The True Story of Johann Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Machine.

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 the outside of it, but it’s internal workings were kept hidden. This was because the inventor feared that his design would be copied and someone else might obtain credit for all his years of hard work looking for the solution. He followed the advice from the famous scientist, Gottfried Leibniz, who was able to examine the device, and recommended 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 a number of years Karl aged and it was decided that after so long it was time the inventor left 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 thought 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 before the buyer was allowed to view the internal workings of the machine. But 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 77). 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.

Not long after I was able to read the English translations of his books, I became convinced that Bessler had embedded a number of clues in his books. These took the form of hints in the text, but also in a number of drawings he published and I found suggestions by the author that studying his books would reveal more information about his wheel.


For some ideas about Bessler’s code why not visit my web sites at 

http://www.theorffyreuscode.com/

Take a look at my work on his “Declaration of Faith” at 

http://www.orffyreus.net/

Also please view my video at 

https://youtu.be/5BWVKtpuzn0

It gives a brief account both the legend and some more detail about some of the codes.

The problem of obtaining a fair reward for all his hard work was anticipated by Bessler and he took extraordinary measures to ensure that his secret was safe, but he encoded all the information needed to reconstruct the machine in a small number of books that he published. He implied that he was prepared to die without selling the secret and that he believed that posthumous acknowledgement was preferable to being robbed of his secret while he yet lived.


It has recently become clear that Bessler had a huge knowledge of the history of codes and adopted several completely different ones to disguise information within his publications. I have made considerable advances in deciphering his codes and I am confident that I have the complete design.


Johann Bessler published three books, and digital copies of these with English translations may be obtained from the links to the right of this blog. In addition there is a copy of his unpublished document containing some 141 drawings - and my own account of Bessler’s life is also available from the links. It is called "Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?" 

Bessler's three published books are entitled "Grundlicher Bericht", "Apologia Poetica” and "Das Triumphirende...". I have called Bessler's collection of 141 drawings “Maschinen Tractate”, but it was originally found in the form of a number of loosely collected drawings of perpetual motion designs. Many of these have handwritten notes attached and I have published the best English translation of them that I was able to get. Bessler never published these drawings but clearly intended to use them in his planned school for apprentices.

You can order copies of the books from my website at 

http://www.free-energy.co.uk/

Printed books direct from the printer can be obtained from here

https://www.lulu.com/spotlight/johncollins

Or from the top of the right side panel under the heading ‘Bessler’s Books’.

There are also links lower down on the right side panel.

As I often say, the solution to this device is needed now. Anything that might help cleanse the planet of pollution and help to reduce green house gas emissions, by providing a clean cheap alternative energy source should encouraged in its discovery and development to counter global warming.

JC

Proof of Pentagram in the Merseburg & Weissenstein Drawings

I have indicated the presence of a pentagon embedded within the two drawings of the Merseburg and Weissenstein Castles many times over several years. It has been pointed out to me recently, that ‘any geometric figure could be revealed by someone else who might draw lines on that Merseburg wheel drawing and get a hexagon or an octagon out of it!’

I think that’s a reasonable comment, although I don’t think that has happened yet. But I can provide convincing evidence that the pentagon/pentagram was deliberately included by Bessler, and with no other geometric design intended in those particular drawings, maybe that would help to focus people’s minds on the reason why.

Back in November 2021 I published a blog entitled “The Toys page, 137, 141 and 47 and the Freemasons”. Amongst other things I talked about the 47th proposition of Euclid and the Pythagorean theorem. I did not offer a link to Euclid’s 11th proposition which I now do, it was in fact ....

“ To inscribe an equilateral and equiangular pentagon in a given circle….”

I’ve abridged it somewhat to simplify my point. A diameter line is first drawn across the circle, in our Weissenstein version it is that line I call the padlock line running downwards from point A.  

