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
Take a look at my work on his “Declaration of Faith” at
Also please view my video at
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
Printed books direct from the printer can be obtained from here
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
I think I have a discerning mind. 😊
ReplyDeleteThat's a good sign thinking! have you studied about Bessler a long time?
ReplyDeleteGuess what guys? I can’t comment on my own blog! So I’m going to temporarily remove the comments feature while I try to sort it! Wish me luck.
ReplyDeleteJC
Was it a success John or are you still tweaking
ReplyDeleteHi Stephen, I’ve had to reinstate anonymous posts again! I can’t comment in my own blog. I seem to remember this was the reason why I went back to anon comments. I’ll leave it as it is for now and see if I can solve the problem.
ReplyDeleteJC
john why are you letting a few nutters here that dont like the anon comments prevent the many who come here and and want to read them from seeing them? from what I see those anon comments are the best here and actually talk about besslers wheels instead of just boring bs mysticism prattle. please leave the anon comments alone!
DeleteAnon14:28
DeleteJohn's let the lunatics take over the asylum here a few times in the past and the result has always been a disaster with comment counts per blog dropping way off and regulars staying away until they finally see the anon option back again. It can take months for that to happen though.
You used to log in before why can't you log in now
ReplyDeleteI can log in, I have to be able to do so to write my blogs, but for some reason as soon a sign in is required, even though I can log in, it won’t let me comment. Crazy!
ReplyDeleteJC
Well then John make another email address to sign in with that should do it! Then you can comment you know have your cake and eat it too!
ReplyDeleteOne email to make your blog the other to participate in it you have multiple email accounts maybe that's what you were doing all along and you didn't know it!
ReplyDeleteIt will work John you know it will but in the meantime I can open up a room in big screen VR where people can talk directly to each other and if somebody gets out of line or is inconsiderate they can be booted or muted by others alleviating headaches these people are not committed to doing anything but disrupting what should be an easy exchange of information between people that can trust you not only that you could reach younger people who've never heard this history of who Bessler there was I'm sure your granddaughter would approve if you're not familiar with the metaverse and the Very culture it is she probably knows
ReplyDeleteJust what the world of Bessler researchers needs...a virtual reality chatroom with SG deciding who can and cannot comment! Lol!
DeleteShemp (...and please stop misspelling my name, SG!)
I found this short youtube video that will give you an idea what VR worlds look like and how they are being misused by some.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpDlhPW8Bd0
Just a couple of trolls it's the same in any form of media but you can deal with them a lot quicker in VR bye-bye
ReplyDeleteJohn you really have to change this before the end these trolls are dedicating to disrupting any serious dialogue whatsoever no one is ever going to share the importance of their discoveries when these trolls are here you should have learned that a long time ago. It paints a picture of you that is very unflattering. The opposition and resistance to Common Sense research will always be under attack by those who have a vested interest in the outcome. By letting this continue your credibility on any topic does not carry anyway whatsoever. It's hard enough to find some people who are interested in the topic when the majority have all been brainwashed with knee jerk responses to the concept you introduced in conversation when you express your interest it is such a knee jerk response there could only be one reason the individual has no reasoning at all it paints a picture of them a sheep to the slaughter there were times in the past when I thought it would be much simpler if I never went down this path but After experiencing The Amazing Discoveries I made in my search when the unbelievable Joy I experienced knowing that it could be achieved without doubt was worth to me the pain and suffering even to this day to to me what lies ahead is more pain than suffering only comforted by the past understanding A new challenge lies ahead Beyond the Horizon and it is the most difficult one of all I still hope you have an understanding of what that is for now John goodbye I sincerely hope you get to experience once again that Joy of discovery like I did may you always look at the world through the eyes of a child with anticipation and wonder please forgive the lack of punctuation you should be able to understand me by now
ReplyDeleteSincerely Stephen Glorioso logging out
Thanks Stephen. I’ll try your suggestion but it will be a few hours before I can get into it. JC
DeleteExcuse me for intruding on this SG dominated blog, but for those who are more interested in Bessler than reading SG rambling on about his "Amazing Discoveries" that he never reveals, I have something for them. I think I now know where Bessler got the idea for his first DT portrait. Check this out:
ReplyDeletehttps://history-computer.com/MechanicalCalculators/18thCentury/images/LeupoldPortrait.jpg
As they say "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery". Maybe Bessler was secretly jealous of him? Leupold was a gifted polymath in the rank of Leibniz and churning out volume after volume on mechanics. That was when he wasn't busy making calculating machines and state of the art air pumps! All very impressive accomplishments, but he still did not have the secret of pm wheel mechanics like Bessler had. I bet Leupold would have traded all of his accomplishments for that secret.
