designs in that same amount of time. Who do you think has the greatest chance of finding a working wheel design first?
Time 04:52 It's been said, that the hands are the cutting edge of the brain. My concern is that simulations will tend to circumvent the use of the hands. So I'm afraid that the dumb ass, (like me), could still have the better chance-------------Sam Peppiatt
DeleteWell, I think I have a really good chance of making the first true gravity wheel. But, I’m not going to blow the trumpets just Yet.
ReplyDelete@Perpetualman
DeleteWe thought that Bessler made the "first true gravity wheel"! You must have meant that you will make the "second true gravity wheel".
Actually it will be the fifth wheel. That would be the title of my book in which I would reveal the design. But maybe I'm too late. Go for it!
DeleteKen B claims Bessler may have built as many as seven wheels and almost built an eight one but couldn't raise the money for it. If the Asa Jackson wheel from the 1860's was real, then that means that Perpetualman would have the "ninth true gravity wheel" since Bessler.
DeleteThere could also be dozens of other OOB wheels between the birth of Jesus and Bessler that were successful but lost for one reason or another. Maybe that Library of Alexander that got accidentally set on fire in 48 BC when the Egyptian navy was attacking Julius Caesar in that port city contained scrolls showing ancient working gravity wheels built by the Greeks and others that all got lost in the flames?
I think inventor types were trying to make working OOB wheels since the Greeks first put an axle through a wheel's center and used it on the front of a cart to make a sort of wheelbarrow out of it. As their wheels became better mounted and more carefully balanced, they began to wonder if there was any mechanical way to keep a wheel permanently out of balance so it would keep rotating. Every once in a great while an inventor would be successful and then he had something very rare that some rich guy would pay a small fortune for to have in his private collection. Maybe they were all variations of Bessler's later design (or actually Bessler's later design was just a variation of theirs although he did not realize it)? We'll never know for sure without some incredible future archaeological discovery. Anyone finding one of them hidden away in a cave somewhere that is genuine can name his own price for it. Bidding starts at $1 billion US dollars!
Henry L.
My question is can you make an OOB wheel without having springs and cords in it. Can it just be made using levers and weights? I know those rolling metal ball type wheels never work and they don't have the springs or cords in them but can you just use levers with weights at their ends and have it work or do you have to have the springs and cords too?
ReplyDeleteFWEIW Time 12:37, Yes. The basic *Idea* of it; if I might quote Marinus, is " the complete wheel acts as one single lever", one continuously revolving lever. The weights on the down side lift the weights back up, on the up side. An OOB wheel is just a simple lever, Sam Peppiatt
DeleteIf one lever can not raise more ( +GPE ) than is lowered ( -GPE ), then a complete wheel acting as single lever can not also!
DeleteRight! But if all the levers are just a little overbalanced, then during revolution it will become worse and worse. In the end, the weights on one side (up) will “fly”.
DeleteTime 23:11, I'm afraid I'm not explaining it very good. Perhaps I should not have said a single lever. First off, the weights need to be pendulums, OK? It seams so simple to me. I just don't understand why you can't grasp it. I think I should quit trying to explain it. Sam Peppiatt
Delete@anon 12:37
DeleteAll that really counts is keeping the cog of your wheel's weights on the descending side while the wheel turns. HOW you do it is irrelevant. Just do it. If Ken B is right about how Bessler did it, then the cords and springs are critical because they are needed to counterbalance the levers against each other and coordinate their swinging motions as a drum turns. But, there are probably many other ways to counterbalance two or more levers against each other and coordinate any motions they have to have as the wheel turns to keep their cog on the descending side. The question is can this be done simpler than Bessler may have done it. It's possible, imo, and we just have to keep searching for such methods.
Here's an OOB wheel that Leonardo Davinci came up with:
https://www.psiram.com/en/images/8/80/Pmleonardodavinci.jpg
No, it didn't work.
