As we enter 2021 I marvel that way back in the New Year of 2012, I thought that that coming year would see us celebrating the 300th year since Bessler discovered the secret of the Perpetual Motion machine, with a working model of his wheel. Yet here we are, nine years later no nearer to success than we were back the ....or are we? But as I frequently say, there will never be a better time than right now, for someone, somewhere on this planet, to produce a working version of Bessler’s wheel. Really, it is desperately important that we solve this ancient enigma, because there is no cheaper, no simpler and more viable an alternative to producing electricity than Bessler’s wheel.
I am well aware that some people dismiss this invention as nothing more than a toy, incapable of satisfying our electrical needs, but this need not be true. All machines are scalable and we don’t need to be put off by the imagined enormous size of such a wheel. You only have to look at the modern windmills scattered over the countryside, here in England and elsewhere and off shore to see that they are monstrous sized machines, Typical modern wind turbines have diameters of 40 to 90 metres (130 to 300 ft) and heights of 328 feet, but much larger ones are planned.
So if we wish to consider the potential size of the Bessler-wheel electricity generator, then the main consideration to overcome is not so much the size as the RPM. High speed rotation to generate electricity requires complex heavy gearing, just like the ones in the windmills, and therefor an efficient and heavy Bessler’s wheel is needed to overcome the load induced by the electric generator. But this is no different to modern windmills which turn at a leisurely 10 or 20 rpm, but produce a turbine speed in excess of 3000 rpm.
We might reduce the potential height of a Bessler generator by, in effect, placing ten or fifteen wheels on one axle. I’m sure that given suitable research an eight or ten foot high machine with a long axle of anything up to 20 or thirty feet would have a far less detrimental effect on the landscape, and it could be located within a building or even underground.
From what I know I’m fairly confident that this year someone will produce a working Bessler-wheel in 2021. When it happens there are plenty of people with enough financial muscle to take Bessler’s wheel, and research and develop it and bring it into use and provide a solution for the cheap clean energy we need.
JC
I'm more inclined to think that the solution will not be increasing the size of the wheels to increase the output.
ReplyDeleteOnce we have mastered the mechanism to extract usefull energy from gravity, we then need to struggle with finding the correct configuration using artificial gravity. I can picture 6 Bessler wheels (for example) horizantally rotating at high speed around a central axis,without the need of the output of all six to rotate them and create the artificial gravity. If mastered, maybe, they could be small enough to power vehicles.
We first need to master the first step before we can start speculating on the following steps. All the time we believe that PM is impossible, any form of speculation is considered as fantasy.
Let's just hope we manage the first step this year.
RH46
Yes we hope so. JC
DeleteJust think of how happy the Amish folk will be to have a Bessler wheel powering their saw mills!! They do LOVE mechanical innovations, and this would be a perfect fit. Going beyond the carbon footprint, their electric foot print is ZERO.
ReplyDeleteGood point Richard. It would fit in with their way of love perfectly JC
DeleteI would love to know how you think a mechanical wheel would enhance their love life, lol.
ReplyDeleteplease.... don't give up hope......there are still a few days left in 2020
ReplyDelete2012 .. 2021
ReplyDelete"Yet here we are, nine years later no nearer to success than we were back the ....or are we?"
We've turned over a lot of rocks in the field of Newtonian Physics. Everyday less rocks need looking under, providing you don't lift the same rock twice. Like Newton's apple some of us sadly don't fall far from the tree.
If the Ken B wheel shows Bessler's actual design then I think we are a lot closer to ultimate success. But unfortunately there's still no working wheel based on that design just a sim. I'm hoping that will change this year.