Interesting find, anon 14:55.
DeleteBut for Bessler to have used that portrait of Leupold as inspiration to make his own DT portrait, Leupold's portrait would have to have been made on or before the year 1719 when DT was completed. Leupold died fairly young at the age of only 53 in 1727 and no one seems to know exactly when that portrait of him was completed.
For Bessler to use it, it would had to have been made at least 8 years before Leupold died which would have made Leupold only 45 when the portrait was made. I guess he does look about 45 in it. It's hard to tell because of that wig he's wearing.
I found this two piston steam engine design Leupold published in 1720. This is what Bessler and his wheels had to compete with!
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/Leupold_high_pressure_steam_engine_1720.gif
PM Dreamer
Got $25,000 and want to invest it in a rare item? Here's one for you to consider. It's an original, four volume set containing eight of the ten volumes Leupold produced before he died that was specially bound for some count back then. The missing two volumes were put out later by a different publisher.
Deletehttps://www.pirages.com/pages/books/ST12783/technology-and-engineering-jacob-leupold/theatrum-machinarum
Leupold and Bessler had some things in common. Leupold started out as a carpenter like his father before him and then moved on to mathematics and theology. Eventually, he became interested in machines and began to manufacture them. He also made instruments used by scientists and doctors. I think he and Bessler were definitely on the same wavelength. Leupold also had an interest in pm machines, but unfortunately concluded that they were impossible. Bessler had the same interest, but believed that they were possible. One's beliefs can make a BIG difference in the results he gets!
@PMD
DeleteThanks for that link to the drawing of that Leupold steam engine which I'd never seen before. However, I think I see an obvious error in the drawing.
Each of the two pistons above the boiler on the right side is alternately raised by steam pressure as the other piston drops back down to the bottom of its cylinder due to its weight. That alternating action is controlled by a simple switch valve that is turned by some unseen linkage. That should definitely work as shown. But, I think the part of the drawing in the lower left corner showing the two sump cylinders an their pistons that are submerged in the water is not accurate.
The lightweight sump piston attached to the end of rod "l" should be raised up after water was drawn into its sump cylinder through an unseen check valve at its bottom, but that piston is still shown at the bottom of its sump cylinder! Both of those sump pistons should be alternately rising and falling in their sump cylinders as they alternately pump water up through pipe "q" (that water would be prevented from back flowing into a sump cylinder again by another unseen check valve), but Leupold's drawing does not show that alternating pumping action taking place.
I suspect that Leupold, unlike Bessler, was not making his own printing plates for his books and had to rely on someone else to make them for him. That someone else, working with maybe a poorly drawn sketch Leupold gave him, must have been confused by it and Leupold didn't notice the mistake he made in the printing plate. However, maybe he did notice it, but left it in anyway hoping no one else would notice it and because he thought that the publisher would not want to go to the extra trouble and expense of having a new printing plated made.
jason
I agree with you, Jason. The rods labeled k and l should be the same length, but they're not! l is too long. I can't imagine a guy like Leupold making that kind of an obvious mistake. Most likely his artist was in a rush or maybe he had just polished off a bottle of fermented grape juice when he got around to working on the plate for that drawing? Cockeyed artists tend to make cockeyed artwork!