Here's a computer model of another pm wheel Davinci came up with that uses the rolling ball weights in a sort of repeating clover leaf pattern of channels. The center of gravity of its balls is actually right under the center of the axle and it is only the oscillation of the model that occasionally makes one of the balls roll to one side and produce a little rotation. This is the best he could do which shows how really difficult it can be.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWysXWPZDSs
Hello Fletcher, Would you comment on SAM the Ultimate Mechanism Designer Software ? Does not need CAD drawings!! Can you do a simulation on my 2 drawings posted on John's blog space ? Have you banished those gremlins yet? Thanks, Richard
ReplyDeleteI am not familiar with SAM. So I had a quick peek at some You Tube video tutorials. It looks to me like overkill for designing wheels with moving parts (that have area/volume) where mass, elasticity, and inertia etc are important. WM looks a far better product for wheel design imo. You don't need Cad drawing either, just start building and connecting items etc. Plenty of tutorials. Yes, I reinstalled and got rid off most of the gremlins, and found a workaround for one visual one that was bothering me. So operational again. I can't see the drawings on John's blog as others have commented on. As I said to you earlier I suggest you start a Topic on Besslerwheel.com and post them up there so that all interested can comment etc. Or build a sim if inclined and post it up there, or at least a picture of it. My other suggestion to you is to download WM (see a previous post above) and start learning the program. That way you can build your own sims of your ideas. You can also ask for help at BW.com if and when you get stuck etc. This blog site is not great for sharing build ideas where pictures are required within the thread, imo.
Delete-f
My apologies people. I didn’t take into consideration all the gravity wheels that have been around or invented over the centuries.
ReplyDeleteI just ordered some parts yesterday 3/12/2020, and I await for their arrival sometime this week. I’ve been working on a project for a while now, And hope to get it finished sometime between now and this summer.
The rotating frame work is all ready to go. I actually made the rotating framework many years ago because I was working on an over balanced wheel back then, but it was more or less based on the roberval balance system. This time however, it’s going to be based on the same principle but, the weights will be continuously off balance through every inch of the rotation process.
I’m not saying that this new way of doing it is going to work, but I will never know until I build it and test it. And then if it works, then I will blow the trumpets! But not too loud because the wife is still sleeping.
If its working she probably will forgive you. Hit that vuvuzela.
Deleteare you sure----------Sam
DeleteSure! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lkq20hzAgk
DeleteSounds good to me----------may I suggest McMaster-Carr for parts, Sam
ReplyDeleteThanks Sam, I’ll look into it right now!
DeleteRAF...hi,.
ReplyDeleteWay back in the nineties your book was like a Bible to me...I graduated from it...it was a great source of inspiration to me...
But at the end your hypothesis of the wheel was also a good attempt...
Please note, when it comes to the original internal mechanism, many go astray...
The bessler's actual internal design is unique... only one of its kind available...I mean that there is only one way you can achieve the movement...it can be only attained through mental efforts... so, the attempts through simulation won't Help...
Both your drawings in this blog are not the right ones...I learnt it the hard way...
Also, the poem helps a lot... the real design is much simpler... Fortunately, I was able to form a reasonably good idea of this great bessler mechanism... but, not so mechanically sound to create a model...
The main problem in this great sojourn is forming the core idea which is the main obstruction... and I have overcome this... believe it or not...it matches with all the clues in the poem...
Your book was a great help... but I had to put much more efforts to understand the secret...I am struck in one place...I have failed to find a good sincere partner to share and build the prototype...I know a bit of numerology... person to to person relationship is different... that is why you find many marital discords... compatibility problems exists...I checked with JC sir's photo if my association with him can succeed... but it was revealed that he is more clever than me... so I dropped the matter...
The secret formula of BW and also relationship finder is known to me...I can predict how a relationship can fare just by seeing photo...
Having the secret in my mind I am running from pillar to post...if the right person joins me I can guarantee the wheel within a week...
Please note that I learnt a lot from your book... I have become your fan...I like your style of writing...If you are really interested we can check the possibility...I also find in Ken a great possibility but he often becomes silly and childlike... He appears here in different forms like Henry, SOS, Anon, etc...
Finally, this comment is getting big, let me cut it short...
The weights are the main characters in the BW... you need to find out how to relate these weights with the levers and if you can do it you have unlocked the mystery... the arrangement comes next and it is followed by the set-up inside...I am not kidding sir...it is as simple as that...
"......if the right person joins me I can guarantee the wheel within a week..."
DeleteLol! If anyone is dumb enough to "join" with SK, the week will past with absolutely nothing being accomplished. At that point he will announce that the person is just not "the right person" and continue to claim in future comments here how he's found the "simple as that" solution that everyone else has missed and can only reveal it to the "right person". We hear this boring tune about once a quarter on this blog. It was last sung by SG as many may recall.