DeleteWhen we look at that design we see all eight lever pivots out near the rim which puts one lever on each set of spokes. But why use just one lever per set of spokes? Why not put several levers with weights along the length of each spoke? It might be possible to do that and then fill most of the inside of a wheel's drum with weights on levers at different distances from the axle with the levers getting smaller as their pivots got closer to the axle. That would result in greater torque and more power output. I think Bessler hints that could be done in MT 11 where he shows us an 18 lever wheel inside of an 18 lever wheel. See this link:
https://www.besslerwheel.com/wiki/images/f/fb/Mt_011.gif
Maybe even replace the short cylinder lead weights on each lever with much longer rod shaped ones so the drum is stretched out into a rotating barrel. The wheel's axle would have to be metal, thicker, and ride on sets of bearings to support the weight which would probably be in the tens of tons.
It might be possible to make such a "Bessler Barrel" the size of a small house that could provide electricity to an entire block of houses. It would have to be able to generate 50 to 100 kilowatts of power to do that. Unused excess power would be stored in lithium batteries. Using these instead of a national power grid would help prevent widespread blackouts. If one of these barrel machines failed, it would only knock out the power to a single block of houses. Maybe that block could temporarily tap some of the excess stored battery power from surrounding blocks' barrel machines until that block's one malfunctioning machine was repaired.
Bessler Curious
Bessler's note for MT11 is a mystery:
Delete"This figure is doubled, as one can see, and the form does not involve much, but there is more in it than meets the eye, as will be seen when I pull back the curtain and disclose the correct principle at the appropriate place, as mentioned previously."
I wonder what he meant by "...there is more to it than meets the eye..."?
@anon 05:23
DeleteHe probably meant that the drawing was not complete. It had to have more parts like ropes or springs not shown. They would be shown when he "pulled back the curtain" which was a reference to the end of MT where the drawings of his working wheels mechanisms were located. Unfortunately, that curtain never was pulled back and all because of a lying maid he fired!
Interesting that the subject of MT 11 came up. Here's a quick numerological analysis of it.
DeleteThe drawing is unusual because it shows 36 levers which is the most shown in any of the MT drawings. That may have been done to attract our attention to it. But why?
When you first look at it you see that the two wheels are in the same drum and concentric. But, look at that number 11. You could also write it as "II" which is the Roman numeral for 2 and that number fits in with two wheels being put in the same drum. But, the individual "I's" are parallel to each other. I think the hint that Bessler gives us here is that the two direction wheels he was building actually placed two one direction wheels side by side inside of the drum instead of one inside the other as shown in MT 11. If you viewed one of his two direction wheels from the side of its outer rim before the covering of wood was attached, you would see its two one direction wheels forming the Roman numeral "II".
Each of the wheels in MT 11 has 18 levers. If you add the number of levers, you get 36 levers. Now if you let them represent 36 inches, you have the diameter of Bessler's little prototype wheel which was 3 feet and the first one he built that could barely move itself. Next, look at those spokes inside of the inner wheel. There are four of them and they form the letter "X".
"X" is used for multiplication in arithmetic, so let's do as Bessler suggests and multiply something by 4. If we multiply the 36 inches by 4 we get 4 x 36 inches = 144 inches. Does that number look familiar? It's equal to 12 feet which was the diameter of Bessler largest two direction wheels! 144 is also equal to 12 x 12 which could mean a wheel's drum that was 12 feet in diameter by 12 inches thick. That could refer to the Merseburg wheel's drum.
Finally, that large letter "X" in the center of the drawing is most noticeable. "X" is the 24th letter of the alphabet and has an alphanumeric value of 24. If we multiply the individual digits we get 2 x 4 = 8. Meaning? Most likely another way that Bessler tells us that his one way wheels all used 8 levers.
I do agree that there is a lot more to this drawing than "meets the eye".
Sayer of Sooths
Similar to his other statement "...for it says more than it shows...".
DeleteI've only scratched the surface of the numerological information hidden in MT 11. For example, it's even possible to determine the shape of the levers Bessler used in his wheels from that drawing. But, I'll leave finding it as an exercise for the aspiring numerologists out there (Hint: concentrate on the center of MT 11).
DeleteHappy New Year everyone!
Sayer of Sooths
My goodness. It's like having the curved levers of MT10 (where JB says the principle is good) inside MT11. Who woulda thunk.