Delete@Anon 21:28
DeleteI just took a closer look at that set of four volumes containing the eight Leupold volumes being sold on that rare book site. I wish I was rich enough to buy them. Here's a link to the image they show of the set:
https://www.pirages.com/pictures/ST12783_07.JPG?v=1475020313
They really knew how to make books back in those days.
Each volume's front and back covers were probably made of thin but strong wood covered over with animal skin and that gold trim was real 24 kt PURE GOLD leaf pressed into the cover. Today all you get with a hardcover book is some stiff cardboard covers with a quickly printed out color image glued to it. Gold trim? Heck no. If the book actually has anything that looks like gold on it, it's just a blend of cheap aluminum and copper powders and most of it will wear off after you handle the book a few times.
Bookbinding in the 18th century was a true form of art. Nowadays it's all done as cheaply and quickly as possible by giant computerized printing machines and the price per volume is probably much higher than it was back then despite all of the manual labor involved in making those past books.
See John he States Leupold believed it was not possible Bessler stated that Jacob Leupold was unable to prove it was impossible. Jacob leupold stated he did believe it was possible where is the statement that he concluded it was impossible in what publication if there is such a document I want to know the date of its publication
ReplyDeleteIt's in Leupold's "Theatrum Machinarum Generale" that was published in 1724 around the time that Bessler would have read it and was adding the notes to his earlier done MT drawings. But to read Leupold's criticisms of the various types of OOB pm wheels, you will need to be able to read early 18th century German. Good luck with that. There are no English translations of Leupold's books available.
Delete"There are no English translations of Leupold's books available."
DeleteI'm not too sure about that. Important books were being written on mechanics over in mainland Europe in the 18th century and they may all, including Bessler's AP and DT, have been translated into English for the readers in England who could not read German. But maybe they were printed in very limited quantities which is why none of them are now known to exist in any libraries anywhere? I've often wondered where Henry Dircks got the English translations of material from Bessler's books that he uses as a source of information on Bessler's wheels in his book.
I'd love to see an early English translation done of AP or DT so I could compare it to the later English translations that JC obtained for us. There might be just a few differently translated lines in them that could give us that extra information needed to finally reproduce Bessler wheels.
OK, can we please get back to Bessler subjects. I’ve given up trying to remove the anonymous requirement, we'll just have to live with it, but I’ll delete anything I don’t like. I have no objection to suggestions that any of my ideas are wrong and I welcome new thoughts, designs and concepts.
ReplyDeleteJC
John, You welcome new thoughts, designs and concepts, but you aren't too keen to share yours.
DeleteI just thought it is worth noting that you are asking of others what you aren't prepared to do yourself. Your reasons for your reticence to share your thoughts is perfectly understandable, they are exactly the same as for everyone else.
I made the test comment above to see if the anonymous comments on this blog were again immediately being published which they are. I made an anonymous comment yesterday to that recent past 100 comment blog and it did not appear immediately. All that appeared was a "This comment is being held for approval" notice! That comment still has not been published in that blog. All that comment did was give my interpretation of the "...one side is full and heavy and the other is empty and light" quote by Bessler. I don't think there is any reason for it not to be "approved". Then again, maybe you never checked that blog to see if there were any comments there awaiting approval?
DeleteI like keeping this blog just the way it was. Every time you start fiddling around with the sign in requirements all sorts of problems start popping up. I got the impression that you recently started doing this again because you got angry that some anons were criticizing your five weight wheel / hidden pentagon theory about Bessler's wheels. You must realize that anybody who claims anything about Bessler's wheels will automatically become a target for critics. That's just the way this game is played. Bessler was the first guy to start playing this game and now it's our turns!
You wrote above "...but I’ll delete anything I don’t like". There's nothing wrong with that if a poster is using foul or hateful language that most people find offensive. But, if some poster turns into a babbling nut case even though he's not using foul or hateful language, it shouldn't be forbidden for others to criticize him for that. Some babbling cases may not even realize that they are babblers and the negative feedback from others might help them become more rational in their future comments and thinking. It does occasionally work!
