I’m currently getting ready to move house again so finding time to write my blogs and complete my work on Bessler’s wheel, is not so easy. Space to work in is limited and although we expect to be out of this house by the end of March, I will then be staying with one of my daughters until we have chosen our next house. This means no workshop until after we have moved! In which case I’m trying to finish construction in the next four or five weeks! So in the mean time here are the details about Bessler aka Orffyreus.......again.
The Legend of Bessler's wheel.
On 6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) announced that after many years of failure, he had succeeded in designing and building a perpetual motion machine. For more than fourteen years he exhibited his machine and allowed people to thoroughly examine it. Following advice from the famous scientist, Gottfried Leibniz, who was able to examine the device, he devised a number of demonstrations and tests designed to prove the validity of his machine without giving away the secret of its design.
Karl the Landgrave of Hesse permitted Bessler to live, work and exhibit his machine at the prince's castle of Weissenstein. Karl was a man of unimpeachable reputation and he insisted on being allowed to verify the inventor's claims before he allowed Bessler to take up residence. This the inventor reluctantly agreed to and once he had examined the machine to his own satisfaction Karl authorised the publication of his approval of the machine. For several years Bessler was visited by numerous people of varying status, scientists, ministers and royalty. Several official examinations were carried out and each time the examiners concluded that the inventor's claims were genuine.
Over several years Karl aged and it was decided that the inventor should leave the castle and he was granted accommodation in the nearby town of Karlshafen. Despite the strong circumstantial evidence that his machine was genuine, Bessler failed to secure a sale and after more than thirty years he died in poverty. His death came after he fell from a windmill he had been commissioned to build. The windmill was an interesting design using a vertical axle which allowed it to benefit from winds from any directions.
He had asked for a huge sum of money for the secret of his perpetual motion machine, £20,000 which was an amount only affordable by kings and princes, and although many were interested, none were prepared to agree to the terms of the deal. Bessler required that he be given the money and the buyer take the machine without viewing the internal workings. Those who sought to purchase the wheel, for that was the form the machine took, insisted that they see the secret mechanism before they parted with the money. Bessler feared that once the design was known the buyers could simply walk away knowing how to build his machine and he would get nothing for his trouble.
I became curious about the legend of Bessler’s Wheel, while still in my teens, and have spent most of my life researching the life of Johann Bessler (I’m now 76). I obtained copies of all his books and had them translated into English and self-published them, in the hope that either myself or someone else might solve the secret and present it to the world in this time of pollution, global warming and increasingly limited energy resources.
The problem still remains the same... Whoever succeeds in building the BW is certainly going to face the same difficulties that Bessler faced... The buyer would insist on seeing the internal structure and this will not be agreeable to the inventor... So the biggest problem of the inventor actually is in trying to find a genuine buyer... Rather not in inventing the wheel itself...
ReplyDeleteThe secret could be lost during patenting process if not during the demo... First, we need to address this problem... There's just no point in inventing the BW and then go through all the pain that Bessler went through and finally fall to a tragic end... The wheel's simplicity is to be blamed for all this...
Another intriguing thing is why it has not been successfully invented so far despite possessing today's technical advances?...
Why authorities or any corporator or any other agency is not offering or coming forward to develop or fund this project?... Why the inventor is destined to face so much trouble and finally die without seeing the light?...
Ramesh Menaria is one such Bessler enthusiast... I again checked his web activities and found that he is not available since 2013... I think he is dead and gone the Bessler way... did he ever know that he would end this way?... Another Bessler or pm martyr...Now I realise why some people like Yellow and Andre sir become wise and opt to quit... There could be many more... I am just wondering who could be the next... It is actually becoming a perpetual quest unto death... Perhaps, the real benefit or enjoyment lies in the chase rather than in the successful hunt itself...
If successfully invented then who is going to install this bulky and old fashioned device in their residence or farm...
The real dilemma would begin when the BW is successfully invented... Maybe the time is not ripe enough... And, in the meanwhile, I wish everyone here a happy reading chasing the coded secret...
Good day...
Moving AGAIN?! How can you take the stress of that at your age? I've been at the same residence for thirty years now and can't even imagine going through the hassle of a big move at my age and I'm younger than you. I plan on dying right here in my own home, preferably in my own bed! Well, best of luck to you and your wife. Sometimes a change of locale is good for one's research.
ReplyDeleteSuresh, I accept your argument about the difficulty of getting patents and having authorities accept your wheel, but I have the solution which I arrived at many years ago. I won’t be patenting anything for the reasons I have posted many times. I would give the design away.
DeleteJC
Anon 03.37. I didn’t intend to move again but old age has slowed me down a little and this house is too large and we could do without a second floor and stairs to climb, so we can live on one floor. We’ve been here 5 years, 20 years at last house, 10 at the one before that, 9 at the one before that, 2 at the one before that and 18 months at our first house! So this will be our 7th house.
DeleteJC
JC sir... I am sorry, but I am quite sure you wouldn't be saying this if you had the secret...
DeleteI can assure you Suresh, I will not be patenting the device if or when I get a working model. I firmly believe that I either have the solution OR I will post enough information for someone else to succeed,
DeleteJC
Unless you can post a drawing showing the design which either you or someone else can confirm with a working sim or a real world build, then what do you really have? Just another feel good daydream. The world of the pm chasers is filled with people with feel good daydreams who all think their particular daydream is Bessler's wheel and everyone else's is a delusion. Many of them will decide to just keep their particular daydream going as long as they can and will do that by making sure they never do post any drawings for others to evaluate and show to be unworkable. If that happened, then their daydream would end and they would have no daydream and the sense of hope it gives them. Nothing worse than being a hopeless pm chaser because then it puts one under constant pressure to get a new feel good daydream going as soon as possible. That can take a lot of hard work and for many becomes impossible.
DeleteAnon.16.16. I agree with you, but at some point, unless I have a working design I must post what I think I know, even if I’m wrong. I had planned to publish my code breaking successes but decided not to when I saw the result of Ken B’s huge publication and the reactions to it, I decided to plod on with my builds for a little while longer. I’m still hoping to finish it before I have to abandon my work shop because I’m moving house. Once I’m settled in my new home, I’ll return to my work, but I suspect this will be my last attempt at a working model.
DeleteJC
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteJohn wrote "I had planned to publish my code breaking successes but decided not to when I saw the result of Ken B’s huge publication and the reactions to it..."
DeleteI don't pity Ken B at all because right now he's probably got the biggest "feel good daydream" going since Bessler. If that wheel he found is "it", then he's famous. If it's not, then he's still made a big mark in the Bessler history. Proving his wheel is not "it" won't be easy though which is probably why no one has tried yet even though he revealed the design two years ago. Even if someone says he's disproved it with a non running sim or build, Ken B and his fans will just say he didn't follow his instructions carefully enough and work accurately enough. So Ken B can never really wake up from his particular feel good daydream when you think about it. Pity him? No, I actually envy him for how he managed to write himself into the Bessler history with a single book.
Unfortunately hi-s-tory won't judge KB's daydreams and his antics kindly when the real gravity PM wheel design is revealed.
Delete"Proving his wheel is not "it" won't be easy though which is probably why no one has tried yet..."
DeleteI agree. It's not an easy design to sim. The springs, cords, and masses of the design's weights and levers have to be just right or he says it won't work properly or at all. I also have my doubts about it being easy to build. He gives detailed instructions for what he says was Bessler's 3 foot diameter prototype wheel (that's the one in his youtube video), but the parallel pairs of arms of its levers are each only a few inches long and one of the pairs of arms on each lever is about 2 inches long and has to have four different types of cords attached along its length to steel pins in it (using tiny hooks you have to make out of steel staples!) so you will be placing the hooks only about a half inch from each other. I don't know about others, but I don't think I could construct something with those tight tolerances. But, to be fair, he does tell you how to make the larger levers used in wheels with diameters of, IIRC, 4.5, 6, 9, and 12 feet. They would be easier to work on, but the time and expense of constructing these larger wheels goes up quickly along with their diameters.
@anon 02:12
DeleteBut, those four little hooks on that lever's arm you mentioned aren't all attached in the same plane. He has them distributed among five different sections of the width of each lever which is about 3 inches wide. Their attachment points actually have a sort of staggered distribution so that the actual distances between nearest ones is more like three quarters of an inch to an inch. Still tight, but better than only half an inch. We might have problems working with something like this, but Bessler, who was once a clockmaker's apprentice, wouldn't since he was skilled with working with small mechanisms. That first three foot diameter wheel he made was only four inches thick. Its levers would have to have been less than four inches wide so they did not rub against the inside of the drum when it was turning and they were swinging around their pivots.
If you are not sure you could construct a 3 foot prototype wheel to those dimensions and tolerances then you are not alone. Very few could, which means it is not easy to design and fabricate as it is said to be by Karl. This is a first red flag about this design.
DeleteNext are KB's sims, which have been well discussed and pulled apart. And his insistence that his accurate proportions Merseburg lifting test sim can hoist its load two floors and in doing so comes to a stop running out of momentum. When the various eye witness reports say it lifted all the way through with the same rapidity and didn't slow down. This is a second red flag to the design.