DeleteSince there weren't any "aspiring numerologists" out there able to decode the lever shape Bessler encrypted into MT 11, I'll provide the analysis for it now.
DeleteFirst, focus on that big "X" shaped set of four spokes in the center of the MT 11 wheel. As I previously mentioned, it can be considered to be a giant multiplication sign. Next, look at the top two and bottom two spokes. What do you see? The top two form a letter "V" and so do the bottom two but their "V" is upside down. As I've mentioned in past comments here, Bessler liked to use the letter "V" as the Roman numeral with a value of 5. So what does this give us? We have two letter "V's" or two number 5's and one multiplication sign.
To decode the symbolism, we must do what Bessler wants us to do which is to multiply the number 5's by each other to get 5 x 5 = 25. So what you might ask? Well, if you can figure out what the 25th letter of the alphabet is, then you will know the shape of the levers Bessler used inside of his wheels! (This controversial lever shape has been discussed here before.)
Note that two of the four spokes actually make contact with two of the inner wheel's 18 lever pivots. This, imo, was Bessler's way of letting us know that the numerological information he provides has to do with the levers and their pivots inside of his actual wheels. He did not have to use the four spokes shown in MT 11. He could have used six or eight but he purposely used four spokes so they would obviously form the two letter "V's". Also, he had to NOT use any spokes for the outer 18 lever wheel because that would have too confused the drawing as well as the numerological symbolism he was trying to provide us with. This gives the impression that the outer 18 lever wheel is just floating in space or is somehow attached to the drum.
There's much more numerological information hidden in MT 11, but its revelation will have to await a future comment.
Sayer of Sooths
Nahh .. no 'Y' shaped lever there. One leg hits a pivot, not two.
DeleteMore like .. 18 (1 + 8 = 9) + 18 (1 + 8 = 9) = 36 (3 + 6 = 9)
.. & 9 + 9 = 18 = 9
9 is reinforced i.e. his connected principle mentioned in MT9 !
@anon 03:52
DeleteIf you remove any one of the four spokes, the X will turn into a letter Y but it could be mirror image reversed, on its side, or inverted. Maybe SoS is onto something with his analysis. I agree with him that MT 11 stands out because of its maximum number of levers. Putting so many levers into it might have been Bessler's way of telling us the figure contains hidden info on the levers he used.
Best wishes of success to all of us!
ReplyDeleteEvery year we are just fooling ourselves by consoling one another with that or this... Are we anywhere closer?... Nope...
ReplyDeleteThe only good thing that comes every year are the good tidings... I mean simple new year wishes complimenting us... Year after year... And, in between, lots of BS... I mean discouragements that are belted on us...
The actual problem is our ignorance and also the great ego... The question here is are we genuinely interested in solving the BW mystery?... Again it is a big NO... Each of us wants to be the first and there really is a great rat race on... Each one of us is guilty in this regard... come to think of it... We aren't even heading in the right direction... too sad... Original inventions or discoveries cannot be carried out in a casual manner... Many criterias have to be met... You got to be different... Odd... Not very business minded... One should know what to believe and what to rule out... That discerning mind... To see what others missed... That passion...
Respect for others' views... Genuine debating nature... Real honesty and sincerity is also an added qualification...
We shouldn't suspect the wheel's simplicity in its appearance and construction... It is simple all right... The thing is that we don't have the creative way of thinking that Bessler had... And, since we lack the understanding we feel that it is really very difficult to build... Whether it is going to reduce global energy dependence on conventional energy is a different question altogether... We can't be sure of the answers at the moment... But first we need to get things together and get into the right direction... To see if we can really succeed... We can really know the wheel's outreach only much later when the wheel becomes popular gradually... There can't be any quick revolutionary changes in the energy scenario... The wheels efficiency has to be watched first... The wheel structure would be very crude and bulky for modern application...
And its speed could also be an impairment...