Sorry anon 14.05, I was trying various ways to avoid too many anons, but in the end it’s the only one that seems to work. During my search for a solution I came across a lot of similar complaints with no resolutions. I considered using a different blog, but this is free and it’s ok, I guess.
DeleteNo I won’t delete something just because my ideas were rejected, it’s only bad language, or hateful language etc. I’m used to having my ideas rejected, only the working wheel we all seek will do.
JC
@RH46.. Touché! JC
ReplyDeleteAnonymous30 July 2022 at 14:05
ReplyDeleteYou are free to explore the concept of mass displacement (COM) and free to believe or have the theory that mass displacement drove Bessler wheel.
My personal opinion is different , to displace mass with other mass requires force greater than the mass to be displaced can counter , it also requires force greater than the resistance and friction encountered in doing so.
So it requires more energy/work to displace the other mass than is available from an equal "driver" mass .
If you apply mechanical advantage , to displace the mass , you can increase the output force or the distance , however you cannot have both , so the "driver" mass either cannot have the required force or the required distance to displace the other mass far/high enough.
If you apply more "driver" masses to make up for the lack of distance or force to displace the other mass , you will still drop the driver masses a summed distance or weight , more than the single displaced mass alone , and it also increases the amount of friction and resistance .
One would find that one are always short of , energy / mass / force / distance.
A good example is MT13:
"No. 13: This is a new weight-invention, with no belts or chains but each weight is
separate and free except that each has an interval arm C with which it forms an angle,
and on the cylinder hangs a figure which has below a weight in the shape of a half-moon
and above a small wheel B over which the arms C sweep and lift themselves up at D.
This invention would be very good for running if not so much friction were present or
someone was available up by D to always lift up the weight with lightning speed."
Depending on how you want to interpret it is your choice , however ,imo , it is stated here by Bessler , that the friction alone of trying to lift 1 weight at 12 , is so much that it cannot be done unless the friction is removed , or someone moved the weight at 12 quick enough instead of the machine , because there is not enough force /energy to do so.
There are other examples , however , imo , physics/mechanics aligns with the impossibility too.
I'm not anon 30 July 2022 at 14:05. But I think what you wrote applies to all OOB wheels except the ones Bessler built! They actually stayed OOB as they turned while others just have their COM's drop right down below their axles after a small amount of a wheel rotation. When the COM gets there torque drops to zero, stays there, and no pm is possible.
DeleteBessler praised MT13 but admits it needed someone's hand to supply the ascending side weights with extra GPE to make it work. There is a numerologist named "Sayer of Sooths" who shows up here occasionally and claims that MT13 was the last wheel Bessler actually worked on before he found a way to make it work. How?
He got rid of that big half moon pendulum and connected the levers together with cords. That was his connection principle. Next he added springs to all of the levers that tried to pull them over to the wheel's descending side. That combination allowed MT13's ascending levers to first swing their attached weights in toward the axle and then after their pivots passed around 9 o'clock the levers would suddenly fly up and rapidly raise their weights. It was this odd reversal in the swinging motions of the levers and their weights that was necessary to keep MT13's COM on the descending side as the wheel turned. Here's how Bessler hints about this motion on page 291 in AP:
"At present, as far as I’m concerned, anyone who wants can go on about the wonderful doing of these weights, alternatively gravitating to the center and climbing back up again, for I can’t put the matter more clearly."
He intended to "put the matter more clearly" at the end of MT with four drawings, but unfortunately the woodcuts he made for them were removed, burned, and buried by Bessler in a fit of paranoia he had. All we can do now is try to guess what those missing drawing showed.
Anonymous31 July 2022 at 14:54
DeleteI highly doubt that you or anyone can say what Bessler did or did not do , no one knows what went on behind the wheel covers , none of us or even people 100 years ago would be able to say they witnessed the inside workings or know what he did and did not do , because Bessler is deceased.
There is only Bessler's words and Karl's words to consider as valid for inner workings of the wheel.
If anyone can show a real working wheel that is truly just an overbalance wheel , go ahead and blow my mind.
The theory sinks before it can even be launched.
