Friday, 18 September 2020

Bessler-Collins Gravity Wheel

The time is approaching for me to finish my wheel and show that it works (or not!) and share my design with everyone. Obviously I hope it will work, but if it doesn’t it will be my fault.  As I’ve said before, my skills as an engineer have long since withered so-to-speak, it being some 45 years since I worked at Rolls Royce aero engines and before that British Aerospace on Concord, and I did five years in the Royal Air Force, so I have struggled somewhat to get to grips with one piece of the mechanism.  I know how it works and what it does and I can explain its function, but getting the pieces to work as required was proving difficult.

I’ve called my design the Bessler-Collins Gravity Wheel because I believe that it matches Bessler’s design concept 100 per cent and the actual construction is perhaps 95 per cent similar.  I’m sure this is correct because I obtained the design by finding and deciphering Bessler’s codes.  I cannot claim to have discovered the design myself, because I could not have found it without his amazing wealth of clues. I am referring to it as a gravity wheel, because calling it a perpetual motion machine conveys the wrong impression and attracts negative responses.  It may not be using the force of gravity directly, but that force enables the machine to run continuously.  

Karl the Landgrave of Hesse, described the machine as simple.  I’m sure he understood exactly how it worked having seen it in action, but believe me when I tell you that it has a number of tricks up its sleeve which are not readily apparent to the observer. I’m not even sure how it can be simulated but I’m no expert and I know people who do know about sims, so I hope they can replicate the machine on a computer if only to prove my design concept is correct.

JC


98 comments:

  1. "Obviously I hope it will work, but if it doesn’t it will be my fault."

    Not really. If it doesn't work you either don't have the skills or tools to build it accurately enough so it will work or you've been mislead by Bessler's ambiguous clues. That could happen to anyone not just you. Failing to find Bessler's secret design is nothing to be ashamed of. Just failing shows that at least you made the effort to solve the wheel which about 99 out of 100 others interested in Bessler won't be bothered doing.

    "I’m sure this is correct because I obtained the design by finding and deciphering Bessler’s codes."

    You really cannot be sure of anything you believe about Bessler's wheels until and unless you have at least a glitch free sim showing the design works. Better yet to have several sims made by different simmers using different software that show the design works. Up to that point you are only engaging in wishful thinking. Belief without any proof is only an act of faith and does not necessarily equal truth. Believing one's numbers will win a lottery jackpot has little value until one actually wins and collects his jackpot.

    I think when you finally reveal the design you have you will have many simming it to see how it performs. You may be surprised at all of the suggestions that will be made as to how to change the design to make it work if it doesn't. If you are very lucky you may also find some of those suggestions hidden in Bessler's clues that you previously did not notice and when you make those changes to your wheel it will suddenly become a runner! When it comes to Bessler's clues expect the unexpected.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Anon. I agree with what you say. In fact I stumbled on the meaning of one of the last clues quite by accident while handling the mechanism and finding a way through which I immediately recognised as the remaining unsolved clue.

      JC

      Delete
  2. Hello John, when it comes to simulations, you can be sure I'm ready to build your design once you publish it. If you're able to explain the function unambiguously and I'm able to interpret your instructions correctly, we'll get it to work if the principle is right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. I’m now converted to sims, as long as someone else can make them!

      JC

      Delete
    2. I have some friends that do sims and once you show us the design, I'll send it to them to see what they think of it. If it has any potential, they will know and I'll let you know here.

      jason

      Delete
  3. If you don't finish by the end of the month, I would still like you to continue working on the wheel. I really think you need (deserve) to end this journey with a sense of completion and feeling of success. I really don't care what others will say or think. It has become your life's work. Please reconsider if you feel you only need a short time more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is a very kind thought, anon, 22.50, and I appreciate it. If I dared to go over my promised finishing date I would no doubt receive plenty of sarcastic comments but I’ve learned to ignore the gibes over the years, so if I need a few more days or more, I’ll say so.

      JC

      Delete
    2. "...so if I need a few more days or more, I’ll say so."

      Lol! Oh don't worry everyone, he WILL definitely "say so". On Wednesday, September 30th he'll announce that he's "so close" and just needs a "few more days" to achieve final success after years of work. They will quickly turn into a "few more weeks" and then a "few more months". Finally, he will announce that he will DEFINITELY without fail "reveal all" early NEXT year...sometime...unless, however, he needs even more time which he will!

      Think this can't possibly happen THIS time? Get ready for the surprises of your lives when it DOES happen! He's actually ALREADY preparing everyone here for it TO happen if you carefully study his slowly changing wording as the promised deadline date approaches!

      NEVER ever ever forget: "A leopard doesn't change its spots"!!!

      Delete
    3. O ye of little faith...