Lastly, Bessler purportedly built a 10 inch table model with stampers, reported in a newspaper as ready for sale. KB and his supporters claim a newsprint error of the diameter with no proof other than speculation. It would be almost impossible to fabricate the KB design accurately to those tiny dimensions, let alone be described as layman simple and easy to build. If you thought you might have a mighty struggle with an accurate 3 foot wheel imagine the difficulty with an accurate 10 inch wheel.
@anon 04:49
DeleteThose hoisting tests done with Bessler's wheels were basically braking tests and the mass of the loads would have been carefully selected so that a wheel would always slow and finally stop turning just before the load reached a pulley attached to the outside of a building. If that did not happen, then the load would have finally hit the pulley stopping the movement of the rope around it and the pulley or its support would then have been torn away as the load fell back toward the ground. As the rope suddenly then went tight again, it would probably have torn out the window frame and then either break or, if it did not break, possibly damage the axle of the wheel that its other end was wrapped around.
It's also possible that, while the wheel constantly slowed down during one of these load hoisting tests, the load would have appeared to rise more or less at a steady rate. That could happen because, as the rope wound around the axle, it did so forming layers of rope around the axle. As the diameter of each layer of added rope increased, they acted like axles of increasing diameter that the rope was being wrapping around. That would then have tended to increase the vertical ascent rate of the load outside of the window and that would then have compensated for the decrease of the load's vertical ascent rate caused by the slowing wheel so that the vertical ascent rate of the load appeared constant throughout a lift.
I also don't think many take seriously that newspaper report of Bessler wanting to sell a 10 zoll or 10 inch diameter wheel. The fact that the figure ends in a 0 is a "red flag" and tends to suggest it was a typo and should have actually read 100 zolls which is 8.333 feet.
*sigh*
DeletePMAAMS? Pg 64 : The first Certificate said that following the notice in the press, arrangements were made to carry out the test as requested by Orffyreus. The test was to specifically include a translocation of the wheel from one set of bearings to another, thus obviating the accusation that the machine was driven through the bearings. It continued thus,
'The inventor first put in motion his six ells (11.15 feet) in diameter and one foot thick machine, which was still resting on the same wooden support upon which it had previously been mounted. It was stopped and re-started, turned both left and right as many times as was requested by the members of the Commission, or the spectators. The machine was started by a very light push with just two fingers and accelerated as soon as just one of the weights, hidden inside, began to fall.
Within about one revolution, the machine had acquired a strong and even rotation, even when a box was lifted, which had been filled with six whole bricks weighing together about seventy pounds. The weight was lifted by means of a rope conducted through a window by means of a pulley, eight ells (14.8 feet) upwards to the roof, and several Clafter (a Clafter is equal to about 8.2 feet) down into the yard. The box was lifted as many times as was requested.
'signed at Merseburg, 31st October, in the year 1715.
If you examine that quote a little more carefully, you can interpret it very differently.
Delete"Within about one revolution, the machine had acquired a strong and even rotation, even when a box was lifted, which had been filled with six whole bricks weighing together about seventy pounds."
All this tells us is that after the Merseburg wheel was pushed started and its drum had completed a single rotation, it appeared to be turning rapidly and smoothly. But, it does not tell us how long that first rotation took or whether or not the wheel had reached its final terminal rotation rate of 40 rpm's yet.
It also tells us that when the box with the bricks in it, which had a total weight of 70 pounds, finally had its rope attached to the wheel's axle, that load was lifted at what appeared to be a steady rate. But, it does not tell us whether or not the rope was actually attached to the axle at the end of the wheel's FIRST rotation after its start up or at a later time. For the load outside the window to be raised 14.8 feet, the wheel would have needed to be turning at its maximum speed of 40 rpm's BEFORE the rope to the load was attached to its axle. We aren't told, however, how long it took the accelerating wheel to reach that speed. Most likely it was several minutes after the wheel was started.
We also aren't told what happened when the load finally reached that pulley outside of the window. If the wheel was still turning at 40 rpm's, then are we supposed to believe that Bessler was able to manually stop it just before the load hit the pulley? That seems to be very improbable. Most likely, he did not need to stop the wheel because it stopped itself! That happened because by the time the load had finally been lifted vertically through 14.8 feet, the wheel had used up all of the rotational kinetic energy that had built up in it during its slow, minutes long acceleration.
It's unfortunate that there is enough ambiguity in the English translations we have of the Bessler documents to allow for various interpretations of them to be made. But, unless one has the correct interpretations of them, all of his efforts to reverse engineer Bessler's wheels will only be a total waste of his time and effort.
Bessler Curious
*sigh*
DeletePMAAMS? Pg 69 : 'Firstly, the inventor showed us all around and overwhelmingly demonstrated that his perpetual motion machine had no hidden cord as was falsely alleged. The circular machine is about six ells in diameter and has a thickness of about one foot. The inventor started it with the merest little effort. As soon as just one of the internal weight s began to fall, the machine started to revolve with such strength that it turned forty or more times a minute, and it could only be stopped with great difficulty.'
An account is given of the turning of the wheel to the left and the right; and the raising of the bricks, and he adds, 'the most extraordinary thing I noticed was that the machine showed the same strength and speed during the lifting and lowering of the load.' ' Weise then signed his document.
>
'Furthermore, the machine may be of little value to the public unless it can be improved. At the moment it can lift a weight of sixty pounds, but to achieve this the pulley had to be reduced more than four times, making the lifting quite slow. The diameter of the wheel is about twelve feet, and as well, the bearing was quite thin, about one quarter of an inch and only a sixth of its length was subject to friction.' 'Wolff to Leibniz
Let's now see what these quotes actually tell us:
Delete"As soon as just one of the internal weights began to fall, the machine started to revolve with such strength that it turned forty or more times a minute, and it could only be stopped with great difficulty."
Again, we are not told how long AFTER it got that initial push it took for the Merseburg wheel to reach a speed of 40 rpm's. Most likely it was several minutes.
"...the most extraordinary thing I noticed was that the machine showed the same strength and speed during the lifting and lowering of the load."
After the load being hoisted outside the window was near to the outside pulley and the wheel had stopped turning, the weight of the load would have provided the torque to axle needed to start the two directional wheel turning in the other direction as the rope wrapped several layers around its axle unwound. But, Bessler's wheels exhibited a odd effect. If one tried to make them rotate faster than they preferred to do at any particular point in their acceleration, they then actually exerted a braking action on the accelerating torque. That is why the hoisted loads, as they came down again, were always seen to lower at a steady rate.
"At the moment it can lift a weight of sixty pounds, but to achieve this the pulley had to be reduced more than four times, making the lifting quite slow."
That shows how really low the constant torque of one of Bessler's wheels was which would have been at its maximum value right after startup. To lift the load of bricks right after the Merseburg wheel was given its starting push, you had to use a pulley system that increased the axle torque by at least a factor of 5 times. When that was done, the load would be rising much slower than when it was attached, without the pulley's system mechanical advantage, directly to axle of the wheel turning at its maximum speed of 40 rpm's to produce a much faster hoisting of the load outside of the window.
Bessler Curious
"Within about ONE revolution, the machine had acquired a STRONG and EVEN rotation, EVEN WHEN a box was lifted, which had been filled with six whole bricks weighing together about seventy pounds.
Delete'Certificate signed at Merseburg, 31st October, in the year 1715."
When given an initial two finger push from stationary the wheel accelerated to an EVEN (constant) ROTATION (of about 40 rpm) in about ONE revolution ! The Certificate describes the rotation as STRONG. Whilst no time interval to reach 40 rpm is given the association with the adjective STRONG suggests a quick and powerful acceleration. Thus, in about ONE revolution the wheel was at optimal operating speed for its design. It did not take minutes to reach 40 rpm otherwise that would have been recorded by more than one commentator and in the Group Certificate account i.e. it's low torque/power would have been obvious to all and duly recorded as a major limitation to it's commercial attractiveness. Other than speculated by you of course.
It did the SAME (rotated at 40 rpm) in one rev when lifting a load of bricks of about 60 to 70 lbs. The box lift was quite SLOW (up and down) because of pulley reductions employed to increase Mechanical Advantage of the wheels torque whilst reducing Speed Ratio as per the Law of Levers.
Its quick acceleration to working rpm, in one revolution, whether loaded or not, suggests a relatively powerful machine with a good and useful torque profile. Even if Wolff thought it could and should be developed further.
Once again, anon 23:05, NO WHERE does it say that the Merseburg wheel was turning at 40 rpm's after it had completed its first rotation. That is only an assumption you are making because you want to believe that Bessler's wheels had much higher torques and power outputs than they actually had. I think you've been hypnotized by the use of words like "great", "strength", "strong", and "even" in the English translations we have. If so, then you need to snap out of it and look at what information those translations are actually providing us with.
DeleteHis wheels' low torques and power outputs might not have been obvious to the crowds of the curious who gathered at Bessler's home to watch demonstrations of his wheels because he knew how to set up demonstrations that gave the false impression that his wheels were very powerful. Those, however, with engineering training and experience who actually tested the wheels quickly realized how little power they produced.