Unfortunately all we learn from Bessler and Karl is that the insides of Bessler's wheels were simple and used weights. That's not much to go on. But Bessler did state that he found his solution where everyone else had looked for it but failed to find it. Everyone else back then was trying to make overbalanced wheels work and they are still doing it today.
DeleteImo, the best that can be done is to try to find as many clues Bessler left as possible and then use them to try to determine his design. There are probably many clues nobody has even noticed yet and supposedly that Ken B guy says he's already managed to find several dozen of them! I don't know if that's true or not, but it could be and who knows how many other clues there could be sitting in Bessler's books especially their drawings waiting to be found. Other than this blog, I don't even see Bessler's drawings being discussed anywhere else nowadays. It's almost like everyone has given up on looking for them and I notice that whenever John has a blog talking about clues, the number of people commenting on it drops way down. It's like no one cares about clues anymore almost like they all have some sort of clue fatigue!
I think Bessler was an expert at hiding information right out in plain sight and I can't believe he would risk dying and just letting all his years of hard work count for nothing. Those clues have to be there somewhere in his books and they need to be dug out and used to make either sims or real wheels to see if they work.
Fawk, everyone now trying to find Bessler's design could only be working with maybe 20% of all of the clues he left us and they would be the most obvious and easiest to find ones. If that is true, then Bessler pm wheel builders are like people shuffling a deck of playing cards missing their sixteen picture cards and then dealing out five cards over and over again hoping to get a royal flush. Ain't gonna happen no matter how long they keep shuffling and dealing those cards. They need the full deck to even have the rare chance of getting that royal flush. And we need to have as many clues from Bessler's books as possible and to stop pretending they aren't there to even have the rare chance of finding his original design.
Those books were available to all his enemies at the time , if Bessler was keen on protecting his work , he would not compose those books to contain direct clues , however i think Bessler was taunting without giving it away in his writing.
DeleteThe only book he worked on that supposedly by his own words contained the proof in detail of the inner design along with the mathematical proof , was to become as we call it MT.
But as everyone knows , he removed that from MT , the only thing he seems to have left in MT of importance , was the "toy page" along with the words that imply "look here , i left a clue , but you will have to discover it yourself , im not giving it to you".
The toy page surely does not fit in with MT , MT shows mostly Bessler's builds ,designs ,experiments ,demonstations , and some other people's designs here and there , along with his comments , which mostly stipulates that they are not workable , they are all overbalance of some sort exept a rare few.
The toy page is not a design , experiment , build ,demonstration , wheel ,it is a collection that contains something special , and clearly is out of place .
I suggest thats where you should be looking , it's the "end of my life chapter" page from him.
Very well said jb .. !
DeleteAlso, volumes and volumes have been devoted to B's. drawings and engravings at BW.com over the last 20 years, and any "clues" they might contain. The topics get a second life from time to time when a member thinks they have more to add otherwise they are available research material to add to John's books and blog discussions.
-f
5 levers? 8 levers? NO! It was 12 levers and not one less!
ReplyDeleteBessler didn't want anyone, especially potential businessmen buyers worried about maintenance costs, to know that his wheels actually needed 12 levers to run smoothly so he used padding material to quiet the impact sound that every third lever made when it hit against a wood stop inside a drum. That reduced the count of impact sounds down from twelve to eight per wheel rotation. This also confused anyone trying to use the number of impacts to figure out how his wheels worked.
Was anybody even paying attention to the missing thump after every two thumps during the official tests? No, because the examiners were too distracted by all of the spinning and swinging motions created by Bessler's wheels to notice the missing thumps. He was also further distracting them with a nonstop flow of his phony Latin descriptions of how his wheels worked. He was a master at creating confusion and distractions when he had to.
It was a very clever trick. It totally fooled everyone back then and it's still fooling most today. But it doesn't fool me at all! The bottom line of this is that if your wheel doesn't also use 12 levers, then it's definitely not the same one Bessler used.
Shemp
And yet another character appears on this blog to entertain us! Welcome, Shemp. I noticed that you were "born" right after SG misspelled your name as "shamp" earlier in this blog. That was like a magical word that summoned you forth from the Twilight Zone...Lol!
