For the last twenty-five years I have been publicly maintaining that Johann Bessler really did invent what used to be known as a Perpetual Motion machine. Before I even wrote my Bessler biography, ‘Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?’, I had already satisfied myself that he was genuine by studying the available evidence. Because the events took place more than 300 years ago this evidence took the form of a huge number of documents, some by Bessler, others by witnesses, newspaper reports and letters.
But surely such machines are impossible? Scientists, teachers, historians have all ruled out any chance that perpetual motion machines might be possible. Yes they have, but there are two things to bear in mind. The definition of what constitutes a perpetual motion (PM) machine has altered since 1847 and even given today’s version there are ways to avoid its implications .... and complementary to this is the apparently conflicting evidence that they ARE possible.
I’m not going to discuss the definitions of PM because it’s been covered numerous times both here and on the Besslerwheel forum, but I think it’s worth taking another look at the strong circumstantial evidence.
We should examine the reasons why and how Bessler provided the specific evidence which was designed to prove that his machine was genuine. Several demonstrations were suggested by the famous scientist and polymath, Gottfried Leibniz, a man of equal intellect to Sir Isaac Newton, his contemporary. Leibniz had considerable knowledge in the field of mechanics and designed a built his mechanical calculator, plus his interests included mathematics, logic, mining religion and history to mention just a few. He had been able to study the machine on two occasions and even though he was unable to state categorically that it was a perpetual motion machine, he was convinced that it was a remarkable invention and too valuable to be ignored. There are many letters from Leibniz to some of his correspondents discussing the wheel and how it might have worked.
The first piece of evidence which on its own could be argued as being definitively and unarguably positive, was the insistence by Karl the Landgrave of Hesse that he be permitted to examine the interior of Bessler’s machine before allowing him to demonstrate it at his castle Weissenstein in front of expert witnesses. Karl was a highly respected ruler and amateur scientist and a correspondent of Leibniz. He acted as honest broker negotiating between the warring nations of Europe which required absolute probity. But he was also known as a ‘curious gentleman’ which in those days described members of such organisations as the Royal Society who maintained an interest in studying the latest findings in the new subjects in science, and in Karl’s case sponsoring research. He had no interest or need to be involved in anything of a dubious nature.
The other pieces of evidence can be summed up as follows. The final machine or ‘wheel’ as it was called, could turn in either direction, requiring a gentle push in one or other direction from which gentle push it accelerated to its top speed. This should have ruled out any suggestion that it was wound up.
The wheel was demonstrated spinning on one set of bearings, it was then stopped and moved to a second set of bearings a few feet away where it was then given a push in either direction, accelerating again to its top speed. This was designed to allow examiners to check for connections between the axle bearings and the pillars which supported the device. The bearings were left open and it was clear that there was nothing of a suspicious nature present.
The same wheel was attached to a rope passing over a pulley and from thence down several feet to the castle courtyard. It lifted a chest of stones weighing 70 pounds from the courtyard up to the roof, and was then rotated in the opposite direction to lower the chest again.
The wheel was attached to an Archimedes screw to pump water which it demonstrated in action.
Finally Karl the Landgrave ordered Bessler to start his machine spinning. The door to the room was locked and sealed with the Landgrave’s seal and a guard ordered to stand watch outside the door. The wheel ran for a total of 54 days with one stop to inspect that it was still working with no undue wear and tear and restarted. The room had been examined both before and after the demonstration, to check that there were no secret connection to any adjoining rooms. Nothing suspicious was found.
The other recommendation from Leibniz was to arrange for official demonstrations and examinations to be carried out by experts, ministers, professors, and the nobility, and get them to sign a certificate describing what they witnessed. They were encouraged to try to discover any signs of fraud or deception but none were ever discovered.
It is hard to know what else Bessler could have done to prove his machine was genuine. I know that people have suggested some ways the inventor could have cheated, but each of them require the complicit assistance of Karl, or some other person, but frankly such suggestions are clutching at straws.
NB For those who are unfamiliar with the legend of Johann Bessler’s perpetual motion machine, see my previous blog.
https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-legend-of-johann-besslers-perpetual.html
JC