You are wrong, Ken... this is the problem with you... you are supposed to be a great author of bessler mystery and you are acting like a child this way...
ReplyDeleteYou are the one here killing every possibility... Well, I didn't think there is anyone in this world who can convince you...
If this is the trend here then every discussion will become a joke...
I am different from SG... don't compare... you have worked hard on simulations but I just pure Brain power...
You couldn't explain that children playing among pillars riddle which I posed...
Take it as a challenge... and know your status...
Hi Ken...I want to reveal to you something which happened a few seconds near me...
ReplyDeleteA neighborhood child aged around just 11 years who was seated next to me while I was just commenting greatly astounded me by explaining what the children playing riddle meant...
He calls me as uncle...he isn't that smart... He is uneducated... doesn't even knows basic English has really shocked me...I thought I must share this with all here...
This child really hit the bullseye straightaway... He could sense, so innocently, what bessler really meant by that...
It all goes to show how simple The Mystery is and how common sense helps solve complexity in understanding...
The above incident should be an eye opener to all...
My humble request to Ken is that you should act more matured... make this blog the best among bessler community... don't make silly comments in the garb of an Anon...
Updated
ReplyDeleteWow! 😳
The comments on this community forum is getting more intense!
I’m going to go make some popcorn, would anybody like some with extra butter?
Hey, Perpetualman, make me a large bowl of that popcorn too and put a lot of butter and salt on it! Thanks. Lol!
DeleteSuresh sounds like he's suffering from a bad case of KDS (aka "Ken Derangement Syndrome") as he keeps addressing comments to Ken B who hasn't been here since last year and probably doesn't have the time to even lurk here. Maybe he caught his KDS from John?
He sounds like he wants to make alliances with different people here so he can share the secret of Bessler's wheel with them which of course only he knows. He's wasting his time with John and Ken B because they are already convinced they know it and don't need him. Now he has to approach others and is finding that none of them are interested in his generous offer either.
We all saw SG make similar offers in the past to people here. I think they must be very lonely people who are really looking for followers who will believe their nonsense. Also, don't expect Suresh to provide any drawings showing Bessler's secret wheel design for John to post because he doesn't have any. All he has is a bunch of vague enticing hints that he is hoping will act like bait to lure someone into thinking he knows something important that can help them solve the Bessler wheel mystery. He doesn't have that and when he fails to get anyone here to believe him and get into some sort of regular off blog email contact with him, you'll find him disappearing for a while. Then expect him to suddenly reappear a few months later trying the same tactic again hoping everyone forgot about his past posts. Don't anyone fall for his nonsense. He's clueless about how Bessler's wheels worked.
Anonymous and PROUD of it!
What's wrong with you, perpetualman?
ReplyDeleteHope you are not acting like Ken...
I am serious and you seem to act funny...
I was under the feeling that I must come out with facts but I keep forgetting that it makes no sense trying to reason with (...)
Why don't you upload a drawing just like Richard. Then everyone might be able to help you. Maybe Fletcher can simulate it, although I know you don't believe in sim's.
DeleteMarinus ... you don't seem to understand anything...it is just not the questiont of uploading a drawing...let me explain...
DeleteWhen you are onto something of such nature like bessler Wheel secret it is all about safeguarding the same...
Tell me, did bessler reveal much?... did he not try to hide so much???
Do you know why JC sir and Ken decided to write it up and publish?
Because they didn't have the real secret...pls don't misunderstand me here by thinking that I don't respect them... despite all that Ken does I still regard him... you know why?...I respect his intelligence...
In such a case it is always better to publish... but not in my case, dear...
The problem with you people is that you just don't know whom and what to believe or rule out...
Well, I can't really blame you... most normal people are like that... either they don't believe it or you make a joke of it entirely...they think everyone is a SG...
I made an offer to you earlier... do you think I am just fooling around with everyone and self as well...
This used to happen during bessler time also...I am talking about the distractors...
Not much has changed...
If your intentions are real you will be very serious and also try to find out If I am really in the know of the secret...and then possibly guide me in the right direction...
I asked a simple question about the dog wagging it's tail or children playing among pillars... and no one is coming up with the right answer...it just drifted away...
One has to be serious dear... every tom, dick or Harry cannot solve this mystery...
“Marinus ... you don't seem to understand anything...”
ReplyDeleteLOL. Well, I understand Bessler when he tells us in the poem that “Greed is an evil root”.