DeleteNo, anon 00:23, the misspelling by SG actually took place in the previous blog not this one and that's where "Shemp" first appeared.
Delete@Shemp
DeleteYeah, welcome. Let's see now...
Hmm...Bessler was a clockmaker and clock dials have 12 hours on them. Also a year has 12 months in it.
Hmm...Bessler's first wheel was publicly demonstrated after the completion of the 12th year of the 18th century in 1712.
Hmm...Bessler demonstrated that wheel in the town of Gera on the 6th day of the 6th month and 6 plus 6 is 12.
Hmm...Bessler was very religious and a devout believer in Jesus who had 12 apostles. There were also 12 main gods in Greek Mythology which he was probably familiar with.
Hmm...Bessler was a student of the Old Testament where he learned that there were 12 tribes of Israel each begun by one of the 12 sons of Jacob and each of those sons had 12 sons.
Hmm...Bessler spoke most highly of a particular wheel in MT which was MT13 and it has 12 levers.
Hmm...Bessler's two largest wheels were 12 feet in diameter.
Hmm...If you add the Toys Page to the 143 pages that were supposed to be in the original collection of MT drawings you get a total of 144 pages and 144 is equal to 12 x 12.
Hmm...nah...Shemp, I think you're just imagining things. Bessler would never have packed as many as 12 levers into one of his wheel's drums...
...or would he???
That all sounds very convincing indeed. I can't imagine how anyone could still have any doubts about the number of levers in Bessler's wheels.
DeleteAn addition proof of there being 12 levers, is the fact that if you count all the curly hairs on his portrait and divide it by the number of buttons on his coat, the total is a multiple of 12.
Shemp's analysis is interesting. Those testing Bessler's 12 foot diameter wheels might have heard all 12 impact sounds, but every two loud sounds would have been followed by a much fainter sound because the impact producing it was cushioned with felt.
DeleteIf they only counted the loud sounds they would have said there were exactly 8 per wheel rotation. But then what about the additional 4 fainter sounds that they heard per rotation? They couldn't just ignore them so maybe that is why they said his wheels made "about" 8 sounds? That could have been to acknowledge that they were not sure exactly how many of the sounds they heard were important. It could have been more than just the 8 main sounds and if one wanted to he could consider all 12 sounds important. That would then allow for Bessler's 12 foot diameter wheels to have used 12 levers carrying weights at their ends.
PM Dreamer
@PMD
DeleteThat actually makes more sense than the last time John tried to explain how you can get eight bumps out of five weights. Lol!
@anon 13:14
DeleteYou forgot to mention that Bessler wrote in MT that Jacob Leupold's pm wheel could work if he was to use Bessler's connectedness principle in it. That wheel had 12 levers in it!
This reincarnation of Shemp Howard (who was born Samuel Horwitz on March 11th, 1895) will probably not amuse us as much as the original one did. Here's an image of the original Shemp when he got himself wrapped up in a telephone cord and trapped inside of a phone booth in the short titled "The Brideless Groom" made in 1947:
Deletehttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/ShempUgly.jpg?20130609115206
The original Shemp died on November 23rd, 1955. He and a friend had just left a boxing match in Los Angeles. They caught a cab to take them to Shemp's home in North Hollywood. Shemp, after lighting up a cigar, suddenly had a fatal heart attack during the trip. He was 70 years old at the time of his death. In about 1 in 3 heart attacks, the only symptom is sudden death!
Anon 22:33
DeleteThat is not entirely correct , Bessler did not write that.
"but nothing is to be accomplished with his thing unless one acts out of my
connectedness principle"
He did not say it would make it work.
"but here I do not yet wish to show or discuss the figure for the time being"
He also said , to the end of that comment , i have not shown it here nor discussed it.