That was probably the major obstacle Bessler faced as he tried to sell his invention. Torquewise, they could not compete with even small water and windmills or the primitive steam engines then being developed then. His wheels' only real selling point was that they did not require water, wind, or fuel. That's certainly nice, but to match the power output of those other devices, Bessler's wheels would have to have been the sizes of buildings with weights in the tens of tons. No businessmen would ever have invested 100,000 thalers in something like that. And, even if we do successfully reproduce Bessler's wheels today, most likely no modern businessmen will be interested in investing in them either. Of course, if modern reproductions can somehow be greatly improved, that situation might quickly change.
Bessler Curious
"Once again, anon 23:05, NO WHERE does it say that the Merseburg wheel was turning at 40 rpm's after it had completed its first rotation."
DeleteOnce Again .. Merseburg Certificate alternative translation from BW.com "Examinations" :
"The machine was started by a very light push with just two fingers and accelerated as one of the weights, hidden inside, began to fall. Gradually, within about one revolution, the machine acquired a powerful and even rotation, which continued until it was forcefully brought to a stop again; the machine preserved the same rapid motion when lifting a box filled with six whole bricks weighing together about 70 pounds."
We shall have to agree to disagree. As you do with the Merseburg witnessed 1/4 inch iron axle (for your thousand pound behemoth), the Ten Zoll Table Top Model (he meant One Hundred you say), and the the clear statements that the Merseburg wheel was at operating rpm in about one revolution (or approx. 40 rpms) and the witness statements of the Kassel bi-directional wheel taking 2 to 3 turns to reach 26 rpm, and 20 rpm with the water screw operational.
You have a severe case of Selection Bias to fit your hypothesis ! And provide no proof whatsoever of your alternative speculations.
Yes, we definitely need to "agree to disagree" on these various issues. Once Bessler's wheels, particularly his 12 foot diameter, bidirectional ones, are finally constructed, all of these issues can then be resolved. Let us all hope such reproductions occur before it is our turns to pass on...
DeleteBessler Curious
Je pense que c'est l'axe de la Rea qui faisait 1/4 de pouce
DeleteJB
@JB
DeleteSi par "Rea" vous voulez dire que l'axe en acier de la roue de Merseburg ou Kassel pivote, alors 1/4 de pouce est beaucoup trop petit. Très probablement, le pivot de l'essieu de la roue de Merseburg avait un diamètre de 3/4 de pouce et le pivot de l'axe de la roue de Kassel avait plus de 1 pouce de diamètre.
English translation:
If by "Rea" you mean either the Merseburg or Kassel wheel steel axle pivots, then 1/4 inch is much too small. Most likely the Merseburg wheel axle pivot was 3/4 inch in diameter and the Kassel wheel axle pivot was over 1 inch in diameter.
JC wrote way above on 23 February 2021 at 07:47: "So this will be our 7th house."
DeleteThere's that number again (7) that SoS claims is so lucky PLUS you have his previous prediction that you would have great luck until at least August 6th of this year! Maybe you are destined to finally find Bessler's secret wheel design only AFTER you make your move to your next and seventh house?! Another interesting numerological "coincidence" here.
"English translation:
DeleteIf by "Rea" you mean either the Merseburg or Kassel wheel steel axle pivots, then 1/4 inch is much too small. Most likely the Merseburg wheel axle pivot was 3/4 inch in diameter and the Kassel wheel axle pivot was over 1 inch in diameter."
1/4 inch was recorded by Wolff. And the Kassel as 3/4 inch. Also who says One Hundred zolls to describe a wheels diameter. They say x ells. Lastly no one doubts that the Kassel wheel rotated strong and even in about 2 to 3 revolutions at 26 rpm unloaded. No one says the rotation was strong and even in 2 or 3 turns but not yet at 26 rpms. So why would the Merseburg be any different just because it was strong and even in about 1 revolution. Deal with facts.
The 1/4 inch reported is doubted by some because it seems too thin and flimsy to support a very heavy wheel, and reliably conduct load tests ect. The conclusion is not to doubt the reported information from a respected witness but to doubt that the wheel was very heavy. Nes't pas !
DeleteI have trouble imagining a 1/4" axle pivot supporting just a 6" diameter x 6' long wooden axle by itself let alone with the drum and weights attached to it! Clearly some sort of translation error or Wolff blundered when he wrote 1/4 inch.
Deleteanon 19:34 wrote "Lastly no one doubts that the Kassel wheel rotated strong and even in about 2 to 3 revolutions at 26 rpm unloaded."
I doubt it! If the Kassel wheel was turning at 26 rpm's after only 2 rotations that means that it would have been turning with an average speed of about 13 rpm's during those 2 rotations if the acceleration was smooth. How long to complete 2 rotations then? 13 rotations / minute = 0.217 rotations / second. 2 rotation / (0.217 rotations / second) = 9.22 seconds.
So, we're supposed to believe that Bessler gave the Kassel wheel a push with two fingers and LESS than 10 seconds later it was turning at it's full speed? Totally ridiculous to even think this actually happened, imo. If it did something like that, then Bessler wouldn't have had trouble finding a buyer and Leibniz wouldn't have written a letter saying that Bessler's wheel (the Merseburg one he actually tested) was not able to do much.
anon 21:20 wrote "The conclusion is not to doubt the reported information from a respected witness but to doubt that the wheel was very heavy. Nes't pas !"
I doubt that if the Kassel wheel was "light" that it could have lifted hundreds of pounds up through the height of several stories at that count's castle. No way. That kind of a lift requires a massive wheel that has a lot of rotational kinetic energy built up in it.
Ken B uploaded a nice sim he made last year that shows the Kassel wheel hoisting up a 200 pound load of bricks through a height of 48 feet at the count's castle. Starting with a speed of 26 rpm's, that lift took 98.25 seconds to complete and required a wheel with a mass of 1,100 pounds! Conveniently, the load comes to a stop right outside of the wheel room's window just as the wheel stops.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKytCoA2Kjk
@anon23:44
DeleteKen B could have gotten the same time and height for the lift of a 100 pound load of bricks if he used a Kassel wheel with a mass of only 550 pounds. How do we know that the load of bricks it was lifting was 200 pounds?
Anon23:44 "So, we're supposed to believe that Bessler gave the Kassel wheel a push with two fingers and LESS than 10 seconds later it was turning at it's full speed? Totally ridiculous to even think this actually happened, imo."
Delete.. read and weep, ridiculous ain't it ! From BW.com menu 'Eyewitness Accounts'.
"Joseph Fischer (1693 - 1742)
Draftsman, Illustrator, and Architect to the Emperor of Austria
Viewed the bi-directional wheel in 1721
"Although I am very incredulous about things which I do not understand, yet I must assure you that I am quite persuaded that there exists no reason why this machine should not have the name Perpetual Motion given to it; and I have good reason to believe that it is one, according to the experiments which I have been allowed to make... It is a wheel which is twelve feet in diameter, covered with an oil-cloth. At every turn of the wheel can be heard the sound of about eight weights, which fall gently on the side toward which the wheel turns. This wheel turns with astonishing rapidity, making twenty-six turns a minute when the axle works unrestricted. Having tied a cord to the axle, to turn an Archimedean screw for raising water, the wheel than made twenty turns a minute. This I noted several times by my watch, and I always found the same regularity. I then stopped the wheel with much difficulty, holding on to the circumference with both hands. An attempt to stop it suddenly would raise a man from the ground.
Having stopped it in this manner, it remained stationary... I commenced the movement very gently to see if it would of itself regain its former rapidity, which I doubted, believing that it only preserved for a long time the impetus of the impulse first communicated. But to my astonishment I observed that the rapidity of the wheel augmented little by little until it had made TWO TURNS, and then it REGAINED its former speed, until I observed by my watch that it made the same twenty-six turns a minute as before, when acting freely; and twenty turns when it was attached to the screw to raise water."
Just like the Merseburg Wheel - about ONE TURN to achieve its former speed.
DeleteWhy would they be any different!
Unless your wheel was so weak (low torque) that it took an age to get up to 40 rpm and 26 rpm respectively. In which case you might convince yourself that the witnesses were lying or mistaken.
No need for anon 23:44 to weep yet because he could be right!
DeleteJoseph Fischer wrote "But to my astonishment I observed that the rapidity of the wheel augmented little by little until it had made TWO TURNS, and then it REGAINED its former speed, until I observed by my watch that it made the same twenty-six turns a minute as before, when acting freely..."
This can easily be interpreted as Fischer saying that, from a standstill, he watched the Kassel wheel complete two turns during which it GRADUALLY picked up speed and THEN it continued to accelerate until, at some future time, he finally measured its rotation rate of 26 rpms. We don't read him saying that AS SOON AS it completed 2 turns it was turning at 26 rpms. No, he implies that there was some additional time and acceleration needed AFTER it completed 2 rotations before he finally measured it turning at 26 rpms. We really don't know how much extra time was needed. If it weighted 1100 pounds like Ken B claims, then it could have needed five to ten minutes more to finally reach 26 rpms.
I agree with anon 23:44 that the Kassel wheel reaching 26 rpms in less than 10 seconds seems way too much. To do that the 12 foot diameter wheel would have to have completed a single turn in about only 5 seconds and that after just being "very gently" pushed. Seems impossible.