I told you before what my interpretation of the children clue was and asked you for your’s. You still did not tell me and I don’t expect you will. So I am not going to tell you what the dog’s tail clue is. I am sure you understand. I am saving the secret for myself. Just like you, just like anyone else.
“...and then possibly guide me in the right direction...”
Why do you need guidance if you are so sure of yourself that you are on the right track and everyone else is wrong. I, and probably others, are not in the least interested in what you know. Save it for yourself.
@perpetualman: please pass the popcorn. :))
Lol! I think Perpetualman will be making a LOT of popcorn for the regular followers of this blog! But, at least Suresh is providing us with some entertainment for a while.
DeleteAnonymous and PROUD of it!
He sure is. Maybe he is named Suresh because he is sure of everything.
DeleteAgain you are losing your mind dear by joining the bandwagon...By guidance, I expected you would guide me to be safe with regard to the secret... well, if you cannot understand this much then there is very little we can do about it...go ahead and solve it yourself... the problem is I just don't understand why you all guys behave like trolls...
DeleteEven If I give away something here I don't think anyone would appreciate the same...instead of trying to learn more or find out about it some just misunderstand and make a joke of it... Yes, I didn't tell you about the children playing but I respected you and even thought of an alliance with you... but you are no different from others here...
Time only will tell us the outcome... one really needs a lot of patience in this line...
"the problem is I just don't understand why you all guys behave like trolls..."
DeleteBecause you try to seduce us to share our knowledge with you and give us nothing in return. How stupid do you think we are? You are the troll.
(... Having another drink ...)
Poor Marinus, John, Ken, and Perpetualman!
DeleteHow will they ever be able to cope with the enormous DISGRACE of knowing that they are just not the "right people" to be worthy of receiving Suresh's advanced knowledge of the secrets of Bessler's wheels?
Perhaps with several years of psychotherapy and some powerful psychiatric medications they will eventually be able to survive the depression that their disgrace will cause them and then go on to live almost normal lives again. They have all obviously been totally shattered by Suresh's rejection of them. How very sad, but it's really all their own faults for losing their minds, acting like trolls, and not respecting Suresh enough when he tried to so patiently and generously bestow upon them the most important secret in history about Bessler's wheels which only he has discovered so far and is obvious to anyone who truly understands the "children play among the columns with loud heavy clubs" clue as he does.
Otoh, maybe some bowls of hot freshly made popcorn oozing with melted butter and sprinkled with salt and perhaps some powdered cheese might help them quickly recover? Worth a try. Lol!
"children play among the columns with loud heavy clubs"
DeleteThat is wrong and should be
"children play among the columns with ONLY heavy clubs"
Whoops!!!
DeleteDisregard the previous post. Forget it.
(... Having a double drink ... Maybe I should stop drinking...)
When total misunderstanding occurs there's no sense in chatting further... why should I try to seduce you... you are totally on the wrong track...you know it and I know it...it is like stealing from a beggar... there is nothing to take away from you...I made a great mistake with an offer to you... I humbly it Take back dear and you can peacefully eat your popcorn and have your drink too...
Delete“I made a great mistake with an offer to you...”
DeleteYes you did. Don’t do it again. And stop calling me dear.
And;
Suresh Kumar 04 March 2020 at 14:06 - You are right, Marinus...
Suresh Kumar 11 March 2020 at 11:56 - Marinus is right...
Suresh Kumar 12 March 2020 at 08:13 - Here again Marinus is very much right...
Stop telling everyone that I am right. I don’t know if I am right. Yet.
And what the heck, another drink. We are all gonna die on corona before we solve it.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx1_6F-nCaw
of corona.. Hips...
DeleteWhoops!!!
ReplyDeleteDisregard the previous post. Forget it.
(... Having a double drink ... Maybe I should stop drinking...)
Anon 13:16
ReplyDeleteMmmm...all this talk of hot buttered popcorn is making me drool!
Here you go courtesy of Perpetualman. Enjoy!
Deletehttp://www.asweeterthing.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/DSC_5137.jpg
Thanks, Perpetualman. That tasted GREAT!!! My depression over not being the "right person" to receive Suresh's secret knowledge about Bessler's wheels is almost gone. I think one more bowl should get rid of it completely. Lol!
DeleteThis is old business. But important, maybe not as important as hot buttered popcorn!