The circumference of a 12 feet diameter wheel is 37.7 feet. If you have 12 levers in it and their end weights are near the rim, then each weight will be 3.14 feet away from the other. The levers Bessler used were probably less than 3.14 long and maybe half that length?. That's enough spacing so that if a lever swung all the way over until it pointed at a nearby lever's pivot, there would still be over a foot of separation between its end weight and the other lever's pivot. That would be more than enough to prevent any collisions between the levers taking place when they swung around their pivots as a wheel turned.
DeleteThe problem is working out the details of the connections between the levers. I also go with the idea of ropes being used. But then there's the problem of the shapes of the levers and where to attach the ropes to them. Seems like there were also springs involved which probably helped support the hanging levers on a wheel's going up side so the going down side levers could more easily lift them up and back toward the rim.
John is fixated on there being five levers with weights, but it seems most here prefer the number of levers being eight (with the recent humorous exception of Shemp). What we haven't heard from John yet is what the shape of his levers will be. Does he have clues that give that? He's showed us plenty of pentagons so far but nothing about levers. If he has the clues for the lever shapes then when are we going to finally see them?
I prefer to believe ,that the amount of assemblies/mechanisms needs to be , whatever it takes.
Delete@JB
DeleteAgreed, but the Bessler wheel "purists" out there (apparently now led by Ken B) want to know the exact number of "perpetual motion structures" that Bessler actually used in his wheels. It looks like they have settled on it always being 8, but maybe Bessler varied the amount?
For his 4.5 foot Gera wheel maybe it was 5 like John thinks? Next, for the Draschwitz wheel maybe it was 5, 6 or 8? Then, finally, for the Merseburg and Kassal wheels maybe he increased it to 8 or 12 like "Shemp" suggests? If nobody can agree on even the number of mechanisms his wheels each used, what's the chance of anyone ever agreeing on the structures of those mechanisms? Maybe he even changed the mechanisms from wheel to wheel along with the number of mechanisms used?!
I just found about about the Bessler wheel a couple of days ago, and I have been thinking about it. I do believe it does work, driven by the force of gravity acting on the weights inside which in one form or another impact the wheel itself, causing it to spin. Here's another clue that isn't brought up often I don't think. Bessler stated that the wheel has to be empty on one side and filled on the other. Taking it literally, I say the weights have to be on the descending side of the wheel AT ALL TIMES. Thus the center of gravity is on that side allowing the wheel to self-turn (notwithstanding the initial push) AND to possess power to perform external work. None of the designs I've seen so far capture that. I do believe it can be done... Here's a quote from Bessler and it evokes the challenge of keeping the weights within the same area (or side) of the spinning wheel:
ReplyDelete"...and when they come to be placed together, and so arranged one against another that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wonderfully speedy flight, one or other of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis, which in its turn must also move."
Welcome to the Bessler pm wheel asylum, anon 19:35!
DeleteThere are reasons why impacts on the descending side of a turning wheel cannot work and even Bessler wrote in MT that "no wheel is moved by heavy blows". He probably tried and rejected that approach when he first began chasing pm.
In any OOB or "Out Of Balance" wheel design, the center of gravity of the weights will be on the descending side at the start when the wheel is stationary and ready to be released. The trick is to keep it there after the wheel is released and starts to turn so that it does not just rotate right down to the "punctum quietus" or equilibrium point directly vertically below the center of the axle causing the torque to drop to zero. So far since Bessler, every OOB wheel someone has built has done exactly that!
Bessler suggests, once at least in "Maschinen Tractate" which we simply call MT, that his "connectedness principle" was needed to keep a wheel OOB, but, of course, he gave no details of what that principle was although most think it involves cords connecting the weight carrying levers together in a special way along with stretched springs to counter balance the weighted levers somehow. Some here also insist that the levers must have the shape of the letter Y to work.
Bessler originally intended to reveal the secrets of his pm wheels in four drawings he placed at the end of MT, but in a fit of anger and paranoia, he removed and destroyed just those four drawings. That is why MT, although certainly being interesting to ponder, remains annoyingly incomplete. John here sells a copy of its drawings that have some notes scribbled on some of them by Bessler along with the English translations of the notes.