Je parlais de l'axe de la poulie de levage des briques.
DeleteJB
If the drum of the Kassel wheel was completely hollow (that is, no levers and weights inside of it) and contained a 150 lb. man who was less than about 5'8" tall (which is 6' minus the 4" radius of the axle), then if he could run up the inside surface of the drum's outer rim wall, he might be able to get the drum and axle to complete a single turn in only 5 seconds. He'd have to run at about 5 miles per hour. Then after two drum rotations he'd have to be running at about 10 miles per hour. Humans have managed to reach maximum running speeds of about 28 miles per hour. He'd have to keep running along at 10 miles per hour then and do so without hitting against any of the other things inside of the drum like spokes which would be impossible since that drum was only about 18 wide on the outside and, with internal spokes, would have been even narrower on the inside.
Deletejason
Maybe Bessler faked the Merseburg and Kassel wheels using some sort of axle suspended monowheel? But he would have had to have either kids or midgets inside of them to do the peddling.
Deletehttps://motherboard-images.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/no-slug/818f5ffa9cb4e8d2979bca412e3b9259.jpg
That method of possibly hoaxing with the mono wheel is interesting. It's nice because the person, child or midget, inside of the drum can be comfortably seated and just has to peddle without having to climb up the inside curving wall of the drum. But Bessler's 12 foot diameter wheels were two directional and that would then have required the rider to occasionally back peddle which would be awkward to do. Bessler would have had to have some sort of reverse gear mechanism that the rider could engage whenever he noticed that Bessler was giving the wheel a push in the direction the rider was not facing. That would allow him to peddle in the same direction at all times, while making the drum turn in either direction.
DeleteAlso, it would have been nice if the rider could have had some sort of speedometer so he would know when he had the drum turning at either 40 rpm's for the Merseburg wheel or 26 rpm's for the Kassel wheel. But that would require Bessler to have invented the mechanical speedometer mechanism about 200 hundreds years before it actually was invented.
These use a rotating shaft from some rotating part to produce a rotating magnetic field using a permanent magnet. That field then induces eddy currents and another magnetic field in a small metal drum whose shaft's end is connected to a pointer that moves along a scale to read the speed. The drum's induced magnetic field is pulled along by the rotating magnet field, but is resisted by the tension of an uncurling spiral spring attached to the drum. The faster the permanent magnet rotates, the stronger the eddy currents and induced magnetic field in the little drum and the stronger the pull on the little metal drum. That then uncurls the spiral spring some more and moves the pointer to indicate a higher speed.
It might have been technically possible for a clockmaker to make such a mechanical speedometer in the early 18th century, but he would have to have understood how electromagnetic induction worked and that principle wasn't discovered until about a century later. If a rider inside of the drum of one of Bessler's wheels was peddling to make it turn, he'd probably just watch marks moving along the inside of the drum's outer wall and would, with practice, know when he was turning the drum at the right speed. He'd also need to have some sort of lamp inside with him to light up the drum's dark interior so he could see those marks moving past him.
He'd have to slip inside of the drum just before a demonstration. That could be done by opening a seam up in the cloth covering on the back side of the drum and him crawling into the drum's interior between two spokes after which Bessler would have tacked it shut again until the demonstration was over and it was time to let the rider out again.
Anon6:34 ... really ... tilting at windmills ... 'sGravesande Letter 1721 (different source) - acquired greatest velocity of 26 rpm in two or three turns (3/4 inch iron axle) !
Delete'...The inventor has a turn for mechanics, but is far from being a profound mathematician, and yet his machine has something in it prodigiously astounding, even though it should be an imposition. The following description of the external parts of the machine, the inside of which the inventor will not permit to be seen, lest anyone should rob him of his secret. It is a hollow wheel or kind of drum, about fourteen inches thick, and twelve feet in diameter; being very light as it consists of several pieces of wood framed together; the whole of which is covered over with canvas, to prevent the inside from being seen. Through the centre of this wheel or drum runs an axle of about six inches diameter, terminated at both ends by iron bearings of about three-quarters (3/4) of an inch diameter upon which the whole thing turns. I have examined these bearings, and am firmly persuaded that nothing from without the wheel in the least contributes to its motion. When I turned it but gently, it always stood still as soon as I took my hand away. But when I gave it any tolerable degree of velocity, I was always obliged to stop it again by force; for when I let it go, it ACQUIRED IN TWO or THREE turns ITS GREATEST VELOCITY (rpm), after which it revolved at twenty-five or twenty-six times a minute. This motion was preserved some time ago for two months, in an apartment of the castle; the door and windows of which were locked and sealed, so that there was no possibility of fraud. At the expiration of that time, His Serene Highness ordered the apartment to be opened, and the machine stopped, lest, as it was only a model, the parts might suffer by so much testing. The Landgrave being, himself, present during my examination of this machine, I took the liberty to ask him, as he had seen the inside of it, whether, after being in motion for a certain time, some alteration was made in the component parts; or whether one of these parts might be suspected of concealing some fraud; on which His Serene Highness assured me to the contrary, and that the machine was very simple...' - letter from Willem Jacob 'sGravesande to Sir Isaac Newton, 1721
@anon 19:38
DeleteHe describes the 6" diameter wooden axle of the Merseburg wheel, but gives the maximum speed of the Kassel wheel! He's seems a little mixed up in his letter!
Now for the critical line:
"But when I gave it any tolerable degree of velocity, I was always obliged to stop it again by force; for when I let it go, it ACQUIRED IN TWO or THREE turns ITS GREATEST VELOCITY (rpm), after which it revolved at twenty-five or twenty-six times a minute."
When the Kassel wheel was stationary and he gave it "any tolerable degree of velocity", he probably had to wait several minutes until the wheel finally reached 26 rpm's and then had its maximum amount of rotational energy. Then he says he had to "stop it again by force". This sounds like a mistranslation that should have been translated as "slow it down by force". If he had actually stopped the bidirectional wheel, then it would not have started up again when he "let it go". It would have remained stationary until he gave it a push start again.
Maybe he grabbed the axle or rim and managed to slow the Kassel wheel to about 20 rpm's. If so, then when he released it, it would have automatically accelerated back to 26 rpm's again and possibly done so after only two or three rotations. But, that was only because he never actually brought the wheel to a complete stop. Thus, the wheel probably still had most of its rotational kinetic energy and only had to gain a little more to have the maximum amount it had when turning at 26 rpm's.
The facts are the empirical observations from different sources. Some things like wheel width seem to vary slightly from account to account. However they are not material to Bessler's wheels 'runner PM principle'. Some, as demonstrated in this blog, want to re-write the facts as alternative facts, of more substance than speculative notions etc.
DeleteThe facts are that the Merseburg and Kassel bi-directional wheels did not gain momentum with a light push, altho it took only two fingers to move them in either direction, so was not a massive' wheel with lots of inertia to overcome with the force of a push. However there was a tolerable degree of force required to get the wheels to increase velocity and gain momentum and not settle down and stand still again (they also took some stopping). Once this degree of push force was applied the Merseburg wheel was at approx. 40 rpm in about 1 turn (about 1/4 inch iron axle). The kassel wheel at approx. 26 rpm in 2 or 3 turns (about 3/4 inch iron axle). The Kassel wheel was reduced to 20 rpm when the water lifting screw was engaged. The Merseburg wheel could hoist a box of bricks of about 70 lbs (via pulleys) at the undiminished 40 rpm operating speed.
By way of comparison the earlier one-directional wheels had to be tied down with a cord because they had torque. Once the cord was released they accelerated to operating rpm which was higher than both the Merseburg and Kassel wheels.
I have not read one iota of evidence to suggest these are not the 'facts'.
-f
Anon20:23 .. perhaps do some homework and read the German and French before creating doubt. There is a lot of difference between Stop and Slow Down and it is not a translation error as you suggest.
DeleteI also go along with the possibility of translation errors here. Many already agree that a 1/4" diameter for the Merseburg wheel's axle pivot is just too small and that 3/4" for the Kassel wheel's axle pivot is also too small IF that wheel weighted in excess of 1,000 pounds as many think. Those undersized steel axle pivots would probably have started flexing where they entered their brass bearing plates due to the weight of the rotating wheels resting on them. That would then have resulted in premature pivot failure due to metal fatigue (yes, even hardened steel can experience that) and wear to the brass bearing plates.
DeleteI'm also bothered by the translation of this line:
"... for when I let it go, it ACQUIRED IN TWO or THREE turns ITS GREATEST VELOCITY (rpm), after which it revolved at twenty-five or twenty-six times a minute. "
First he says that the Kassel wheel achieved its "greatest velocity" after two or three turns...but then adds that AFTER THAT it revolved at 23 or 24 rpm's. Why AFTER THAT? Why does he not just flatly say that it reached a velocity of 23 or 24 rpm's WHEN it had completed two or three turns? Is there no word for "when" in French or German? It seems to me like there is some time lapse involved here most likely while he got his watch ready so he could count the number of rotations taking place per minute. That could have required several minutes MORE after he observed the wheel to make its first two or three rotations. Maybe "greatest velocity" was also mistranslated and should have been translated as just "a great velocity", but not yet the wheel's maximum velocity? If so, then a correct translation would be:
"... for when I let it go, it ACQUIRED IN TWO or THREE turns A GREAT VELOCITY (rpm), a WHILE LATER it was determined that it revolved at twenty-five or twenty-six times a minute. "
I agree with BC above. We aren't going to know about any of this for sure until and unless we can finally make some accurate reproductions of Bessler's Merseburg and Kassel wheels and can submit them to the same kinds of tests described in the Bessler literature. Let's hope those reproductions will come along in our lifetimes.