      Delete
  4. John's old workshop from 2014. I like the posters on the wall!

    https://assets.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/163769/John-Collins--workshop--3-.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for that reminder of when I had a really good proper workshop. Now it’s the size of a small table, but it will have to do, I guess.

      JC

      Delete
  5. I think we are all looking forward to a new page turn in this mystery John. Something tangible we can all sink our teeth into. Maybe you have a smoking gun up your sleeve. Wouldn't that be wondrous. Wishing you success.

    -fletcher

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks fletch. I’m confident that this is something no one has ever see before. (Apart from Bessler, hopefully!)

      JC

      Delete
    2. That is probably a very important indicator that one is close to success...a design that is unique and not just a variation of someone else's past failed design. Bessler said much the same in AP (see page 246):

      "You will, oh paragon of virtue, be unable to show me printed evidence that a work of art of this nature ever existed in the world before. Therefore, my machine is the only one now in existence that accords to true physical principles."

      I'm not sure what he meant by "...accords with true physical principles". Maybe that was his way of saying his wheels weren't hoaxed? Could it be a poor translation?

      Delete
    3. Hope you’re right, anon, 09.23

      JC

      Delete
    4. Cheers John .. JC wrote : "I’m confident that this is something no one has ever see before."

      I think that is what it will take ! Sustained OB causing rotational acceleration from known mechanical principles arranged somewhat differently than expected or previously seen. Having said that, still not breaking Newton's Laws (but might bend them like a coconut tree in a cyclone lol), and definitely NOT breaking Archimedes Law of Levers. Best !

      -f

      Delete
  6. I am convinced of your success, John. We are on your side. Michel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From what you wrote, I concluded that you focused on the bizarre of the project.
      So I want to ask if your project already has the strength to start independently for an indefinite period?

      Delete
    2. That is what planned for and what I hope for, but until I test the finished wheel I won’t know for sure, but I’m very confident.


      JC

      Delete
    3. I understand that the strength will come from what is hidden, not directly from the weight system. Yes ?

      Delete
    4. @John Collins

      When you say you are going to test the finished wheel does that mean your wheel now has all five of its lever mechanisms mounted on it?

      Delete
    5. Yes but I’m trying to perfect the action of a small part of each mechanism. I know what I need to do to get it right, but it is small and intricate, otherwise I would have finished it by now.

      JC

      Delete
    6. It sounds like your lever mechanism adjustment problem is similar to what Bessler experienced as he finished his Merseburg wheel and got it ready for running. At the beginning of chapter 32 of AP he wrote:

      "To get back to details, I soon started building machines again, and in particular, as most people already know, I constructed my great work, the 6-ell diameter wheel. It revolved in either direction, but caused me a few headaches before I got the mechanism properly adjusted."

      Delete
    7. It does seem like that but Bessler was trying to perfect the two way version of his wheel, which I suppose was a more complex task, compared to mine. One of the things that always amazes me is how he fixed all the parts together without the benefits of modern systems - screws, stiff nuts, rivets, etc. So many clever ways to fasten things, but Bessler had his organ building craft to help.

      JC

      Delete
    8. In my opinion, the necessity to adjust was associated with turning left, stop, right.
      He had no problem with power in the system when he discovered how to use it; that's when he was happy.

      Delete
    9. JC wrote: "One of the things that always amazes me is how he fixed all the parts together without the benefits of modern systems - screws, stiff nuts, rivets, etc."

      They did have a means of making threaded parts back then to hold things like clock movement plates together. IIRC, they were even beginning to make tapered screws using lathe-like machines but they were expensive and not widely available. Probably most of B's wheels were simply held together with glue and nails or parts press fitted together like any other piece of furniture. When Karl required him to dissemble and move his wheel to another room in the castle and then put it back together again, it must have been a real pain.

      Delete
  7. John Collins 19 September 2020 at 20:39

    "Yes but I’m trying to perfect the action of a small part of each mechanism. I know what I need to do to get it right, but it is small and intricate, otherwise I would have finished it by now."

    Simmers will be able to explore design feasibility most likely John. Others can attempt an accurate reproduction of the part previously giving you problems. Veproject1 comes to mind here with the fine tolerance build skills and workshop equipment, if he has a mind too. There will be others. And then there's Computer Controlled Design and cutting options for complete accuracy, even at very small scale.

    Once the part and its intended actions is understood then your current impasse may dematerialize, with a few heads working on the problem, if it still exists in a few weeks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes thanks guys. I will share it all, I just need these last few days to finish the build then, what ever happens I’ll publish what I’ve got.

      JC

      Delete
  8. If it doesn't get us out of this long dark tunnel, we can still hope that it shows us the light.
    Best of luck John.
    RH46

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Finding Bessler's secret wheel design is like putting a dart board on the street and then climbing to the very top of the clock tower (aka "Big Ben") in London, throwing a dart off of it, and having it drop all the way down and then hit the red bullseye at the center of the dart board. It's physically possible to do but extremely unlikely. Many have tried and failed since Bessler's time without success. One has to hope for success but always remember that failure is far, far more likely.