We should hurry now... It is already too late... There's always the fear of some other new energy source suddenly cropping up... And the BW story could get into oblivion even before it is reinvented...
"You got to be different... Odd..."
DeleteThen SK should have found the solution to Bessler's wheels decades ago!
Let us not forget that SK and SG by their own admission have the full and complete mechanical answer to Bessler's PM mystery machine. Anecdotally as simple as it is they refuse to share the details with you. Therefore they are no better, in fact worse, than those they admonish as being dullards, unmotivated, and unworthy.
ReplyDeleteBoth of them have obviously ascended to the next level of Bessler wheel understanding because of their years of hard work and meditation on the subject. Why should they make it easy for the rest of us to ascend to their exalted level without doing the same amount of work? What makes us unmotivated dullards worthy of such consideration from them? We should all feel honored and privileged to even have them just posting here and dropping their pearls of wisdom down to swine like us.
DeleteYes, I forget that I am of the great unwashed !
DeleteLooks like Ken B decided to celebrate the new year with another video added to his collection. You know that line in AP where Bessler said that a great craftsman would know how to make a one pound weight drop a certain distance to cause a four pound weight to fly up four times that distance and that would then let him soon make pm? It's supposed to be impossible to do something like that. Well Ken B's new video shows you exactly how to do it! He has a lever that lets a one pound weight drop one foot at one end to make a four pound weight fly up four feet at the other end!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iB7R2ttYWCw
It will work as he shows it. But now that we know how is this going to help us get a pm wheel?
DeleteIt's an interesting little sim. It cannot produce any pm because if any of the weight was removed from the 4 lb ball after it rose 4 ft, then the remaining weight of that ball would not be enough to return it to its starting location again even if the 1 lb ball falls out of its basket on the right end of the lever. That's because a ball on the left weighing less than 4 lbs won't be able to stretch that long spring enough to allow the lever to become horizontal again.
DeleteBut, if this is what Bessler meant by his AP verses, then it might show an important principle he used in his wheels. That would be that when you start counter balancing levers with stretched springs, you can make them appear to do some very unusual things which would be impossible without the springs. Now the question is how can this principle be used in a wheel with levers to keep it constantly overbalanced as it turns?
Bessler suggests once you know this principle you will then soon be able to make pm wheels. Also, if you don't know and use this principle, then all of your efforts will only fail. Sounds to me like he's saying that this principle is a critical condition necessary for success yet how many even use springs in their builds or sims?
jason
@jason
DeleteWhat many watching that video do not realize is that about 15/16 of the GPE gained by the 4 pound weight as it rises comes directly from the contracting spring. Someone had to put that energy into the spring first by stretching it before it was attached to the lever. If the 1 pound weight is removed from the basket after the 4 pound weight has hit its top stop, then all that will happen is that the 4 pound weight will sink back down to its starting position again and 15/16 of its GPE would go right back into stretching the spring again. I guess the other 1/16 would be dissipated as heat and sound after the 4 pound weight hit the bottom stop again. I also can't see any way to get some free energy out of something like this. But it's interesting to watch and apparently Bessler thought it important enough to comment on it in AP.
It is a KB whimsical folly. The mechanical method known for eons. Unsurprisingly the energy budget is balanced and the PM cupboard bare.
ReplyDeleteWhy no one has succeeded in building a working BW?...
ReplyDeleteWhy there's so much delay?...
Is perpetual motion really possible?...
Perhaps we can get an inspiration from the Bible...
We are all on earth only for our allotted span, so let us find comfort and meaning in the small, simple joys of everyday life... This sounds like very good New Year advice, a grounded and encouraging view'of reality...
But then, what is reality?... There's a time for everything, and season for every activity under heaven: a time to be born and a time to die, a time to plant and a time to uproot, a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build, a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance, a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them, a time to embrace and a time to refrain, a time to search and a time to give up, a time to keep and a time to throw away, a time to tear and a time to mend, a time to be silent and a time to speak, a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace... As a reality check, this is powerfully and simply worded, isn't it?...