It would have been very difficult for either Fischer or 'sGravesande to measure the speed of the Kassel wheel WHILE it was completing its second or third revolution after starting. If as some here think, the wheel was turning at 26 rpm's, then that second or third revolution would have taken only 2.3 seconds. They would have needed accurate stop watches to measure such a small time interval. Did they have such watches?
DeleteThey would have needed something like the "Physician's Pulse Watch" which had been invented in 1695 by a British man named George Graham. It was a pocket watch that could be started and stopped by pressing a little lever on the side of the case. Supposedly, it could measure time intervals to an accuracy of 1/5th of a second or 0.2 seconds.
If they did not have this watch, then they probably tried to use the second hand on a regular pocket watch to count how many rotations the drum completed in a minute. Who knows how long it took them to do that AFTER the Kassel wheel had completed its second or third rotation. All we're doing here is guessing and debating the real meaning of various English translations of letters originally written in foreign languages three centuries ago. All we really know for sure is that, eventually, the Kassel wheel's maximum speed reached and remained at 26 rpm's.
*sigh* Henry Dircks book Perpetuum Mobile
Deletehttps://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Perpetuum_Mobile.html?id=lEWF9o2Ba4kC&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button&newbks=1&newbks_redir=1&redir_esc=y
Pg 110-111 Letter translated from French to English from Fischer to Desaguliers
"But to my great astonishment I observed that the rapidity of the wheel augmented little by little until it had made two turns,and then it regained its former speed, until I observed by my watch that it made the same twenty-six turns a minute as before, when acting freely; ..."
Pg 95 Letter from 'sGravesande to Newton
"The diameter was almost 12 feet, and the thickness one foot; the diameter of the axle-hole was six finger-breadths; but the thickness of the small iron axle was scarcely a fourth part of this; ..."
Later authors repeating previous poor translations of past writers' poorly written letters isn't really that convincing.
DeletesGravesande to Newton:
"The diameter was almost 12 feet, and the thickness one foot; the diameter of the axle-hole was six finger-breadths; but the thickness of the small iron axle was scarcely a fourth part of this..."
One wonders what "axle-hole" is supposed to mean. Was it the hole bored into the end of the Kassel wheel's wooden axle that the steel axle pivot pin was pressed into? Was it the round end of the axle itself? Was it the hole in the vertical support into which the pivot was inserted? This looks like yet another bad translation.
If sGravesande's fingers were wide, say 1.333 inches, then "six finger-breaths" would be about 8 inches. This is the diameter of the Kassel wheel axle according to some. So, this detail obliges us to retranslate "axle-hole" as "axle diameter".
But, then we're told that the "thickness" or rather the diameter of the "small iron axle" or steel axle pivot was ALMOST one fourth of this. Well that means that the diameter of one of the steel axle pivots was almost 8 in / 4 = 2 inches. Maybe it was 1.5 or 1.75 inches? In any case, it definitely wasn't 1/4 inch or 3/4 inch in diameter.
Congratulations .. you have solved the secret of Bessler's Wheels ! It is iron axle diameter !
DeleteIt was never an issue ! Read the original French or German etc and translate it yourself if you think there are nuances in translators context and ability. 'sGravesande uses a unit of measurement called a finger-breadth, which is approx. 3/4 inch. So it doesn't neatly align with others measurements of the wooden axle portion diameter. Finger-breadths might vary according to locality and culture etc. And the quarter quoted by other translators is a fourth (a quarter). And so does he mean a quarter of 6 finger-breadths i.e. 1.5 finger-breadths (about 3 inches) or does he mean a quarter (fourth) of a single finger-breadth (the thickness of the small iron axle was scarcely a fourth part of this) ? Perhaps we are still confused ? Perhaps we should read Fischer again where he said the Kassel iron axle was 3/4 inch. Fischer is not 'sGravesande. Maybe the translators got that wrong too eh ! As said earlier, so what ?
You completely ignore nor comprehend the most important information from Fischer (by a different translator), which has been said all along. "But to MY GREAT ASTONISHMENT I observed that the rapidity of the wheel augmented little by little until it had made two turns, and then it regained its former speed, until I observed by my watch that it made the same twenty-six turns a minute as before, when acting freely; ..." [He also talks about the difficulty in STOPPING the wheel, in multiple sentences. NOT SLOWING IT DOWN !]
To his GREAT ASTONISHMENT !!! Yah .. super excited about it accelerating in 2 turns, then taking minutes to slowly work up to 26 rpm - NOT !!!
"Perhaps we are still confused?"
DeleteThat's putting it mildly! Lol!
Fischer was only "greatly astonished" because, after he gave the Kassel wheel's drum a sufficient nudge, rather than slowing down again as he expected it would, it started to accelerate. But, it did that "little by little". Does that sound like it could have accelerated to 26 rpm's after only its first 2 rotations? Doesn't sound like that to me and probably most others reading this thread.
Someone above calculated that IF the drum was turning at 26 rpm's at the end of its second rotation, it would have had to have completed that second rotation less than 10 seconds after Fischer gave it the nudge which would certainly be astonishing. But, IF that happened would he be describing the acceleration as taking place "little by little"? Wouldn't he have written something like "the increase in speed was amazing or incredible"? But, no, it only took place "little by little".
The fact is that we don't really know how long those first two rotations took to complete. If the Kassel wheel did weigh 1,100 pounds as some believe, then it might have required over a minute or 60 seconds for it to complete its first two rotations and many more minutes to "little by little" finally accelerate up to 26 rpm's.
"Wouldn't he have written something like "the increase in speed was amazing or incredible"? But, no, it only took place "little by little"."
DeleteDuhh .. what a numpty !
He would have left out the 'two turns'. They would have no relevance to the context.
Such as .. "But to my great astonishment I observed that the rapidity of the wheel augmented little by little ...,and then it regained its former speed, until I observed by my watch that it made the same twenty-six turns a minute as before, when acting freely; ..."
But neither Fischer, or 'sGravesande said that. At least three different translators [BW.com > eyewitness accounts; Dircks; Collins (Mike Senior)] in different centuries translated both witnesses, with similar grammar, as saying the same thing each time.
It is of no concern to me if you can't get your head around it.
Looks like anon 06:57 is doing some retranslating of his own now! Lol!
DeleteBut, the reality is that all of those earlier different translations DO tell us that at least two initial rotations were observed by witnesses during which the wheel GRADUALLY picked up speed. Only some time AFTER that did witnesses bother to make a speed measurement. Claiming that the Kassel wheel's speed after the first two turns and later at 26 rpm's were the same speed is just an assumption without any evidence to back it up. But, as others point out above, there are many sound reasons that contradict that assumption.
If my next wheel takes off and hits 26 rpms after 10 seconds, I won't have time to be astonished because I will immediately FAINT!
DeleteWouldn't we all lol. But that is what the witnesses describe. Acquired previous rpm in about 2 turns. Anon16:07 has a campaign of Chinese whispers of alternative facts.
DeleteI don't think many are under any illusions.
DeleteA certain person has a pigeonholed theory of a 12 foot diameter massive wheel (1,000+ lbs mass) with high inertia, supported on substantial iron axles to manage that weight, that takes many minutes to slowly bit by bit accelerate to its steady state rpm. The many minutes to spool up are required because of the wheels high inertia and its projected very low torque.
The translated witness observations and descriptions could suggest a different story. Of a lower mass wheel that can be moved with a light touch of two fingers from wherever it is stopped. That has iron axles of a diameter to minimize friction (static and rolling) losses whilst being sturdy enough to do lifting tests. That accelerates to steady state rpm in only a few turns. Perhaps suggesting that its torque is relatively plentiful, and thus its time to reach maximum speed is substantially less than the minutes required in the previous scenario.
Each of us has read the various witness testimony translations available. We can also translate the original language ourselves, if we so choose, for comparison. Whilst nothing is set in concrete it should be enough to get a fair idea about how the two-way wheels operated under test conditions and environment.
-f
That "certain person" (Ken B!) does push the massive wheel / low torque model for Bessler's wheels based on his own research. He is opposed by the low mass / high torque believers. Each camp will have their favorite quotes and their interpretations of them that convince them they are 100% right. There really is no compromise possible for them. One is right and the other is wrong. But which one is right?
DeleteFor example, the witnesses at the Merseburg wheel demonstration handled a few cylindrical lead weights that were estimated at four pounds each. If that wheel only contained eight weights like that, then their total mass would only be 32 pounds. Sounds like a low mass wheel and coupled with the belief that such wheels could reach maximum speed in only a few turns, seems to support the opinion of the low mass / high torque believers.