      Everyone seriously looking to solve Bessler's wheel is only given so many darts to try with during his life. I think that in the next week John will be tossing his last dart off of that high tower. If enough darts are tossed by enough people, eventually one of them will hit that bullseye on the street below. Let's hope it's his this time.

      Delete
    2. It's a good analogy. Make sure you are throwing the dart on the same side of Big Ben as the dart board is below. N.B. it's the shortest and most direct route down. Many are standing on the wrong side and gazing off wishfully to the horizon. But the analogy still stands. If enough people throw their darts from all points around the tower eventually one will strike the bulls eye. Or, apply critical thinking to define the problem correctly and shorten the odds to success. Then find a mechanical arrangement that actually fulfills the requirements. That would be a wire stretching down from the tower to the bullseye to which is attached your dart and which acts as a guide to target. No random chance involved because you are the architect and the engineer that ensures it :7)

      -f

      Delete
    3. All of the thousands and thousands of failed pm wheels since Bessler were also, in the opinions of their builders, the product of "critical thinking". So much for critical thinking! When it comes to Bessler's wheels you either got his design or you don't. That comparison to throwing the darts off of Big Ben could be made even more accurate by imagining that the dart thrower was drunk, then blind folded, and finally spun around a few times before tossing out his dart and no guide wires down to the bullseye allowed!

      Delete
    4. You're not thinking critically Anon ;7) Bessler didn't throw a dart. He thought through the problem aided by the experiences of his past mistakes. Just like the rest of us. IMO there is just one mechanical gravity PM principle to be found within the Natural Laws (but not seen in nature), which may have more than one way to be physically enacted. JC may have found that critical path way which leads to success, and if he has it came from the qualities of hard work, application, and resilience, and not blind luck imo.

      -f

      Delete
    5. But in his first post here JC wrote:

      "In fact I stumbled on the meaning of one of the last clues quite by accident..."

      Certainly sounds like "blind luck".

      Anyway hopefully "-f" will eventually find his "one mechanical gravity PM principle". If that can be done then it may be possible to build many different types of working pm machines and some of them might be powerful enough to become practical sources of power.

      Delete
    6. That would be the next chapter in JC's book, or anybody else's who solves the mystery of a gravity wheel. To refine the principle and scope the mechanical application alternatives and options, to extract the highest energy density for the highest materials strength and durability available today, and for the least wasteful energy sapping frictions. I'd say we have a better than even chance than Bessler to produce a wheel with greater power, but as to whether it is practical or archaic and a relic today could be questionable. At least the gravity PM wheel mystery would be solved and perhaps forensically determined to be one of Bessler's solutions on balance of opinion. Perhaps the conversation will turn that way in a few weeks, fingers crossed.

      -f

      Delete
    7. @Anon 16:12. Ken B claims in his Bessler wheel book that his last dart finally hit a bullseye back in April of 2018. However to do that he had to throw about two thousand darts off of that clock tower!

      Delete
    8. What happens if your dart misses the bullseye but still hits somewhere else on the dart board? In a real game of darts that happens most of the time and you still get some points for it. Maybe for Bessler's wheels that means you have Bessler's basic design but its parts aren't quite right yet and it won't run as well as it could if you had hit the bullseye and had all of the parts right?

      Delete
  9. I wonder if John ever considered the possibility that his five lever wheel might NOT actually be the same one that Bessler had. If it isn't that means it is an original invention of his, not Bessler, and if it works and he discloses it publicly at the end of this month without at least patent pending status on the design, he will actually be throwing away billions of dollars of future revenue! Something to think about as he gets ready to reveal all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kind of you to be concerned anon, 19.51, but I’m confident my design is the same as Bessler’s and I still plan to make a million or two!

      JC

      Delete
    2. Just another greedy one who hasn't learned anything!

      Delete
    3. It's a hot potato and you have to be careful not to burn yourself.
      Desperation is a bad advisor.
      It is better to wait with making money and make sure that this is the correct principle of the device.
      You can be accused of dishonesty and thus be publicly labeled a fraud.
      As Bessler said, there is only 1 way to make it work.

      Delete
    4. "As Bessler said, there is only 1 way to make it work."

      IF that's true, then anyone chasing any pm wheel design that is not identical to the one Bessler's had is totally wasting his time. IOW, one either has Bessler's design and some hope or he doesn't and his search is hopeless. I can't believe Bessler had the ONLY design that would work. Supposedly the Asa Jackson wheel also worked and we have parts of it today in some rural museum over in Kentucky. It's obviously NOT the same as Bessler's wheels. But, then again, maybe it was hoaxed like all other pm machines, except Bessler's, that their inventors claimed worked. Of course, most of the serious science guys today think ALL of Bessler's wheels were also hoaxed even though they can't explain how they could have been. They are just sure of it. Amazing how confident they can be without having all of the facts!