Let us appreciate the blessings we enjoy from God... The only permanent thing is God... He has made everything beautiful in its time... He has also set eternity in the human heart... Yet no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end... Whoever realises this, lives gratefully, and does their work to the best of their ability are happy people...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHere's another one, SG:
Delete"A time to chase the Bessler pm and a time to finally give up because you realize it's hopeless and you're only wasting way too much of the rest of your one and only life trying to find it."
Happy new year to everyone.
ReplyDeleteThe chances that this year will bring a solution to Bessler's riddle is just as great as it was all previous years before.
Bessler told about the springs that they were just there to enhance the motion. They were not needed to bring the wheel into motion. Only the weights itself were responsible for the motion.
So if you really want to solve it, forget the springs. If you do NEED them, you are NOWHERE near.
Depends on what your definition of "enhance" is. Maybe the springs Bessler used were actually critically necessary to making the weights work and without them a "weights only" wheel cannot work?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteMy point is that the springs are NOT critically. Bessler was very clear about it.
DeleteI do not understand why it is discussed. It is such a waste and will bring no one any further.
People discussing springs are not taking the matter seriously. Or are Ken B. who's wheel is relying on springs.
The problem, Marinus, is that if you are wrong about the springs being necessary, then you will spend the rest of your life chasing designs that cannot work. Anyone following your advice will also be doomed to the same fate. Imo, you are taking a BIG gamble based on an opinion. Many put down Ken B and his "spring enhanced" OB wheel but right now he's got the only clue based design with a working sim to back it up. Everyone else just has a lot of opinions that so far haven't led anywhere.
DeleteRubbish .. Marinus is correct ! Read the material. Quote where it says that springs are critical to success ? And KB does not have a 'working' sim to back it up. His sim is totally dodgy and has been pulled apart time and time again. He refuses to 'fix' the most basic of mistakes in it. For example any experienced WM2D user knows that the ordinary 'spring' element is a 'perfect' spring. It has no energy losses for deformation etc, therefore returns 100% energy from compression and extensions. This is totally unrealistic and to take a spring assisted sim to the next level of accuracy a 'dampened spring' element must be substituted to allow for very real energy losses of 'springs'. The dampening can be a very small value but it must be there. It isn't !
Delete@anon01:19
DeleteOne could also say quote where it says springs are not critical? Bessler would have avoided discussing them because he didn't want people to think there were any springs in his wheels because that would immediate make them jump to the false conclusion that they were powered by wound up springs like clocks. When the weights were put back into the Merseburg wheel a very loud sound of a spring was clearly heard. To be that loud that spring had to have a lot of tension in it. Why so much? As for Ken B's wheel sim video, he admits in his pinned comment, IIRC, that the sim had a minor flaw in it but when he corrected it in the original, it still a ran just fine. Maybe he should have uploaded the corrected sim but why bother if what he already had on youtube worked and the flaw was so minor that no one even noticed it until he pointed it out? Ken's sim probably did use ideal parts with zero friction, no air drag, etc. Most making sims do that to make the construction of the sim as quick and easy as possible. That doesn't automatically mean that a build using real parts won't work. Whether it does or not depends upon whether the design can develop enough torque to overcome any counter torques due to friction, drag, etc. Dampened springs? Does anybody think Bessler was using them?
I also believe that Marinus is right. Springs are not a necessary addition and can therefore be left out for a PoP wheel. This continual fanatical support for Ken B’s wheel is tiring and illogical. His whole concept is derived from imaginary clues. To suggest that he was aware of the “minor flaw”, but did not bother to correct it even though he claims his sim worked, is just unbelievable given the huge amount of work he put into his book, not to mention his ‘thousands’ of sims he claims to have done. Is it remotely possible that he would have left such a massive discrepancy in his ‘evidence’ after all thst work? Come off it!
DeleteJC
JC: "Springs are not a necessary addition and can therefore be left out for a PoP wheel."