BUT, one of the witnesses of the Merseburg wheel said that, prior to its translocation to another nearby set of vertical supports, Bessler removed enough of those little lead weights from its drum to FILL a "respectable box". That sounds like he may have removed several DOZENS of weights! Now we're talking about a wheel that may have contained, at a minimum (assuming two dozen weights), about a hundred pounds of lead. That coupled with the fact that we don't know exactly how long the first two rotations of a wheel took (one wonders why they were not timed considering all of the pocket watches his wheels' wealthy examiners would have been carrying!) or if it was actually moving at maximum speed after only a few rotations lends support to the Ken B solution involving a massive wheel.
I agree with others here. None of this will be resolved until and unless we can finally reproduce one of Bessler's wheels and actually measure its performance.
Quote please ?
DeleteAnon05:47 : "BUT, one of the witnesses of the Merseburg wheel said that, prior to its translocation to another nearby set of vertical supports, Bessler removed enough of those little lead weights from its drum to FILL a "respectable box".
The number of cylindrical weights was not known, IINM. Who said they were placed in a box let alone a respectable one ?
It is expected that at times Bessler was cagey about his wheels - he wanted to keep and then sell his secret mechanics for his 'runners'. So it was not in his interests to be forthright and transparent at all times.
However, for the likes of Wolff, Fischer, Weise, and 'sGravesande etc it is an entirely different matter. They had no such motives or agenda, other than reporting accurately empirical evidence and what they observed to their contemporaries or superiors. And if they speculated (e.g. Wolff) they said so, so you are in no doubt that it was speculation. Therefore their language was precise, exact, purposeful, professional, deliberately designed to remove ambiguity imo. To suggest otherwise from all sources is grasping imo.
-f
Anon 05:47 misquoted. The mention of the box can be found in Christian Wagner's "First Critique" where he wrote:
Delete"On the other hand, at the experiment, before the wheel was set up at another place in different boards, he had taken an amount of weight out of the wheel which could have filled a considerable box, and in the received testimony he expressly admits that the weights are inside and are driven.”
But "respectable" and "considerable" mean about the same thing here and imply a somewhat large box. I'm imagining something the size of a large microwave oven. Ken B. claims that the Merseburg and Kassel wheels each contained 48 lead weights (3 placed at the ends of 16 levers inside of these bidirectional wheels). The ones in the Merseburg wheel were 4 lbs. each and the ones in the Kassel wheel, according to him, were 8 lbs. each. That means that if Bessler put all of the weights from the Merseburg wheel into a single box, it would contain 48 of the 4 lb. weights with a total mass of 192 lbs.
Note, however, that Wagner does not say that Bessler actually put the weights into a box, but that would seem likely if he was trying to conceal the total number of removed weights from the witnesses of the Merseburg wheel test. Putting them in a box would obviously provide more concealment than just placing them on the floor. Those weights were small and about the size of small juice cans. I can imagine 48 of them packed into a wooden box about the size of a large microwave oven. The box would have to be very study and maybe weigh about 40 lbs. when empty. So, total weight of the box when holding all of the Merseburg wheel's 48 weights would have been about 232 lbs.
I wouldn't be able to lift something that heavy by myself. But, if the box had a handle on each side then two strong men, like Bessler and his brother, could have moved it short distances around a room. Any farther distance than that and they probably would have placed it on a cart and wheeled it along.
Yes, I was aware of the Wagner critiques and Wagner's speculation about "which COULD have filled a considerable box". That is his musing, and not a fact, tho as you point out no box to receive cylindrical 4 lb weights is cited by others as being present, or filled, nor do they offer an estimate or comment of quantity of weights. Perhaps nothing extraordinary struck them about the quantity they did see, 'nothing to see here'. Wagner gives the impression that there are a number of them, and being small can sized, just 8 would hardly warrant any hyperbole of the box kind, so there may have been more.
DeleteHowever since Bessler let one weight be handed around, albeit covered with cloth etc for controlled inspection and concealment, then a box to place the weights in probably would be practical to keep prying eyes from looking more closely. And to also move them the 5 or 6 paces to the next stand all at one time as you say. Or perhaps that is how Wagner would likely move them all at once.
Wagner would certainly want a box if he had 48 of them. Pity no one else thought to mention a box for the weights. I guess the weights being shifted just wasn't important enough and didn't pull any triggers for anybody else.
-f
It's a pity that we have such sketchy information about the testing of the Merseburg wheel based on only a few quotes here and there. How many weights were used being part of that. Also, exactly how did Bessler move the wheel to the other set of vertical axle supports?
DeleteI can't escape the feeling that all that information actually still exists in letters out there somewhere, but it has yet to be rediscovered by the John Collinses of the future. If interest in Bessler's wheels can be maintained in the coming decades and does not just fade away when this blog eventually winds up in that WayBack Machine archive of IA, then someone, somewhere will find those letters. Again, all we can do now is hope that we are all still alive to read English translations of them someday. I think that when we do, we will find a few surprises waiting for us.
It's our job to tease out facts from fantasy. And that happens with considered debate and opinion. Presenting your case to the best of your ability. One of the first things I for instance decided was a corner stone of the edifice was what I have been discussing in this blog. I am not a fan of the high inertia/low torque wheel approach. I don't believe from the witness statements (including Wagner) that it is supported in any conclusive manner. I do believe they credibly support the low inertia/high torque scenario. If you make the wrong turn at the outset it could send you down rabbit holes better never explored. While we don't know the number of weights various witnesses said that about 8 weights contacting could be heard each revolution. The earlier one-way wheels were particularly noisy and B. said (paraphrased) the noise was part and parcel of the machine. He could mitigate it with some measures such as felt lining etc. All in all I assume that there are at least 8 weights in rotation at any time. Possibly double that if mirror mechs were used in two-way wheels. But I don't rely on only 8 weights, as there might be any number above that that can practically fit inside the wheel to be deployed. MT does not limit the number of weights or lever-weights to just 8.
DeleteNew information comes along from time to time, but is often not followed up. An example is the posts by Hotzenplotz (German native) finding a newspaper article about B's. ten zoll last wheel. He has never provided any proof of that newspaper article that I'm aware of. Nevertheless I've read all his posts since he became a member and he seems to me to be quite sincere. He also gave some further context about other matters which tended to support the idea he is a credible researcher of things Bessler. Why has nobody else found that article and given a link or published it for translation attempts ? It is rather important in the scheme of things because if its diameter was ten zoll it makes life difficult for some of the theories. Elimination of possibilities is a good thing.
-f
"An example is the posts by Hotzenplotz (German native) finding a newspaper article about B's. ten zoll last wheel. He has never provided any proof of that newspaper article that I'm aware of. Nevertheless I've read all his posts since he became a member and he seems to me to be quite sincere."
DeleteThat alone should make that figure of 10 zoll or 10 INCHES for the diameter of Bessler's final wheel very suspect. Hotzenplotz might have sounded or actually been sincere, but that does not mean he was right. Maybe he did read something somewhere at sometime regarding Bessler's wheel, but was relying on his memory of the figure. Time can blur and distort our memories. IIRC, the process is called "confabulation" and is seen in hypnotized patients trying to recall past events.
Bessler Curious
.. Yeah, sounds like he can’t remember how big the diameter was from such a momentous and surprising discovery in a newspaper. Probably can’t trust any of his other comments or numbers he gives either because he’s clearly a confabulated dribbling idiot with alzheimer's to say 10 Zoll .. !
DeleteHotzenplotz wrote 24Oct2019 @ BW.com
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=169898#169898
"By the way I discovered some announcements in a 1745 newspaper, afaik not known till now.
In february we are told, Bessler is now in Fürstenberg and is going to build a PM there, if his weakness is not going to prevent this. He also announced to build some "Feuer-Spritzen" of a very special kind, so it is not a usual device we were talking about above. He also is looking for a publisher to publish pictures of his machines, drawn in copper (!) by his own hand.
In may the PM is ready, and although it's just a model, driving two hammers, with a diameter of 10 Zoll, he is willing to sell it for a good price.
This public offer was published one month after the "last letter" was written."
Hotzenplotz wrote 24Oct2019 @ BW.com
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=169900#169900
"There are some questions unanswered concerning his legacy:
Where is the PM he offered to sell in May 1745? Obviously he didn't sell it, cause otherwise he would have had money, which was not the case.
Where are the engravings he offered in May 1745? What we know is MT are NOT engravings but woodcuts, which is something very different.
Where is the rest of the woodcuts? The inventory of death counted a number of 219. Strieder in 1795 found only 141.
I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I think these are quite interesting questions... The fact, that both the PM and a lot of pictures are missing since the day of his death has something quite fascinating..."
Hotzenplotz wrote: "By the way I discovered some announcements in a 1745 newspaper, afaik not known till now."
DeleteIt would have been nice if he could have given the source of those newspapers he claimed to have read so others could verify they actually existed and could do their own translations of them.
I do admit however that the possibility of missing engravings is intriguing. Maybe they are still in existence somewhere out there and will one day come to light again? Or, maybe they showed too much and Bessler, in a rage over not being able to find a buyer for his last and possibly reduced price wheel, decided to pour acid on them all and destroy them forever?!