ReplyDeleteReff. Anonymous 13 March 2020 @23:11 I know now what you mean, please forgive me for being so slow. You are right and, this is the reason. If the fulcrum of the lever, that's doing the lifting, (of your weight), isn't on the axle; in other words some where else on the wheel, other than on the axle, there can't be any gain in GPE. Exactly as you say.
However, by using the axle as a fulcrum you can gain GPE. Do you see the difference? The axle is fixed, so to speak, to the ground. In other words the lever has some thing solid to pry against, then it will work. To reiterate; to lift a weight back up, the fulcrum of the lever has to be on the axle. FWEIW Sam Peppiatt
Or, Sam, they are attached to the rotating disc.
DeleteDas Triumphirende, pp 16-32.
Around the firmly placed horizontal axis is a rotating disc (low or narrow cylinder) which resembles a grindstone. This disc can be called the principle piece of my machine.
Keep going Sam.
HI Marinus!! I apologize for my boring little lecture------------Sam
DeleteDon’t. You are doing great. You are using your brain and your hands. You are one of just a few who is not distracted by imaginary coded clues. But don’t ignore what Bessler tells us about his wheel. it is all a matter of reading comprehension. It is there, but not everything, you have to fill in the gaps yourself. One day you might free us all from this burden. I mean that. I am trying to help you.
DeletePS: Why don't you try selecting Name/URL and fill in your name instead of selecting Anonymous (ignore the field URL). It would improve the readability of this blog.
Marinus, What can I say, I had no clue, I'll try it, Sam
DeleteGreat! So much easier to find you between all those anon's.
DeleteMarinus, That was too easy-----what a dumb ass I am. Rain here today, having trouble getting the lead out. I'm working on my pendulums, trying to figure some way to swing them out, on the down side. It has become a burden, maybe you can free me of it. I long to be rid of it-------------Sam
DeleteSame here. I am doing my best. Did you ever tried anything with double pendulums? There is a lot of energy in such a system. Chaotic, but you might control it when you enclose them in cases and restrict their movement so the energy is stored in the fly-drum. (This was a hint everyone. What can you tell about the upper weight?)
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foZHjI8Lydo
I wonder how this would work if it was not designed as "T" but as "Y". Angles of 120 degrees instead of 90, 90, 180.
Marinus, I tried your link: "video unavailable"--Hmmm Double pendulums? Is that two on the same pivot point ? By the way, I got one of mine working, still have to do the other three-----will give it up for today. Sam
DeleteHmmm... Did you enter the link correctly? Otherwise try to search on youtube for "Triple Double-Pendulum". It's a short video of 1:30 from Guy Cohen and looks somewhat like a clock. On a double pendulum the pivot point of the second one is on the weight of the first one. It's a very "simple mechanism".
DeleteThis one is also nice but more complicated, therefore I dismiss this "mechanism" because it's not simple.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J85gpcjvqzs
Marinus, I found it. Also three others. They are wild, to say the least. Sam
DeleteGood. The possibilities are endless. Too much for a lifetime. Sometimes I wonder if Bessler was that smart or just lucky.
DeleteLast post for today then I am going to sleep. It’s already Sunday morning here in Amsterdam.
Delete“They are wild, to say the least.”
As I said before, and as anyone can see, there is a lot of energy in such a system. All we need to do is build a system like this in a flywheel in such a way that it will drive the flywheel. Now you might think that this is complicated but according to the one and only whoever did it, it’s not. It is simple.
Goodnight everyone.
Marinus, He was smart; I mean, the guy didn't sigh his name with an "X"!! And, a little good luck don't hurt.
DeleteHowever, we have a huge advantage over him; because we know, (thanks to John Collins), that it can be done, which he didn't have.
Well, yeah, I would rephrase that. True he was educated and not stupid. But he was, just as we are, convinced it could be done otherwise he might have given up. But the advantage we have over him is that he had no clues. And we do, thanks to John’s work. Therefore, imho, someone who finds it is always indebted to John Collins.
DeleteLike many others before him, Bessler was convinced it could be done. The secret of his success, however, was a combination of perseverance and plain old fashioned luck. Those who discover working designs in the future will also be depending on those two factors to achieve their successes.
DeleteUnfortunately, it's far easier to persevere than to be lucky. Many OOB wheel chasers on the internet have been at it for, literally, decades, but got nowhere because they did not have enough luck. Once a working design is finally verified, you won't need luck anymore to make a working wheel. Just the perseverance to hang in there and keep building until you've got your runner sitting on you shop table and spinning away!