DeleteI agree with anon 00:18 on this. If your opinion is wrong, then neither you nor anyone accepting your opinion as valid will have any hope of reproducing a Bessler wheel.
JC: "This continual fanatical support for Ken B’s wheel is tiring and illogical."
Your years long hyping of your own 100% FAILED "Bessler Collins' Gravity Wheel" was far more tiring and illogical yet we all patiently endured it hoping you had finally solved the wheel. Ken B's wheel has been described as "novel" and "unique" as well as fitting all of the commonly known clues about Bessler's wheels and that is the real reason for the "continual fanatical support" of it. Maybe we should all be glad that someone made the effort to finally solve the wheel and published the solution so it could be available to anyone? I'm sure that he would not have done that unless he was extremely confident that he finally had it.
JC: "His whole concept is derived from imaginary clues."
Again, this is only your opinion and the exact same thing has been said about the few "clues" you revealed that led to your own failed wheel design. Can you please give us some specific examples of Ken's clues that you consider imaginary? Have you even read his book?
JC: "Is it remotely possible that he would have left such a massive discrepancy in his ‘evidence’ after all thst work?"
The single lever to stop contact problem in his sim isn't a "massive discrepancy". It was a minor one that was verified after he discovered it to not affect the wheel's performance which is why he did not change the video he uploaded. Your blogs here over the years have been riddled with misspellings and factual errors. Did you correct all of them?
Seriously? Have I read the book? Yes of course, he sent me a link to a copy. I read it first then again thinking that the clues he described must be worth a second look. They weren’t. It was complete and utter nonsense and his interpretations couldn’t even be described as a guesses. They were made up on the non-existent evidence. But there is another resin I know his work is entirely the product of his imagination. I have found and deciphered numerous real clues which do actually lead to the design Bessler used. They will be revealed when my own wheel works,and it won’t be a simulation, it will be an actual physical working wheel, as near as possible to Bessler’s wheel.
DeleteJC
Anon 05:49 said :
Delete"Ken's sim probably did use ideal parts with zero friction, no air drag, etc. Most making sims do that to make the construction of the sim as quick and easy as possible. That doesn't automatically mean that a build using real parts won't work. Whether it does or not depends upon whether the design can develop enough torque to overcome any counter torques due to friction, drag, etc. Dampened springs? Does anybody think Bessler was using them?"
WOOSHH !!! - right over your head.
If a sim is a 'runner' with no frictions or air drag turned on it means that 100% of energy is conserved and recycled. Then you add in low level frictions such as air drag to simulate real world conditions of energy robbing frictions. If it is still a 'runner' then you can get a little excited.
But KB's sim has other energy sapping losses beside those two. First the springs he uses are perfect (i.e. no energy losses). There is not a real world spring in existence that is 'perfect'. That's why you substitute for a dampened spring element as said and apparently you don't understand. The dampening removes a small portion of energy from each spring as a real world spring would do. Secondly KB's 'Y' levers accelerate and then decelerate rapidly against 'stops'. This deceleration is also an energy sapping process unavoidable in ALL sims and real world builds where objects move and that movement is later arrested (by whatever means). Both the use of proper springs and arresting stops robs the system of energy as well known about dissipative energy losses. Even without using dampened spring elements in place of perfect springs his sim 'runner' would lose energy from impact and the rpm would decline, let alone self accelerate as he claims. There is no small amount of positive torque provided to the sim from the use of 'springs'. It is a flawed concept by perpetrated by KB that can not withstand close scrutiny.
Your repeating these fallacies does not change the basic perceptions.
No offense intended John, but, your failure a few months ago did not seem to be based on real clues, at least you did not share any factual information you uncovered that specifically mentioned angles, lengths, weights, etc. that led to the mechanisms you included in the drawings you released, so to pick on Ken's interpretations seems a bit unjustified.
Delete#notakenfan
anon 05:49 wrote: "Even without using dampened spring elements in place of perfect springs his sim 'runner' would lose energy from impact and the rpm would decline, let alone self accelerate as he claims. There is no small amount of positive torque provided to the sim from the use of 'springs'. It is a flawed concept by perpetrated by KB that can not withstand close scrutiny."
