Now that the number one Bessler forum is back on line 🙏👍. I’m back too.
I’m posting these stats to show there is a lasting interest in this subject across the world, even if it is disregarded, not to say dismissed and derided by the educational institutions. I once gave a lecture and opened it with the question, “hands up anyone who believes a perpetual machine might be possible”, in hindsight it was far too open a question but it happened 25 years ago and people were more open minded about such things then. The audience were of mixed ages and education but a swift head count gave a surprisingly large number of “believers”, over a third. I’m not sure a similar question would elicit such a large percentage of “believers” these days.
This, it seems to me, is our biggest problem; these days the young minds seem closed to new or old ideas unless they are “trending” on the internet. Our field of research is regarded as “dead in the water” so to speak. If it hasn’t been solved in the last 300 years it must indeed, be impossible and they are therefore not interested. I don’t know the average age of Bessler researchers, but I get the distinct impression that it is much closer to my age (76) than say the twenties. This is not a subject that attracts young minds, which is shame given the urgent need for a technology so similar to the one we seek to reinvent.
So since I began this blog in February 2009, there have been:
Over 1581472 visitors. - I’ve published 694 posts. - There have been over 26303 comments.
Visitors have come from the following locations:-
United States 24%
France. 15%
United Kingdom. 10%
Australia. 8%
Poland 6%
India. 5%
Italy. 4%
New Zealand. 4%
South Africa. 3%
Denmark. 2%
Ireland. 2%
Taiwan. 2%
Germany. 1%
Canada. <1%
Lithuania <1%
Norway <1%
Belgium. <1%
Ukraine. <1%
Bolivia. <1%
Other. 12%
I know there are visitors from several other large countries, such as China and Russia, but I assume they are included in the ‘other’s. Romania is a constant and frequent visitor, but they don’t show up outside the ‘other’s group.
Of course compared to the Besslerwheel forum, my stats are minuscule
Besslerwheel forum stats - Total posts 178388 • Total topics 7223 • Total members 3271
I guess this means, as if we didn’t know it already we absolutely ……….
have to build and demonstrate a working Besslerwheel, right?
JC
Hi John .. your blog runs parallel to BW.com discussion platform and community. I read both. Both are important resources for the Bessler story, and investigation. Importantly to me, and turning back to your blog topic today, they both help keep the momentum going to solve the Bessler mystery. Without that mv pumping along the story (and belief) would have died out long ago in this age of instant asymmetric gratification and reward. Or perhaps I am just old fashioned and think good things take time lol. We have certainly put that in.
ReplyDelete-f
Thanks fletch, I’m going to try and post things I hope will interest we who continue to seek Bessler’s secret!
DeleteJC
John, Have you ever heard from a scientist that would admit, that they simply don't know how to make a gravity wheel? Off the record of coarse------------------------Sam
ReplyDeleteI know of a scientist who believes Bessler was genuine but he needs to see a working model before he will say anything in public.
DeleteJC
If possible John, could you put me in touch with this person? I would send you my email, and we could have very productive conversation.
DeleteBNR
Sorry BNR, he doesn’t want any direct contacts and originally he only wanted me to update him on any interesting developments, but now only a fully validated working device would interest him. Can’t really blame him.
DeleteJC
That's OK, I understand.
DeleteBNR
Sam said "John, Have you ever heard from a scientist that would admit, that they simply don't know how to make a gravity wheel?"
DeleteALL of them will admit they know how to make a water wheel and the like. ALL of them will also admit to not knowing how to make a gravity PM Wheel as we understand it.
Anonymous14 September 2021 at 02:32
Delete"ALL of them will also admit to not knowing how to make a gravity PM Wheel as we understand it."
And what exactly is our understanding of "gravity PM Wheel". If I asked you a simple question: what "gravity PM Wheel is" would you be able to answer that question?. The problem is that neither "we" or "they" have an understanding of what "gravity PM Wheel" is.