      Delete
  10. The new world order is suppressing free energy, wants everyone sterilized and put under 5g nanobot mind control.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Two thoughts: In A.P. 352 Bessler says the Draschwitz machine worked on QUITE DIFFERENT principles (!) So, is there more than one way to find success? 2nd thought:Bessler says A.P.264 : " Be prepared to use a combination of LATERAL THINKING and initiative " Isn't critical thinking a dead end for Bessler innovation ? (see lateral thinking , wikipedia ) Comments,suggestions, criticism ? Looking forward to your new disclosures John!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And me, for the responses! And the sims.l

      JC

      Delete
    2. Amazing how quickly you converted from being anti-sim to being pro-sim! Being unable, for whatever reasons, to do or complete actual builds can have that effect on a pm chaser and it looks like your experience has helped you "see the light" and to be more sympathetic to those who have chosen the simming route to success.

      I think the new protocol for future pm chasers will be to sim first and then, only if a working sim is created, go on to do an actual build. That, unfortunately, puts a lot of emphasis on having reliable sims so one had better make sure his sims are as reliable as possible before he invests the effort, money, and time in building something based totally on a sim. The biggest advantage of simming is that it greatly speeds up the hunt for working pm designs. If sims had existed three hundreds years ago, it's possible that someone could have found Bessler's secret wheel mechanisms while Bessler was still alive!

      Delete
    3. We don't know if JC's design can be simmed yet in its entirety. Some things I can't successfully sim because of too many moving parts which makes the sim too complex for my laptop and its limited computing power. It crashes. So I'm always looking to simplify every sim build to reduce complexity and it's second nature. Sometimes I can cheat my way around an issue by using generic workarounds that fulfill the physics requirements of those parts left out, and is usually perfectly legitimate in terms of performance. Let's hope JC's design can be fully simmed or a workaround found if I/we can't.

      Delete
    4. RAFORD wrote : "Two thoughts: In A.P. 352 Bessler says the Draschwitz machine worked on QUITE DIFFERENT principles (!) So, is there more than one way to find success? 2nd thought:Bessler says A.P.264 : " Be prepared to use a combination of LATERAL THINKING and initiative " Isn't critical thinking a dead end for Bessler innovation ? (see lateral thinking , wikipedia ) Comments,suggestions, criticism ? Looking forward to your new disclosures John!"

      IMO, ONE PM Principle, more than one Mechanical Principle (arrangement) to enact it. Possibly only two.

      Lateral thinking and initiative is by essence a novel approach. Once a novel approach is generally known then in hindsight it usually appears as logical because we see the connections and pathways leading to that approach. That same approach was always an option for us to discover had we applied the same logic steps that the novel approach later showed us. Had we thought critically and deeply enough about both the problem and the solution alternatives, before bouncing to a creative hunch solution, which is what we are wont to do. IMO. Sometimes hunches work out, because they are usually based on past experiences, but in this field they seldom yield viable results it seems. That won't stop us throwing darts from clocks tho. It's too much fun.

      -f

      Delete
    5. Hi anon 17.00, let me correct that impression that I converted from anti sim to pro sim. I have never believed that sims would lead to a successful design or build. I believe that if my design fails, I’m confident that it because my skill and patience are in short supply, and therefore a sim of my design might help to prove its validity. But it is my belief that I wouldn’t have got this far without two things - one is my basic hands-on build experience and secondly Bessler extraordinary range of clues. The sim can validate or invalidate a design, but using sims deprives you of the many lightbulb moments you get during the actual build.

      JC

      Delete
  12. JC wrote : "The sim can validate or invalidate a design, but using sims deprives you of the many lightbulb moments you get during the actual build."

    Point taken John. Sims are great for exploring a concept and then optimizing design. Sorting out tolerances and clearances, best dimensions, range of movements, identifying constraining conditions etc.

    You remember when you are building in the workshop and having those lightbulb moments (i.e. I wish I'd done that slightly differently but now I'm committed coz it takes so long to change it all now) you will already have it well sorted so there are few technical building surprises needing change. So I guess that is depriving me of learning opportunities on the fly lol. And I don't miss the skinned knuckles.

    What a sim can't do is change the Laws of Physics ! And not always are the imaginative designs of the inventor and put down on paper, the computer sim that might follow, and the reality of a real world build all aligned like the stars in the night sky. However the sim is an excellent vetting process for the imagination and you'd be surprised how many lightbulb moments there are as you go thru 10's if not 100's of iterations looking for performance improvements and simplicity. And that's when the validation or invalidation occurs. Dang, there was a show stopper I didn't fully appreciate. Or euphoric moments as a mech does what you expected it do do.