JC sir... I studied your date of birth in lo Shu Grid numerology and as per this you will have difficulty throughout your life with regard to your luxurious, permanent own ground floor house... And this is because the number 8 is missing in your dob... However, you should stick to upper floors wherever you live as earth touching ground floor is not in your favour due to 8 missing... Also, the number 6 is missing too... You can never have that very luxurious material life you always throng for... Whoever has this 6 number in their dob they can expect to have all such luxuries... But your mind Power is great and you can become famous as it is already evident...this is due to the presence of numbers 492 in your date of birth...
ReplyDeleteThe word 'long' misspelt as 'throng'... sorry about it...
ReplyDeleteBy JC giving away his design (releasing to the public) he will certainly remove all the obstacles associated with patenting. The other major benefit which I see as an almost certainty is the risk to his livelihood and potentially life. I just don't see big energy (or those secret societies that are already aware of such devices) allowing anyone to bring such a device to the market, much less profit from it. Truly the only way I can see getting the knowledge in the hands of the public is to release all the details in some sort of public disclosure. I would not assume this site and bw.com are safe from reprisals however so I would plan on some type of mail dump as well.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion There is currently a Great desire to quit burning up our home. The children are being taught about the need to recycle and eat organic, cause its just better for us. The collective mind of those children will embrace the wheel and give it a place in the world, their lives depends on it.
ReplyDeleteYes indeed Gravittea. There are too umany paranoid doom sayers!
DeleteJC
REPENT all ye Bessler pm wheel chasers! The end IS near!
DeleteMy reading of the most holy Book of Revelation tells me that when the secret of Bessler's wheels is finally rediscovered, it will trigger the End of the World! I could not possibly know this unless that divine information had been delivered to me by God's angels as I slept one night only a few weeks ago.
But Satan wants to prevent the end of this sinful world so he and his army of demons can continue to harvest all of your immortal souls after you die. The more doomed souls in Hell, the happier Satan becomes! It is his demons that have stopped you from finding Bessler's secret and those demons know thousands of little tricks they use to do that. You must pray constantly for protection against their evil influences. Don't ever let them succeed in getting their claws on your souls! You must pray daily to prevent that.
Holy Believer
Welcome to the blog, Holy Believer, and thanks for your revelation about Satan's plan.
DeleteI always thought my OB wheels were nonrunners because my builds were too crudely made or I didn't know enough mechanics. But, who knows, maybe I actually had found the secret of Bessler's wheels a while ago but some demons showed up and kept it from running! Damn those demons from Hell! They must have gotten inside of the wheel and jammed it up on me! I will follow your advice and start praying more when I rebuild that wheel. Next time, NO demons allowed!
Bwahaha! I am SATAN and I WILL capture all of your souls to increase my power! Just give me time and keep right on living your wicked unrepentant lives. My army of faithful demons are everywhere and have been instructed to immediately fly over to your workshops whenever you are ready to test your latest pm wheels or machines. They have been ordered to constantly sabotage their mechanics to keep them from ever running. That MUST be done to prevent the return of the Anointed One who would dare to chain me, Lord of the Underworld, up in a bottomless pit for all of eternity and make me powerless. I shall NEVER allow that to happen! Bwahaha...
DeleteSatan
“Proving his wheel is not "it" won't be easy though which is probably why no one has tried yet even though he revealed the design two years ago”
ReplyDeleteAs a matter of fact it is not that difficult to prove it, it is not “it”. You don’t even need to sim it. Every project or claim has to have some theory to back it up, KB’s theory is not there, as simple as that.
Have to quote part of KB’s comments again from a couple blogs before:
“ They were actually powered by the energy associated with the masses of their weighted levers. That energy was finite and so any of his wheels, if it could run long enough without being stopped by a part failure while outputting mechanical energy, would eventually stop. However, because of the enormous energy contained in a wheel's weighted levers and the very low power outputs of his wheels, they could, literally, run for millions of years and even up into the billions of years for his largest wheels before the came to a stop”
If he really found the runner (which I doubt or even better, I know he didn’t ) he has no idea how it works. Not even theoretically!
In order to clearly explain what that means I have to give you refreshment crash course of “basic physics”, I will use good old pendulum, not gravity pendulum or gravity enabled pendulum, just pendulum slightly modified. Imagine a wheel with only one spoke. At the junction of the spoke and rim, there is attached steel bearing ball (bob). For testing purposes physics allow to remove some forces, so I will remove air resistance and friction to avoid any energy losses. Gravity stays of course. Now let’s pull the bob to 3 o’clock and let it go, from 3 to 6 all PE (100%) will be converted to KE, from 6 to 9 all the KE (100%) will be converted to PE. From 9 to 6 PE to KE from 6 to 3 KE to PE. Along with the swinging bob the wheel would turn, once to the left and then to right back to left and so on.
Theoretically the bob would swing and the wheel turn forever
Now there are some questions that need to be asked, in no particular order:
How much energy did the bob use?
How much energy did the bob create?
Where the energy comes form or what is the source of that energy?
What powers the bob and wheel?
Find this answers, try to understand their meaning and they will bring you so much closer to understanding of what the real, true PM is.
Anyone who claims discovery, rediscovery of PM must know answers to this questions, there is no other way around. Does KB and his enthusiasts know them? I don’t think so.
In the meantime the bob keeps swinging, and swinging and…
Have nice day.
Batteries not required
SK, it's you that needs a refreshment crash course in "basic physics"!
DeleteWhen your pendulum bob swings around and down from 3 pm to 6 pm it does NOT lose all of its PE. At 6 pm it still has all of the PE it has between that location and the center of mass of the Earth (which is located about 4,000 miles below it!) . The bob, as it swings from 3 pm to 6 pm, just converts the loss of its PE as it moves between THOSE TWO elevations into kinetic energy. But, when you add up the PE and KE of the bob at ANY place along the arc of its semicircular swing, you will find that the SUM is always the same. There is NO change in the TOTAL energy, PE + KE, of the bob.
The motion of the pendulum bob you describe is also NOT the same kind of pm that students of Bessler's wheels are talking about. Bessler's wheels had pm while ALSO outputting mechanical energy to their environments to operate machines there. Your swinging pendulum would only show pm IF the bob and its spoke were in a perfect vacuum and their pivot was frictionless. As soon as you tried to make your swinging pendulum do some outside work, it would quickly come to a stop.
Ken B has given us an answer to where the mechanical energy Bessler's wheels delivered came from. It came from the mass of the weights and levers inside of a wheel's drum and nowhere else. Those masses represented a tremendous amount of energy and if released very slowly by a turning wheel, would let it run for an incredibly long time.
This now concludes YOUR refreshment crash course in "basic physics".
That wasn't me... I don't and never comment as anon... All my comments come with three dots ate the end of every sentence...
DeleteIn that case, SK, then what was written above applies to "Batteries not included" and not to you. However, come to think of it, you probably also could use a "refreshment crash course in basic physics"!
DeleteAnonymous 24 February 2021 at 16:49
ReplyDeleteWhat can I say or write? Ignorance rules, knowledge is death, long live ignorance.
Batteries not required
That does describe your comment above! Lol!
DeleteBessler wrote
ReplyDelete"I have many different kinds of machine all running on different principles. They can be moved by weights, balls, springs, internal gears, internal water, oil, alcohol and wind."
Based on his words, how can we ever know what his wheel consisted of?
I know there are ongoing attempting to decipher his works and find clues in his illustrations, but so far, all attempts have provided nothing more that more interpretations or best guesses. Only a deciphered piece of text that clearly identifies the wheel design can be considered a fact.
Clearly his comments about building multiple wheels with different principles does not correlate with the notion that he hid his secret (which secret) in his works (AP, MT, etc.).
Nowhere does Bessler state that any of those "many different kinds of machine all running on different principles" were capable of perpetual motion like his pm wheels were. That they ALL were capable of pm is only an ASSUMPTION that you and others try to make in order to suggest that he didn't only have a single working pm design. It is an assumption that most Bessler pm wheel chasers reject.
DeleteYou could be right Anon 20:55. Below is the full text of what Bessler said (as translated by JC from AP). I assumed when Bessler said he had many different kinds of machines, all running on different principles, I assumed he was referring to PM wheels. I suppose like everything else Bessler, it is up to the reader to decide what is true and what is misleading.
Delete'If, having given serious consideration to my project, the Czar graciously resolves to have more for less money, then may I at least add this; I have in mind a great 'Treatise on Mechanics' which I plan to publish, with many hundreds of machines and drawings that could be printed at my home.
'In this tract it will be possible to trace my perpetual motion machine through all the stages of its development. As a result, whoever wishes to pay a certain sum of money to receive such a treatise, will be able to select and build at his discretion any machine together with my invention. The Treatise would be in folio in two volumes. It would be ready in about two years from the time I start to work on it. It will be very interesting, useful and beneficial for the public. I would have much more to say about it but, because time is short, I will add only the following, subject to your approval;
'If His Majesty the Czar would advance me 10,000 thalers for this tract, which would increase and promote the publication I could start work on it immediately; in two years he would have quite a large number of these treatises. It would include my perpetual motion machine revealed completely through all stages of its construction, which would eliminate any need for him to contribute anything else. N.B. Sufficient guarantees would be included. In the event that my perpetual motion machine was sold before my treatise was published, my project would still be finished and the treatise published. However, the machine that had been sold would not be included in the treatise, because I want to sell just one kind of machine, not all of them. I have many different kinds of machine all running on different principles. They can be moved by weights, balls, springs, internal gears, internal water, oil, alcohol and wind. I believe it is best that this information is known in advance. Certainly His Majesty the Czar will see the advantages with his enlightened mind more clearly than I could indicate. Please offer my most humble services to His Majesty the Czar.