A second line is drawn from the upper end of the padlock line, point A,  to the opposite circumference, point C in Euclid’s construction below, forming an 18 degrees angle.  That one in the Weissenstein drawing I call the ‘rope line’

A third line is drawn from the same point, to the opposite circumference, point D in Euclid’s construction, again at an angle of 18 degrees but on the opposite side of the padlock line from the rope line.

A line is drawn between Points C and D.  Angle CAD is 36 degrees (2 times 18 degrees) and angles C and D are twice the angle at A, 72 degrees.

“Let ABCDE be the given circle.

Set out the isosceles triangle FGH having each of the angles at G and H double the angle at F.

Inscribe in the circle ABCDE the triangle ACD (blue) equiangular with the triangle FGH, so that the angles CAD, ACD, and CDA equal the angles at F, G, and H respectively. Therefore each of the angles ACD and CDA is also double the angle CAD.

 6

Now bisect the angles ACD and CDA respectively by the straight lines CE and  DB, and join AB, BC, DE, and EA.

Then, since each of the angles ACD and CDA is double the angle CAD, and they are bisected by the straight lines CE and DB, therefore the five angles DAC, ACE, ECD,CDB, and BDA equal one another.

But equal angles stand on equal circumferences, therefore the five circumferences AB, BC, CD, DE, and EA equal one another.

But straight lines that cut off equal circumferences are equal, therefore the five straight lines AB, BC, CD, DE, and EA equal one another. Therefore the pentagon ABCDE is equilateral.

I say next that it is also equiangular.”

With thanks to http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/elements/bookIV/propIV11.

What features of Euclid’s construction could be found in the two drawings being examined, and clearly identified as a clue to it being part of the pentagon, and nothing else?

This is the Weissenstein drawing with some existing lines coloured by me!

The blue line exists as the padlock line from A. Although it isn’t in this particular construction it is used in alternative constructions.

The red line is the rope line A to C.  These two are 18 degrees apart. This should spark the thought of a pentagon on its own.

The purple line A to D is also 18 degrees from the blue padlock line. These two angles total 36 degrees, another hint at the presence of a pentagon.

The yellow line C to D matches the green one and is aligned with the hatching lines in the wheel drawings.  Just in case you think that you B and E should also align with the hatching lines, you’re right they should, but I did not measure the bisected angles when I drew this with my mouse, so on the Weissenstein drawing my positioning was slightly out - but it doesn’t affect the conclusion.

The two white lines, DB and CE bisect the angles at ACD and ADC to provide the final two points of the pentagon.

Remember every single angle in the pentagram is a multiple of 18.  Hence there are these angles 18, 36, 54, 72, 90 and 108.  

Also the letter ‘R’ is the 18th letter of the alphabet.  It also forms a major part of Bessler’s logo and his initials, J for Johann, to become R through the ROT13 cipher.

To summarise. The two lines of interest in the Bessler wheel drawings are the rope line and the padlock line.  These two lines form the basis for suspecting the presence of the pentagon. They’re 18 degrees apart.

JC.  

© John Collins 2022

Johann Bessler’s Connectedness Principle - Apologies!

It seems that my blog about Johann Bessler’s Connectedness Principle met with considerable scepticism which I was disappointed to see, but I’m not surprised.  I wrote my ideas without any supporting information or drawings and I think that this is not the place to do this unless I do it properly.

I am absolutely determined to publish everything as soon as I can but doing it a bit at a time will not convince anyone.  So I’ve removed the details of the blog for now, but I will return to the subject later.

I am extremely busy with stuff to do with my recent house move and while the weather here is brilliant for what I have to do outside, I’m working hard during daylight hours and I’m too knackered in the evening to write or draw anything Bessler-related.  I’m 77 years old but very fit (for my age!) and this work is all-consuming.  I fell off a ladder a couple of days ago, nothing broken but a bit of bruising.  I was reducing the height and depth of a 12 foot high laurel hedge and I and the ladder tipped backwards, depositing me on the lawn.  Once I’ve caught up with these things which are so occupying my time and I have my workshop operating again, I shall return to my blog with more and better information.

Thanks for all your comments, but for now I must get on and finish with these mundane jobs so I can concentrate on the important things like Bessler’s wheel.