    Evolution before revolution, lol.

    Best.

    -f

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When you make a hands on build you're following some idea for part motions in your mind that you are very convinced will work for one reason or another. But, that idea is really more like an animation in your mind's eye that doesn't have to follow the laws of mechanics. Every design I ever built failed because the damn thing refused to behave exactly the way I convinced myself it had to behave. All of my "light bulb moments" put together really counted for nothing, but they did feel good as I was having them.

      Sims, otoh, have to follow the laws of mechanics and physics. They can be glitchy at times but generally are not. They are not subject to delusions and fantasies like human minds are. They are like emotionless robots that just accurately predict what will happen if you put all of its parts together in such and such a way and then release your wheel so it can take off.

      I think a lot of pm chasers don't like sims because, aside from having to put in the hours of effort needed to learn to how use them, they tend to quickly shoot down their best ideas. But, they definitely do speed things up and for the devoted pm chaser that will get him to the success he wants faster if fate has that in store for him. Unfortunately, simming is still no guarantee of success. You will still need to have incredible luck. Maybe for some pm chasers their use will also cause them to burn out faster and drop out long before they would have if they were hands on only builders. That might be a good thing because it prevents them from wasting their lives trying to make an unworkable design work and they can then concentrate on other things in life that they will have better luck finding success with.

      I'm sure if Bessler had sims available in his day he would have been using them daily. Maybe instead of needing a decade he could have found success in only a year or so. That he was able to find success without simming and only after a hundred builds is really amazing. He is probably one of the most persistent humans who ever lived and also the luckiest too.

      Delete
  13. All good comments guys and much appreciated. Unfortunately the sim software that is used these days wasn’t available back when I started learning how to use a computer, write and launch a website or self-publish my book, and my pc wouldn’t have been up to the job anyway, so I missed the boat but I don’t regret it. It has taken me until this year to believe I have finally got it, and now the sims will prove me right or wrong or show us the simpler error I might have made.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think you are wrong if you think that a simulation can prove whether your design is right or wrong. Fletcher said it quite well above that a simulation cannot change the laws. But what if the simulation program is based on wrong (because human-made) laws? What if gravity is not a conservative force?
    According to Bessler, weights rise faster than they fall on the other side. Is the effect of gravity in this case the same on both sides? My assumption is that exactly this is not the case. A simulation cannot take such a case into account at all and is senseless in such a question.

    ovaron

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The real proof is a working model, a proof of principle, Ovaron. So you may be right, but I hope my wheel works and then they can sim as much as they like and it won’t matter.

      JC

      Delete
    2. I think John should assume a worst case scenario which is that on the last day of September, only a week from now, he finally realizes despite his best efforts he can't make his five lever wheel run. Then he MUST have at least one working sim, preferably several, that show the basic design does work after its various parts have been properly tweaked. Without that he will have nothing that verifies that any of his clues are valid and they will all be quickly dismissed as imaginary if he even bothers to reveal any of them. He will really then be no different than a newbie Bessler pm wheel chaser that just showed up yesterday on the web with some design he dreamed up the night before.

      I'm sure his natural instinct will be to say all those failed sims don't really matter and all he has to do is find a few more clues for more changes to make to his wheel and then surely it will run when they are made. But, sadly, we all have to face the reality that we are aging and getting closer to the grave with every passing day. Our energies and enthusiasms fade a little bit more each day and the thought of continuing with a failed design becomes less and less appealing to us. At some point, finally, we have to fully admit that we have personally FAILED to find the secret of Bessler's wheels. It is a very bitter truth to have to accept. We can only console ourselves that maybe the next generation will finally find an answer and wish them the best of luck with their efforts.

      Between Bessler's death in 1745 and the present there have been about 10 generations. Each has failed to duplicate Bessler's wheels and been forced to hope the next generation would finally find a solution but it never did. How arrogant of us to even think it would be OUR generation that would finally change that situation with all of our modern equipment and computer software.

      But if our generation does not find a solution there is, imo, the real risk some future generation, maybe even the next one, will finally declare Bessler's wheels to have all been hoaxed and they will even find a convincing way to "prove" it to everyone other than just relying on the old "his wheels would have to have violated the first law of thermodynamics if they were genuine and since that's impossible they must have been faked" argument. That additional "proof" they will produce may even be historical in nature.

      Maybe a letter written by Bessler to a close friend will surface in which HE admits he hoaxed his wheels so he could get the money he needed to start a new religion and save the world from evil. He might say that he realized what he was doing was wrong but justified it as "serving a greater good" and he was sure that God would forgive him for his grand deception. That letter will actually be a very carefully made and undetectable fake by those who finally want to see the Bessler story dumped into the scrap heap of history and forgotten once and for all. They could be covert government disinformation agents or perhaps some conspiracy of skeptics.