Bessler says he wants to "sell just one kind of machine, not them all". He refers to his perpetual motion wheel as a "machine". So when he says he has many machines, you could assume he is saying he has many perpetual motion wheels. Why assume he did not. It does not diminish the fact that he had a working wheel, in fact, because there are more "principles" means there is a better chance at finding a solution. As a Bessler pm wheel chaser myself, I like that.
DeleteAnon 22:23 wrote: "...because there are more "principles" means there is a better chance at finding a solution."
DeleteIf there were actually hundreds of different ways of achieving pm or even just a dozen, don't you think that one of the maybe tens of thousands of pm chasers in the last 300 years would have stumbled upon at least one of them by chance? The fact that none did tends to support the view that Bessler really only had a single design that produced pm. Just finding one such design would, imo, be the major achievement of a lifetime. Bessler was certainly a smart and skilled person, but I don't think he was smart or skilled enough to invent hundreds of different ways to achieve pm!
No disagreement there Anon 23:16.
DeleteBessler's different principles could just have been different ways (mechanisms) of producing a similar down force, something that is needed to raise another weight. What comes to mind is a swinging pendulum producing a down force on the pivot point, and a weight bobbing at the end of a spring producing a down force on the other end of the spring. Two entirely different mechanisms (principles) that produce a down force.
Here's a guy that makes perpetual motion like 3D animations. Maybe the motions he shows will give someone an idea for a real pm machine.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-oBtykxTeE
Amazing what can be done with CGI! They almost look real.
Delete"because I want to sell just one kind of machine, not all of them.
ReplyDeleteI have many different kinds of machine all running on different principles. They can be moved by weights, balls, springs, internal gears, internal water, oil, alcohol and wind. I believe it is best that this information is known in advance. Certainly His Majesty the Czar will see the advantages with his enlightened mind more clearly than I could indicate."
i think this part was possibly wrongly translated.
"because I want to sell just one kind of machine, not all of them.
because there are many many different designs, with different principles , like weights , balls , springs, inner wheels, water, oil, alcohol, mercury and wind which are moved per se"
if you had many kinds that actually functioned you would not need to sell just one kind.
It seems like Bessler is saying he built one wheel (one type of wheel) but other types are possible. My guess is the underlying force or principle is the same across all the types, but the driver (balls, weights, water, wind, etc.) is what make them different. So in a way, he does have only one wheel, or only one design.
DeleteSorry to butt in... I would like to say one thing here that is BW operates on a slightly different principle... Other than the downward force being discussed there is one more phenomenon involved... Without it the perpetual motion is not possible... And that's what makes all the difference... This is the main reason why no one is able to successfully make it all happen again...
ReplyDeleteThis second principle has never been discussed here before... Bessler only makes an indirect hint about it and he vigorously safeguarded the same... Eventhough it is very simple but it is the one which is all about the innovation...
The idea of one wheel and one design being suggested by anon is very much right but the idea which explains what makes that magic happen is incomplete... There's that void always present... We are not even touching...
Please note that 300 years have passed this way... Real innovative idea is required...
People may mock at my suggestion and even try to undermine my interference this way but let me make it very clear that unless we adopt a different approach the BW quest may never see the light...
Good day...
We now all EAGERLY await SK telling us exactly what that "second principle" is that makes pm possible. But, will he actually tell us? Don't hold your breath while you wait!
DeleteSK, were on it...
DeleteAnon 12:05, look into that "slightly different principle" and see what you can come up with.
Anon 16:49, give that "one more phenomemn" further consideration.
Anon 19:09, ponder the "second principle" to see where it leads you.
Anon 20:53, you take a looksee in that "always present void".
Anon 22:24, put your "real innovative idea" hat on and get cracking.
and lastly, Anon 23:13, you "adopt a different approach" and see where that leads you.
Guys, I feel really good about this.
Anon 18:27, I've tried many phenomenon and none have worked. Hard to imaging just one phenomenon working.
DeleteIf you can guarantee SK a fortune, a cash payment up front and then a share of the royalties from the patent you will make, then he will reveal to you just how an SK/Bessler Wheel works. He needs a big cash out up front coz the Chinese might steel your patent and beat you to market. You can then build it and see that he is right and take the risk to patent it and market it etc, while he takes it easy. He will wish you well however.
ReplyDeleteSo his little prods and pokes are really about marketing himself, and not helping anyone solve the mystery of how Bessler's wheels were runners! He will never share that information openly (if he is not a crackpot) because if he sold out he would be tied up in a non-disclosure agreement and restraint of trade.
So suck eggs!
"He will never share that information openly..."
DeleteHe can't share something he does not have and that is exactly why he does not share anything. His goal, like SG, is to try to sound as mysterious as possible. I think SK is angry because SG and not SK was nominated months ago as this blog's TOP GURU. But, SG hasn't been contributing much lately (someone said he was recently hit by lightning!) and SK may think that now it's HIS turn to become TOP GURU and to do that he's got to sound as mysterious as possible without telling us anything of value. If SG does nothing about it, then SK may actually grab the jeweled crown of the TOP GURU away from SG! Be careful SG...SK is SERIOUS about grabbing that crown right off of your head!
In the past, several commenters on this blog have linked to digital copies of books that are available on internetarchive.org or IA for free. But, apparently, four major publishers have decided that this digital library is nothing more than a giant book piracy operation that is infringing on copyrighted books and not paying the publishers or authors! They have sued for damages that could bankrupt IA and drive it out of business. This lawsuit seems to have been triggered by IA making more digital downloads of their books available then they actually own when the pandemic started last year which prevented people and students for accessing physical libraries. Just goes to show you that, as they say, "no good deed goes unpunished"...especially when there are money hungry capitalists involved!
ReplyDeleteHere's a Vox article that gives more info on the lawsuit.
https://www.vox.com/2020/6/23/21293875/internet-archive-website-lawsuit-open-library-wayback-machine-controversy-copyright
If IA is forced out of business by this, then that could put an end to their "WayBack Machine" which is really the internet's only historical record of all of the now dead and gone websites and blogs going back to about 1997. It would be a tragic loss.
Anonymous and PROUD of it!
Sad news, AAPOI!
DeleteBefore you know it, those money hungry publishers will be filing lawsuits against kindergarten teachers for reading the latest children's story books to classes of their kids and showing them all of the nice pictures in them. Grounds for their lawsuits? Conducting UNLICENSED and UNAUTHORIZED public exhibitions of copyrighted works of art! Lol!
"...seems to have been triggered by IA making more digital downloads of their books available then they actually own..."
DeleteYou can't actually copy any of the material you access on IA unless you want to make a screenshot .jpeg of every page and save it in a file. You really have to read the books using their website's viewer. To appease those publishers, IA did away with allowing as many visitors to read a book as possible at the same time for as long as they wanted to last year. Now you have to join their site (which is easy) and then, IF it's available, you can borrow one book for so many minutes to read it. You can keep reading as long as you renew the book. Once you stop renewing the book, it immediately becomes available for someone else to read.
IA functions exactly like a regular library would except you don't have to actually go to a building and worry about returning books you've checked out, etc. If those publishers can get rid of IA, then there would be nothing from stopping them from going after regular libraries. I hope they lose their lawsuit and wind up having to pay for their own lawyers as well as those representing IA!
I think what happened last year is that, with the pandemic, the publishers thought everyone would be stuck in their homes and buying loads of their books online to pass the time and their profits would skyrocket. That didn't happen because most of those bored people just watched more cable tv and streamed movies. There was a poll done years ago that showed only one in one hundred people reads books regularly. Reading requires effort and a lot of people either don't have the energy for it or are too lazy and easily distracted. The publishers were disappointed and angry. They needed someone to blame and that's when they zeroed in on IA hoping to make up for their lost anticipated profits by emptying IA's coffers. Like Bessler said "Greed is an evil root"!
Found a new video: Go to Google, then to Youtube and type in: bessler wheel quest. Interesting !
ReplyDeleteSee "Anonymous March 2021 at 18:27" comment above. Looks like we have some real collaboration thanks to SK and his recent revelations on the BW. I'm sure this will lead to some serious results now that SK has given us proper directions.
ReplyDelete"... another approach..."
DeleteI never thought about it like that. It's all so clear to me now. Could this be a Karl moment?
Suresh you knocked it out of park. SG's got nothing on you that's for sure.
DeleteAnd the crown of TOP GURU is starting to slip a little farther away from SG's head! Will SK be this blog's next TOP GURU?! The smart money is starting to be bet on him now! SG, if you want to retain that sparkling, jewel encrusted crown, you are going to have to fight hard for it! Your fans are hoping you won't let them all down...
Delete