“What's wrong with you, perpetualman?
ReplyDeleteHope you are not acting like Ken...
I am serious and you seem to act funny...“
Hi Suresh,
I meant no disrespect to you or anyone else on this forum. Sometimes when I read these posts, I laugh inside just to myself, but not at anyone in particular on this forum. Everybody has a right to there own thoughts and to express themselves freely.
We’re all gifted in one way or another. Some people have the gift of gab, some people have the gift of ingenuity. I think I have a gift of being humble and therefore, I humble myself before you and everyone here on this forum if I said anything that offended you.
I admit that I’m not very smart when it comes to simulations but, when I get to working with my hands on a project and trying to make something regarding free energy, I do a good job with it and prove that it can or can’t work. But I’m not giving up. I have an idea that I must build to see if it will work.
So, please forgive me for my statement earlier.
Perpetualman.
Why? What was wrong with it? I found it very entertaining. You are an enrichment for this blog. The popcorn was a great idea. Thanks. :)
DeleteThat roberval balance sounds very interesting. But how do you implement such a thing on a rotating disk?
Perpetualman wrote: "I meant no disrespect to you [Suresh] or anyone else on this forum."
DeleteActually, it was Suresh who showed disrespect TO US when he showed up on this blog and started putting down everyone else's opinions and suggesting only his were correct and that he could only risk sharing them with the "right people" who, of course, would be those who were willing to "join" him in some sort of extended off blog emails in which he promised to give them the secret "in less than a week".
He first targeted John, apparently by private emails, with his generous offer, but was quickly rejected. Then he started addressing comments to Ken B who no longer posts here hoping he was lurking and would suddenly reappear and be eager to "join" him to find out the big secret he claimed to have. When that didn't happen, he moved down the line to Marinus. He tried to slowly prepare Marinus to "join" him by complimenting him repeatedly in prior comments. As soon as Marinus realized that Suresh was playing a "head game" with him and Marinus correctly labeled him as a "troll", Suresh lost interest in him.
Finally, someone used Perpetualman's humorous comment about the popcorn to lampoon Suresh and he then realized he had zero credibility here and took off in a huff. He's now out there lurking around with the likes of SG and others and patiently waiting for there to be a turnover in the regular posters here so he can return and play his "I've got the secret and will so generously give it to you if you kiss my butt just right game" with everyone here again. We've seen it all before. It's not the first time and unfortunately it probably won't be the last time.
Anonymous and PROUD of it!
I think we have to be very wary of anyone who shows up here or on any website and slowly tries to coax people into private contacts with him. They could be setting someone up for a scam of some sort. There are tons of these scams being operated out of countries like India, Pakistan, and the far East where they provide everyone with free high speed internet and, if they can get their hands on an old used laptop that still works, they can quickly go to work scamming on an international level.
Delete$500 US dollars might not seem like that much to an American, but to someone living in, say, Pakistan, it's about 3 and a half months worth of the average salary. Just three or four scams for $500 USD each and the scammer doesn't have to go to work for the rest of the year! Scammers in such countries actually like to get together and brag to each other about their biggest scams and how they did them. They share their methods and constantly improve them. They actually take pride in ripping off their victims.
The professional internet scammer carefully builds up a personal relationship with a victim by first offering to give him something of great value or which is difficult to obtain in the victim's country for some reason. The victim eventually learns that the scammer is not actually offering to give it to him, but to sell it to him for a price far below its actual value. Payment must be made by sending the scammer money in the form of credit or debit card information so he can get the money immediately, an international money order, an EFT or Electronic Funds Transfer from the victim's bank account directly to the scammer's account, a money transfer like those provided by MoneyGram and Western Union, or even the new bitcoins. With the exception of a credit card payment, you will never see your money again if you use the other methods and you don't get what you were expecting to get.
In most cases, after the money is paid, you'll never hear from the scammer again. Your future emails will just be deposited into his junk email folder and automatically deleted every few days. Occasionally, he may actually send you something. It will be something that is not what you were expecting and will be nearly useless to you. Occasionally if a scammer thinks his victim is really stupid, he may try to keep the scam going longer. He may claim that he never received the original payment and the victim should send more money. Or that what he originally had to sell was sold to someone else, but the victim can have another newer or better one for more money. This kind of "milking" of the victim has actually gotten people to hand over thousands of US dollars to complete strangers on the other side of the world!