      Those making the fake letter will justify their fraud to themselves by thinking that Bessler's wheels had to be faked even if they don't know how they were. Their intention will be that their faked letter will help young people finally and completely let go of the pm search nonsense so they can do more productive things with their lives. Those faking the letter will actually feel like they are doing a good thing and if everyone accepts it as real they will be overjoyed!

      Delete
    3. In my opinion, John is well aware that his wheel may not work.
      You are floating unnecessarily wanting to get your way. I see that you are fighting and you took John as your opponent.
      John is not to blame that Bessler left a mystery he solved himself. He has the right not to know the solution and not to know.
      Impatience is your opponent, wait and give time for John to calmly finish the working device.
      Life has taught me that peace saves from many oppressions and the truth defends itself perfectly.
      We will see.

      Delete
    4. That possibility of a faked Bessler letter you suggest anon 18:43 might seem improbable but we do live in an age of fake news, scams, cyber crimes, and governments engaged in all sorts of secret activities that the public rarely learns about.

      I think if anyone actually builds a working Bessler wheel that threatens Big Oil's profits he would soon find himself having a fatal accident and his wheel mysteriously disappearing never to be seen again. It's probably happened in the past to other inventors who were too far ahead of their times to suit the rich.

      Anyone getting a pm wheel running needs to broadcast the details to as many people as possible as quickly as possible so they can also begin making copies. Big Oil can't have all of them assassinated.

      Delete
    5. I have a few friends who think the same way as you do.
      I believe that the world is not that predatory and murderous.
      If there is a real solution and John has it, then he is safe because he has old age, contacts and knows how to act safely.

      Delete
    6. In one respect, the statement of a false letter came true in a vivid dream.
      During this dream, Besslers wheel was not only a wheel for energy, This wheel traveled, "it flew".
      The dream contained unusual elements, the likes of INK- "lamp black"? frequency waves and Mercury.
      The machine came from our true creator and was kept secret until the appropriate time in the future.
      Secret societies kept the truth hidden until an appointed time in the very near future.
      The future was known.
      All of this would mean the portrayal of the Person named Bessler in AP were false, the true details of this Ancient secret are hidden in the Story and other works.
      The society were all involved, the wheel displayed was a deception to deter many from pursuing the task, due to the little power for it's size.
      The true wheel has immense power.

      Witnessed during this vivid dream were linkages resembling common religious symbols, the likes of the Maltese cross, the Crucifix, in which the cross was part of a slide system for the fish type linkage, the pentagram, the star of David, thoughts of this line in AP came to mind during it's action, "the jew was a good christian".
      not only religious symbols, secret society symbolism was seen.

      The complete version of Besslers wheel was a flying machine, The ship that brought our true creators.
      Glad it was only a dream.

      Delete
  15. FWEIW, Where I worked, sim's were called, "CAD", computer aided design. I think a sim would aid in a design, but it can't decide on a design. It just defers the problem back to the inventor. It seams to me, on this blog, anonymous's use them more to bolster there self esteem, over dumb asses like that aren't smart enough to do a sim---------------------Sam

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here Sam. It’s difficult to explain to a simulator the advantages of hands-on building. You assemble your mechanism and when it fails to deliver, you can alter it or just watch it in action and these moments tend to suggest new alternative designs, which lead onwards......
      JC

      Delete
    2. Well said.
      Because only experienced dinosaurs are dangerous to the young.

      Delete
  16. When watch working wheel in full face and uncovered ... There in no matter, is it a sim or real word build, both of them will hypnotize you in their run.

    PLMKRN

    ReplyDelete
  17. If John's gravity wheel works within the week then a sim won't be necessary. People will sim it anyway to see if he has found the most optimal design for power density. Also just to see the PM Principle in action, at last, free of frictions to slow it down. To see the acceleration possible, and compare it to B's. "clues" of up to speed in one or two turns etc.

    If it doesn't work, John has said, paraphrased, that it might be due to his workmanship skills not up to the task at the scale he is working at. A sim can make exact mechanisms, all the same dimensions, the same mass etc. It side steps the accuracy issues of duplicating mechs in a real world build. * this is assuming that John's mechs, or entire wheel mechanics can be simmed. This can also be free of frictions to maximize potential. IOW's frictions will not be a show stopper.

    Let's hope our future role is only digital validation and to explore possible mechanical improvements of John's Bessler-Collins Gravity Wheel. Otherwise it will be for forensic purposes.

    -f

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Otherwise it will be for forensic purposes."

      It's not enough to just say one's wheel didn't work because it couldn't keep its weights' cog on the descending side as the wheel rotated. That's obvious. What one really needs to keep asking is the next question which is why didn't it keep its cog there? The detailed answers to that question will be the ones that can finally guide one to a runner.