DeleteThe only actual impacts taking place in Ken B's wheel happen after 3:00 when a lever finally makes contact with its stop. When you study that "impact" though it's really more like the lever making a gentle landing on the stop. In Bessler's big 12 foot diameter wheels those impacts would have made the steady thumping sounds but even so I don't think they would waste that much energy. In the 3 foot diameter prototype wheel he gives construction plans for I doubt if the impacts of its little levers would produce much sound at all.
Ken B's wheel doesn't actually use its springs to propel the wheel. Their only real purpose seems to be to help maintain an orientation of the weighted levers that always keeps its center of gravity on the drum's descending side as the drum turns. This cannot be done without the use of those springs which I think definitely strengthens the claims of those saying the springs are critical to achieving OB wheel pm.
Bessler Curious
John's admitted here in the past that he only "skim read" a review copy of Ken's book. That is not seriously reading and studying a text and this is why he cannot give any specific examples of Ken's clues that he thinks are "utter nonsense". But from just that minimal effort he quickly realized that Ken's clues and their analysis had nothing to do with his own "clues" and he promptly rejected them all.
DeleteJohn wants us to believe that his "clues" are the only valid ones even though the wheel design they resulted in earlier this year was quickly shown with a valid sim by "Wubbly" over at BW forum to be just another useless nonrunner. Ken's clues, otoh, lead to a wheel design that fits all generally known clues and also has a working sim to verify it (even though as anon 19:11 pointed out there was a minor flaw in it that was shown not to affect its performance).
Now John's back again claiming he has the "real clues" that will finally let Bessler's wheels be duplicated...but only by him, of course. We've all heard that pompous tune from him in the past. He may even make some occasional efforts over the next several years to fix up his last failed wheel to turn it into a runner. But most likely those infrequent efforts will only lead nowhere in the long run just as they have been doing for all of the past years he's made them.
Until you have a physical runner, or it is clear that you will have a real world runner, then ALL claims of pending runners should be taken with a grain of salt, no matter the source. Being 'clear' [to yourself] does not constitute a potential or pending runner, with or without a sim, with or without finding hidden clues, no matter how objective you think you are, nor how many books you publish on the subject. The field is level until a PM wheel is produced.
DeleteBC wrote "The only actual impacts taking place in Ken B's wheel happen after 3:00 when a lever finally makes contact with its stop."
DeleteThere's another impact for each lever that's not that obvious. Just before a lever reaches the 9 o'clock part of the drum, it's swinging ccw around its pivot and then there's a cord attached to it (Ken calls it the "stop cord" and it's colored red in his sim) which suddenly gets tight and stops the lever's further swinging. That obviously is necessary to make the lever stop moving relative to the drum just prior to it being made to start rotating cw in the other direction. It's some sort of synchronizing step in a lever's rotating motion about its pivot.
I suspect that when that cord gets tight that must put a lot of stress on it as well as the place on the lever where it is attached. I might be wrong about that though if, when the cord suddenly tightens, the lever has already been slowed down a lot because it just finished helping to lift the lever and its weight that is 45 degrees ahead of it on the drum near the 10:30 location.
I agree with you Marinus... Yes, the weights are the main players... We can do even without the springs... Another important aspect is their arrangement... Which we also refer to as the designing... Or the mechanism... Then only there will be a good coordination among them... Despite all this, ultimately, the entire thing inside is very simple... It appears to be very difficult to most because some of us are very good at constantly painting a complicated picture of BW... As if they are an expert on the matter... Very ridiculous... To see their daily postings here...
ReplyDelete"As if they are an expert on the matter... Very ridiculous... To see their daily postings here... "
ReplyDeleteYes, Suresh, it is ridiculous to see your postings here! I think you're still angry because SG won the race to become TOP GURU on this blog.