As soon as anybody asks you for money on the internet, an alarm bell should be going off in your brain warning you of a potential scam in progress.
You are forgiven, perpetualman, but why the hell you made fun of me in the first place?...
DeleteThis is JC sir's blog...let us not disgrace it...
I am here in this blog since 2010... you can check this out...
Ken has hijacked this blog by disguising himself in various forms like...SoS, Anon, Henry, Anon and proud of it, Paul., Etc.,
Anyone can sense this out very easily yet most remain and that includes you, too...
He cannot be contained... He multiplies like a cancerous virus...
His sole purpose is to condemn anyone who opposes his ideology and promote his worthless book...
He miserably failed in understanding the bessler mystery and is trying to earn through his publication...
He is the biggest scamster here and is fooling himself into believing that he is able to convince everyone...
He has become so cheap and shameless that we don't have words to describe it...
It is very surprising how everyone is tolerating all this...
Ninety percent of the comments here are from Ken and even JC sir has become vary of him...
We all know most of his preachings make no sense at all...
It is impossible to get rid of him...he will reappear in a different form...
But Never even once I appeared here in an Anon form...
You have provided the spark to him and his fire still continues to burn...
Hope something drastic is done by JC sir to tackle this blog hijacking by Ken before the credibility is lost...
Sometimes I do wonder about JC sir's silence on all this...if it is deliberate...
In that case we are helpless...
Many years are passing by with no progress in our mission...
The bessler mystery can be solved very fast and easily if discipline is enforced by JC sir...
Somehow, we should get rid of this Ken virus...all his opinions are totally speculations...
Let goodness prevail...
@Anon 04:28.
DeleteIf what you say is true then that means that ex-government official over in Nigeria who assured me that I was a Nigerian prince was lying to me! I did think it a little strange since I'm white, but he said they had some sort of proof of it and that I had an inheritance of several hundred gold bricks that was rightfully mine. He said that if he could bribe a few treasury guards over there, he would make sure that my inheritance was all crated up and immediately sent to me here in the US. I've been waiting for something like this to happen to me all my life and I promptly sent him a moneygram for $5,000 to cover all of his costs and even give him a little something for his kind assistance. No wonder he hasn't responded to the last several emails I sent him asking for a progress report.
But, then again maybe he's just been busy getting my gold bars loaded onto a cargo ship to get them to me? He was so sincere and honest sounding that I can't believe he could be one of those scammer types you describe. It's been about four months since I sent him the money. I think that any day now I'll be getting a notice from US Customs at a nearby seaport so I can arrange to have my crates of gold bars picked up and delivered to me.
Maybe you only posted what you did to try to scare people away from collecting what is rightfully theirs? Maybe YOU have a problem and are envious of guys like me who are rich Nigerian princes? When my gold bars arrive, I won't be sharing any of them with the likes of you! You should be ashamed of yourself for spreading false information about good people in other countries who are working hard to help Americans collect their inheritances. If it wasn't for nice people like them, we would be losing out on a lot of wealth that can help improve out lives and that of our loved ones.
Shame on you Anon 04:28!
@"Suresh Kumar"
DeleteAccording to your profile here:
https://www.blogger.com/profile/02204535280064717108
you've only been here since March 2016 and not "since 2010" like you claim. So, already you start your last post off with a lie! If you were here before March 2016 who knows what fake names you were using then and for what purpose!
There is no actual proof that "...SoS, Anon, Henry, Anon and proud of it, Paul., Etc.," are Ken B in disguise like you claim. Maybe you don't like them because they have provided some useful information here unlike you, they do not agree with your nonsense, and didn't want to "join" you?
You then say about Ken B that "He miserably failed in understanding the Bessler mystery and is trying to earn through his publication..." How would you know that if you never read his book? He at least has shared his research with us openly. You have shared nothing and only contributed a lot of empty words here while trying to make everyone think you have some big secret to share, but only with the "right person" after they "join" with you. You are probably the biggest phony to ever show up here!
There are a lot of people here who wish John C. would ban YOU!
Now I think I'll have another big bowl of Perpetualman's hot buttered popcorn!
That's ok J C H . Back to the workshop and finish your prototype .