BNR
Quite right! No one, save Bessler, knows what his PM principle and PM Law is, or was. We speculate about certain conditions being met. They range from the CoM (CoG) must remain above the axle. To the torque must be asymmetric, to a greater acceleration than 'g' must be applied to the overbalance appendages to give excess wheel momentum, ect, ect. All of these 'explanations' are hypotheticals, short on mechanical detail. They are a casual foray towards a legitimate PM principle yet to be birthed. All require gravity to play an active part in the final solution, thus the commonly used "gravity PM wheel" moniker. However, Bessler did not call his PM principle or PM Law his "gravity PM principle" or "gravity PM Law". Though he mentioned keeping out of the center of gravity. You can take that literally or treat it with a certain amount of respect and caution. Bessler was a self confessed master of rhetoric, and rabbit holes are made to fall in. Especially if you want to protect or deflect from a simple secret.
DeleteBNR, It's not a big mystery; The weights shift in on the up side and back out on the down side-------------------------------Sam
DeleteAnonymous14 September 2021 at 21:28
DeleteSam Peppiatt14 September 2021 at 21:28
The question was "what gravity PM Wheel is" , not how it works or supposed to work. So the question remains unanswered. Have another take at it.
BNR
BNR, Sorry; I don't have a clue to what you are talking about----------Sam
DeleteBNR asked "what gravity PM Wheel is ?"
DeleteRegarding the one-directional wheel.
It is a wheel made of moveable parts with mass, that starts revolving from a standing start. Once rotation commences it accelerates to an optimal RPM for its design and dimensions. It builds up both angular momentum, and, rotational kinetic energy as a result of Cause and Effect. It has inherent and unavoidable energy losses, being frictions, and any work done. It is able to overcome these and still maintain its working rotation rate. It manipulates the conservative gravitational force that permeates it, with the use of simple mechanical principles, to output work and self-sustain itself. Giving it innate momentum building as its 'natural' condition and outcome. Unlike others where they move to stability and stubborn standstill as the norm. Its performance is not greatly compromised by in-situ dynamic forces such as centripetal force that is generated internally whilst in rotation.
Not only that, it will run all day and not eat any hay--------------------Sam
DeleteHi!
ReplyDeleteJohn thanks for your efforts to restore Besslerwheel forum.
ReplyDeleteThanks Trevor, but I only passed on your suggestions to Scott.
DeleteSorry John, I didn't mean to offend you--------------------------Sam
ReplyDeleteNo problem Sam.
DeleteJC
JC wrote : "I guess this means, as if we didn’t know it already we absolutely ………. have to build and demonstrate a working Besslerwheel, right?"
ReplyDeleteFraid so .. unless your sim or drawing leaves no doubt ....... whatsoever. To anyone even with only a passing interest in mechanics ! The proverbial barmaid, or gen z lol. Just look at B's. MT's and think how many are absolutely clear how they 'could' be a runner ! None are that clear-cut to me therefore wouldn't pass the sniff test, without a real world build as POP. However I do hang my hat on that B's. runner design is stupid simple, once thought of; and might be convincing enough with a good peer reviewed sim, and a tech drawing, without a full blown build to take the blinkers off. I'd probably still need to see a vid of a real world runner, open to view, and then pinch myself, hard !
-f
You are right Fletcher. The great simplicity of it has been difficult to imagine, at least for me. And; it has to be made just right, or it won't work.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I'm getting close to it-----------------Sam
Follow up: Trying to figure out how to make a gravity wheel is a little bit like a combination lock. It's very simple, right? Only three numbers, how difficult could it be? The wheel is the same sort of situation. The way it's shaping up, is there are only three or four main parts but, like the lock, if one thing is off some way or another it won't work----------Sam
ReplyDeleteTest
ReplyDeleteTest.
ReplyDeleteTest.
DeleteTesting one, Testing two, testing three. Its working .
DeleteTrevor, Your ridicule is well founded. I think I'm close to a working wheel but, I may not be-------------------------Sam
DeleteI'm glad the forum is back online and glad to hear that you are making progress with your housing situarion. I am the "anonymous" that keeps suggesting you host a live Q and A session (maybe on Zoom) and am in the U.S. (what's left of it).
ReplyDeleteHi anon 03.05, it’s kind of you to suggest a Q an A session but I’m not sure i can manage it yet as we are living with my daughter, because we are between houses at the moment and all my staff is in storage. Thanks anyway.
DeleteJC
Stuff not staff! JC
Delete