At www.besslerwheel.com---Clues to the wheel's design---any comments on clue#6 quoted here: "Springs WERE employed,but not as detractors suggested---Bessler" ??
ReplyDeleteYou'll note that the first set of clues to which you refer are somebody's generic summary. They are not quotes and referenced to known sources. Beneath them is referenced material.
ReplyDelete@anon's 14:53 and 18:52
ReplyDeleteThere are several literature references to the springs Bessler used in his wheels:
From PM, page 87 by Merseburg wheel witness Johann Mencke in 1715: "Orffyreus did not attempt to conceal the fact that his machine is set in motion by weights.” The author goes on to “conclude from circumstantial evidence that the weights were pierced in the middle and attached by connecting springs.” This is interpreted as meaning that the weights or the levers they were attached to were connected to the drum by springs of some sort.
From a December 19th, 1715 letter to Leibniz from Merseburg wheel witness Christian Wolff: "When he put the wheel onto another support and reinstalled the weights in their previous positions, he pushed down on an iron spring that gave a loud noise as it expanded upwards." Some believe that a lever with a stretched spring attached to it slipped out of Bessler's hand as he was trying to reattach its weight and that made the lever fly up and slap against some part inside of the drum.
From AP, page 346 by Bessler: "Springs and weights of the kind he describes are not to be found in my machine.” This is interpreted as meaning that Bessler's wheels used springs, but they weren't the same kind used in clocks of the time which were spiral mainsprings to power a clock movement and the more delicate hairsprings on balance wheels to regulate timekeeping. That means that Bessler would have either used flat strip type springs like those in MT18 or simple helical coil type springs like those in MT17 and MT60.
Imo, anyone claiming Bessler's wheels didn't use springs doesn't know what he's talking about.
IF springs were present they were to moderate an internal behaviour. Perhaps to give a better performance or more reliability. Mencke and Wolff speculate because they did not see springs. Wolff heard something that he thought sounded like a spring. The only inference that Bessler may have had springs in his Merseburg Wheel comes indirectly from what he said "Springs and weights OF THE KIND he describes are not to be found in my machine". He could have said Of ANY KIND but chose OF THE KIND, leaving the question open to there being some present in a minor role.
DeleteHis main quote (that Marinus gives) makes it abundantly clear that weights are the MAIN constituent part responsible for the PM. ".. these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself ..". If springs were the tipping point to PM they would be the essential parts, and not the weights which remain out of CoG.
-f
Furthermore .. the speculation about springs from two of the witnesses was for the Merseburg bi-directional wheel (translocation test where it was moved 5 or 6 paces). Not for the earlier one-directional wheels. Therefore Ockham's suggests that springs may have been some part of a latch and release mechanism for a two-way wheel format. This is conceivable if two mech systems were used as speculated by some, one for each direction of rotation. The other not in use latched until its direction is selected when it is released.
Delete-f
Das Triumphirende Perpetuum Mobile, Bessler, 1719.
ReplyDelete...
Inward structure of the wheel is of a nature according to the laws of perpetual motion, so arranged that certain disposed weights once in rotation, gain force from their own swinging, and must continue their movement as long as their structure does not lose its position and arrangement. Unlike all other automata, such as clocks or springs or other hanging weights which require winding up or whose duration depends on the chain which attaches them, on the contrary these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself; as from them is received the universal movement which they must exercise so long as they remain out of the centre of gravity; and when they come to be placed together, so arranged that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wonderfully speedy flight, one or another of them must apply its weight vertically to the axis, which in its turn must also move.
-/-
There are springs in his wheel. But they are not needed for designing a classical perpetual mobile. For that is what he did. Simply a wheel with weights.
It's a riddle and it's solvable (without springs).
Bessler said his springs were not the kind found in clocks (ie, the kind that require external winding). What if he found a method and type of spring that could be wound internally? The end result would be the same - just no human intervention and thus PM.
Delete"Bessler said his springs"
DeleteWhere does Bessler say HIS springs ?