JC.                   

Johann Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Machine Worked!

We generally refer to Johann Bessler’s wheel as a Perpetual Motion machine or device, but such machines are consistently said to be impossible and therefore Bessler must have been a fraud.  However the evidence that he was genuine is remarkably convincing so how do we explain this apparent paradox?

Maybe it depends on the definition of perpetual motion.  I think we are familiar with these definitions but do they apply to Bessler’s wheel? The answer must be ‘no’ for two reasons.  Firstly such devices are impossible and would violate the law of conservation of energy, therefor his machine was not a perpetual motion device.  Secondly the definition of perpetual motion states that in such a hypothetical machine there is no external source of energy, and Bessler said his machine was dependant on the actions of a number of weights, this implies that the weights actually supplied the energy to rotate the wheel continuously. The only potential source of energy from outside the machine was gravity- or rather, the effect of gravity on the weights.

Even Bessler pointed out that his machine could not be described as ‘perpetual’ for reasons such wear and tear, old age, accidental damage etc.  ‘Continuous motion ’ seems a better term  to me, it removes the unreasonable word ‘Perpetual’ which implies that it will turn for ever regardless of how many thousands of years! 

But gravity is not an energy source.  This is true but it is a force and can enable a weight to fall in a special configuration which may seem as though gravity had provided the energy.  The energy is a property of the mass and it’s interaction with our planet and for instance waterwheels are driven by falling water,  enabled by gravity.

But so far no one has found a way to design a system which allows the fallen weights to return to their former position ready to fall again - no one except Johann Bessler.

We have been repeatedly told that there is no design which can accommodate such an action, but is this true?  I assume that Bessler succeeded therefore there is a special arrangement which allows the fallen weights to return to their pre-fall position, ready to repeat and repeat.

The energy provided comes from the action of gravity on the weights, so there is no mystery where the energy comes from.  For repeat falls to be possible there must be a particular inclusive action by a part of the mechanism.  Repeat falls are also vital for continuous overbalancing.

Bessler described the action of the wheel in this way.

“ …these weights are themselves the PM device, the ‘essential constituent parts’ which must of necessity continue to exercise their motive force (derived from the PM principle) indefinitely – so long as they keep away from the centre of gravity. To this end they are enclosed (page 21) in a structure or framework, and co-ordinated in such a way that not only are they prevented from attaining their desired equilibrium or ‘point of rest’, but they must for ever seek it, thereby developing an impressive velocity which is proportional to their mass and to the dimensions of their housing. This velocity is sufficient for the heaviness movingk and raising of loads applied to the axis of rotation.”

Bessler mentions this “PM principle” many times and it is this that provided the answer to the problem of returning the weights to their starting position.  It is hard to see what else provided the energy when he states so clearly that the weights themselves “are the essential constituent parts…”, only gravity could provide the force which moved the weights.  

The word gravity or gravitas used by Newton simply meant heaviness but he did not invent the word, but was the author of a crucial "shift of meaning": previously "gravity" denoted a quality, after Newton, a force. You could say that gravity formerly meant, the tendency of objects to fall toward the center of the earth but after Newton it meant the tendency of two objects to attract each other.

Given the successful tests, and the word of a highly respected man who inspected the interior of the machine - and Bessler’s own words, how can anyone doubt the veracity of his claims?  But you have to put aside your prejudices and consider the facts.  Was his machine a fake?  Was the Landgrave of Hesse Kassel fooled, a man who had supervised the experiments by Denis Papin for ten years at the castle, before Bessler arrived, as well as being an honest broker during the 30 years war involving many European countries and their rulers? The answer must be a resounding no.

In the end, a perpetual motion (pm) machine is defined as needing no external source of energy, which is ridiculous, but means that Bessler’s wheel was definitely not a pm device.   He ascribed the source of energy to moving weights, enabled by gravitational force. This is possible provided the fallen weights can be returned using the actions of the other weights.

Bessler found the solution and so can we.

JC