      Delete
    2. Everyone knows that for 300 years the impossible has been tried to get the device working. Bessler himself clearly stated: (falling weights) and (they don't have to be lifted) said (you have to find a way).
      Even on his deathbed, when asked if he was lying, he firmly denied lying.
      For the PM principle, friction does not matter. Friction cannot stop it. It will work until the material it's made of is destroyed. Friction is a figment of the lack of a concept of how to get around.
      Friction causes abrasion of the impossible with the possible.
      You live with friction, so you don't have to fight it, accept it and go on.

      Delete
    3. Bessler, then age 65, fell to his death in November, 1745 while working on the F├╝rstenburg windmill. I don't think he was doing much talking after on a deathbed and denying anything.

      Delete
  18. Anon wrote : "Even on his deathbed, when asked if he was lying, he firmly denied lying."

    I do not remember this. If he was on his death bed, some time after the fall, it wouldn't have been in his books. Can you provide a reference so I can read what he allegedly said?

    And yes friction is part of everyday mechanics. It can be minimized but not totally avoided. And B. didn't have ball bearings as we know them. Just simple journals (bushings) and lubrication IINM. So we should be able to have less wasteful friction in a professional build attempt than he managed in his time. Sims default to no frictions so they give the best result possible for concept testing. If that looks good you can add back in pin frictions and windage etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't hold your breath while waiting for anon 17:01 to give you a reference for his statement about what Bessler supposedly said on his deathbed. That's because no such reference exists. He's only passing on more misinformation about Bessler.

      Delete
    2. I don't remember where I read it anymore.
      It is generally known that he died immediately at the construction site.
      I think John could confirm or deny it.
      Besides, it is known that he always assured everyone about the truthfulness of the device because he even risked his own head in defense of the truth.
      I think that my interpretation is also correct in this matter.
      In the Bessler machine, friction was not a problem.
      Olive, of course, helped with the tangent points, but was not absolutely required to prove the power of the device.

      Delete
    3. I’m not aware of any documentary or apocryphal evidence relating to a deathbed statement by Bessler.

      JC

      Delete
    4. Sorry because it looks like I did mislead and cause misinformation.
      I relied on the information obtained from all possible sources.
      In the rest of the post, I kept the message fair.
      John, I'm glad you have your finger on the pulse even though you have your job, thank you.

      Delete
    5. No problem, anon,08.19. There are a few sources of information which are inaccurate and others which are highly speculative without stating that they are. Sometimes you can’t avoid assuming they are legitimate, so I’m always pleased to offer the correct information where possible.

      JC

      Delete
    6. Here's a website I found by a Dr. Ramesh Menaria who quotes some guy named "Deva Ramanada" (some sort of Hindu mystic?) who tells us exactly what Bessler said as he was dying after falling off of his windmill. Ramanada apparently thinks Bessler was pushed by assassins and somehow landed on top of his last wheel and destroyed it! It makes interesting reading but has nothing to do with reality, imo. I like the windmill gif, but wasn't that windmill he fell off of unfinished and would have had horizontal blades on it when it was finished? (Is that Bessler's mangled body laying on top of the wheel at the bottom of the windmill?)

      http://orffyre.tripod.com/bessler/id33.html


      jason

      Delete
  19. John continues to adjust the parts in his soon to be revealed wheel while thoroughly enjoying the hands on experience of it all!

    http://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/museum/finaglab.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha, very funny, and he looks a bit like me too! Thank you for injecting a bit of humour in this sometimes too serious endeavour.

      JC

      Delete
    2. I can feel the anticipation growing here. Only five more days until the end of September. John's probably now working of the detailed drawings of his five lever mech wheel to reveal in his next blog here! Maybe he'll even have a video of the wheel to show us! I really don't care if he can get it working or not. If he truly has Bessler's wheel design someone will figure out how to get it running.

      Delete
    3. I deleted a comment, which is something I seldom do, but in this case I see no reason to allow the writer room for his sarcastic comments which he obviously thinks are hilarious but which I find offensive. I detect jealousy in his attacks on my integrity.

      JC

      Delete
    4. Good morning, John ,

      you did well ! This blog must remain user-friendly and with constructive exchanges.

      When on the due date, it doesn't really matter. Take your time and don't worry about the stressed. If they are so impatient that they find it themselves and give us a deadline, they will understand that this hobby is above all a pleasure to be savored and not a race.
      The path is often more thrilling than the finish ...

      Good continuation John ....


      Robert. . .

      Delete
    5. Thank you Robert, I do feel some pressure to deliver on time, but conflicting calls on my time compete. However, I shall post pictures of my wheel as it will be then, even if it doesn’t work. I’m still trying to write an account of the design concept including the clues and what I think they mean, but that is looking like a long document, too long to post here, so I’m also trying to explain in the shortest way possible how it works. It’s not easy!