ReplyDeleteKen...check this below mentioned old blog...and also you can verify from Andre sir or Trevor...
ReplyDeleteI don't what happened to both of them...
Saturday, 11 December 2010
Is this really the only alternative to fossil fuels?
How frustrating it is to come across web sites like the one below!
In this blog "Suresh Kumar" earlier wrote:
ReplyDelete"From all the interactions with JC sir we have had so far we can comfortably conclude that it [his wheel design] won't be any different from what Ken has come up with...Unless and until the solution matches with all the clues proposed in bessler's poem one can rest assured that it is another non-runner..."
"Do you know why JC sir and Ken decided to write it up and publish? Because they didn't have the real secret..."
In other words, only SK's has "the" answer and he lumps John and Ken together as having wheels that are the same and can't possibly work. He does that without knowing any of the details of John's design and without having read all of the details of Ken's published design. Not only is SK a genius, but he's also a PSYCHIC!
Look out Sayer of Sooths, you've got some serious competition on this blog now! A large bowl of Perpetualman's hot, buttered popcorn should help ease your envy!
You are forgiven, perpetualman, but why the hell you made fun of me in the first place?...
ReplyDeleteHello again Suresh,
Could you please show me where on this forum, that I made fun of you? I don’t know you, I’ve never met you, so how can I make fun of you? As far as I know, the only thing I mentioned was:
“The comments on this community forum is getting more intense! “ And of course I said I was going to go make some buttered popcorn. So could you tell me, how I made fun of you by that statement? I don’t know about anyone else on this form but, this form is quite entertaining just by the comments that people make.
I mean I like buttered popcorn, but I have to drink it with a Coca-Cola.
Perpetualman.
And besides that, I didn’t join this forum to make fun of people. I joined this forum to be inspired by the wisdom and knowledge of people who are interested in free energy and gravity power machines. I’ve always been interested in these types of machines and I hope one day I will be able to build one that actually works.
ReplyDeletePerpetualman.
@Perpetualman
DeleteDon't trip all over yourself apologizing for hurting SK's feelings whether you did it intentionally or not. He's been showing everyone here for several blogs now that he could not care less about their feelings! He subtly insults people's research efforts, tries to make everyone think only he has "the" answer, and then puts down anyone who does not immediately agree with him and want to make an alliance with him.
My theory is that he's some sort of religious guru wannabe. He's probably been rejected for that role in his own country and, because he looks at the search for Bessler's pm wheel secret here as a kind of religion, he's come here hoping he can recruit new followers to his version of that "religion" by claiming he has some sort of "divine" or psychic knowledge of the subject. Maybe he's hoping he'll get some sort of internet "congregation" going?
That would be made up of a bunch of frustrated members here who he convinces he can help find the secret of Bessler's wheels. He would then send them an email "sermon" every week or so with his latest revelations on the matter. Those will all be whatever latest interpretations about the "Little Book" poem's verses that he can dream up for that week. Of course, to remain a member of his "church" in good standing and to stay on his emailing list, his followers will have to make regular donations to it to prove they are worthy of the valuable information he's providing to them.
The world is filled with religious huckster types and they will persist until they have a nice regular tax free cash flow coming in. Beats working for a living!
I agree. If Suresh was mocked here it was because he brought it on himself. His arrogant mistake was trying to make everyone here play a guessing game for the meaning of that "children playing among the pillars with loud heavy clubs" line from AP and then only telling us "wrong...wrong...wrong" while not actually finally telling us what his interpretation was. People have a low tolerance for trolls who show up on blogs and forums playing stupid games like that. He got what he deserved, imo.
DeleteHe is weird, just like SG. I still don't know what he is trying to tell us in his post 14 March 2020 at 05:11 which should be an eye opener to all.
DeleteFortunately it was addressed to Ken B who should act more mature.
But like "Anonymous and PROUD of it!" stated, he provided us with some humor and entertainment which can be very relaxing and welcome in our mostly depressing work. His greatest revelation was that John might be the reincarnation of Bessler himself. Although he later withdrew that again. Poor John.
I really enjoyed reading the post from Anon 14 March 2020 at 13:16. Some anon's really have nice and good comments. And some are probably nothing more than aliases of ignored frustrated people. You know it when you read it. However, I am not sure about the white Nigerian prince at 15 March 2020 at 06:10. It was probably written with a wink, but very persuasive.
THIS is the best blog in the Bessler community.