      JC

      Delete
    6. @JC, I saw that paranoid anon's comment last night before it was deleted and think his suggestion that you would fake your coming disclosure to hide what you are really doing totally ridiculous as I'm sure most who read it did. However, most likely it was your repeated failures in the past to deliver on promised disclosures that helped to create people like him. That is why I think it's very important you deliver something this time even if it's not all of the details. A single clear drawing will be enough to trigger discussion of your approach and get people started trying to simulate the design and maybe even build it.

      It either works now or it doesn't work now as it is. If it doesn't work it either can somehow be made to work or there's no way to make it work. If there's no way to make it work then you can move on to something else. At a minimum it should give followers of this blog much to discuss and think about in the coming weeks and months.

      Delete
    7. Thanks anon. 17.11, I agree that I’ve perhaps deserved some mistrust seeing my failures to fulfil some promises I seem to have made, but it was never my intention to deceive, just a relaxed attitude to my public expressions of intention and a tendency to procrastinate.

      JC

      Delete
  20. Thanks John for deleting those toxic comments. This keeps your blog user-friendly and extends to us all a virtual welcoming hand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those deleted comments may have been toxic but that doesn't necessarily mean they aren't true. John's past repeated disappointing of the followers of this blog has created a lot of skepticism in many of them about any promised disclosures he says he plans to make. Some may actually believe that he's not even working on a wheel but only pretending to do so to keep this blog going. He needs to put an end to that kind of paranoid thinking by revealing some information this time. If he can't or won't that will only further decrease his credibility.

      Delete
  21. John presenting a false wheel is possible if you think MIB are there forcing him to do so. I see this as more feasible than any other scenario. In fact, I will be very surprised to see John post anything of value. We all talk about how big oil and the government will never allow any invention like this to surface, so do you really think John will release factual information. I think not, but not because he doesn't want to.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Find the hidden motor that will drive his wheel, if you can. It will be well obscured. But, if it is found, as a backup fail-safe plan, he will then hook it up to a light bulb and call it a "generator." Ok...show us the batteries hidden inside the motor. He won't!

    But, we can at least rest assured that Ken has a working wheel. In his book, Ken gives full details of how to build a wheel that is 100% identical to Bessler's wheel. Special latches engage and disengage to create a two-directional effect. You can see a simulation video of it on youtube.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The idea that John is being controlled by the MIB is total BS. I don't have any doubt that he will show us something this time. It probably won't be working so you can forget about it having any hidden batteries making it run.

      As far as Ken's wheel is concerned, it's a interesting design and he claims it is 100% verified by the clues he's found. But, aside from only his claim to having working sims for it, no one else has simmed it yet to show it's a runner much less built it. Until that happens I would have to consider it speculative at best. But I can't deny he put a lot of effort into documenting his research. Now it's time to see some documentation from John. I think simmers will be more likely to sim his wheel than Ken's at this time. I really hope they show it's a runner or can be made into a runner. This whole subject of Bessler's wheels is way overdue for some sort of successful breakthrough for a change.

      Delete
    2. If John's wheel is a runner, you will be able to see why it is a runner and that the need for a motor doesn't exist.
      If you are unable or you refuse to understand, then you can imagine the need for a motor to justify your incomprehension and find lots of weird and wonderfull ways of hiding a motor.
      If John's wheel doesn't work i believe he will show it as a non runner, because he isn't stupid enough to hide a motor.
      RH46

      Delete
  23. Anon 15:34 is more toxic waste.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Ken does not have a working wheel. He has a SIM that barely shows movement, and without the app parameters, that device is just a pipe dream.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you had bothered to read his description under his youtube video you would have learned that the wheel in that video was greatly slowed down to better show the motion of its levers. The actual wheel would have been turning many times faster. The model in the video is of Bessler's first Gera prototype wheel that was only 3 feet across. It had a maximum speed of over 60 rpm's!

      Delete
  25. "100% identical to Bessler's wheel"

    Not even close to reality.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ken, if you have nothing to hide, you will release all app parameters of your simulation for immediate review. At this point your cartoon simulation is nothing more that Saturday morning entertainment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol! And if you had nothing to hide you wouldn't be posting anonymously on this blog! Ken put all the details needed to sim his solution of the Bessler wheel in his book and wants others to make their own sims of it using their sim software. Those that are the most serious about Bessler's wheels will do as Ken wants them to. I'm sure he must have thought long and hard about this before deciding that's the way it should be done.

      Delete
  27. Either John is delusional or Ken B is delusional or both are delusional (which is what I am betting on). Time and sims will tell us what the truth is. However, don't expect either to ever admit he is delusional no matter how many sims he's shown that prove his wheel can't work.

    ReplyDelete

Johann Bessler’s Non-Stop Gravity Enabled Device.

I know I’ve been banging on about this for years, but here I go again! I am continually surprised that some people are still arguing about t...