If you haven't visited it yet, you might want to take a look at this site:
http://orffyre.com
It has a lot of interesting information about Bessler and his wheels.
Thank you for the welcome and link! When I used the word "impact" I was referring to weights interacting with the wheel in any which way causing it to turn. I didn't necessarily mean heavy blows as they don't work according to Bessler. I probably should have provided a better word. These are some eyewitness accounts of the wheel in operation that I found at www.besslerwheel.com :
Delete"Weights were heard hitting the side of the wheel going down."
"Machine made scratching noises, as if parts or poles moved over one another."
"Weights may have landed on slightly warped boards."
Here is my imagined, very simplified Bessler wheel: It is like a Ferris wheel with a weight placed inside one of the cabins on the descent side. Before the weight reaches the equilibrium point at the bottom, the (spring-loaded?) cabin precisely flings the weight up and over, landing it onto the cabin above. The action is repeated continuously so the weight is kept inside the descent area even when the other mechanisms pass in and out of it as the wheel turns. The force from the landing weight keeps the wheel moving. The cabin release could be induced by a pole hammer that moves up and down next to the wheel's axis containing catching tab(s). There are diagrams showing the Bessler's wheel driving a stone/grain crushing device and Archimedes pump. Perhaps they are clues as to the wheel's internal mechanism?
Bessler's mentioning the wheel being half empty and half full reminded me of the rotating Taichi (yin-yang) symbol now that I think about it...
These are just my initial thoughts. I am new to all this and it is all so fascinating! Thank you.
The problem is that it will take energy to compress that spring and it will be taken from the dropping weight. However, a real spring will not return 100% of the energy it receives from the weight back to the weight to raise it back to its starting height. As a result, each time the weight will be raised to a slightly lower height and eventually the weight will just sit on the compressed spring and they will both come to rest under the axle.
DeleteI put a ? after the phrase "spring-loaded". The weight may or may not need the assistance of a spring. The main force could come from the pole hammer coming down on the cabin/lever that holds the weight and ejecting it (sorta like a springboard). The spring could play a supporting role in this case. The question really involves the optimum design -- and that's a big question mark -- of a projectile system that can move the weight from one cabin/lever to the one above and maintain the gravity center in the descent zone.
DeleteKarl the Landgrave who was privy to Bessler's wheel remarked on its surprising simplicity. He claimed an apprentice carpenter could construct one. The other designs I've seen online with connecting chords, levers, etc. do not seem so simple. And they do not seem like they can even drive a load which the Bessler wheel did. I also think the "connectedness principle" as mentioned earlier is demonstrated in this Ferris wheel model.
There's been much debate here and on the besslerwheel.com forum over the years about what Karl meant by Bessler's design being "simple". It's really a subjective term. What he considered simple, someone else might consider not really that simple. Karl was a collector of the latest scientific instruments and clocks in Europe and he was used to seeing some very complicated mechanisms. When he said Bessler's wheels were simple he could have just meant that they did not require a lot of gears like clocks did. His stating that a carpenter's boy could construct one implies that their levers were made of wood. We know that his wheels contained lead weights. Some think the levers might have been connected together with leather straps or even chains instead of regular ropes because they would resist stretching and changing lengths which might mess up the coordination of their levers. Chains would be very noisy though.
DeleteThere is also some debate about how much power his wheels could put out continuously. They could lift heavy loads of stones, but his 12 feet diameter, bidirectional wheels could not do so from a standstill. They had to first be push started, allowed to reach their maximum speed, and then a rope running over a pulley to a heavy load of stones would be quickly attached by a small noose to a pin on the wheel's axle. And, then the load would immediately begin rising at its maximum speed which was probably only about a foot per second or so.
As the load was raised, the wheel would gradually slow to a stop so these hoists were actually braking tests. But, a load could be raised tens of feet before that happened. It's suggested that once a load reached as high as possible, the wheel would stop, change direction, and begin lowering it back down to the ground again. The load would not just come crashing down, however, as one might expect, but the wheel would actually lower it at a constant rate!
I still maintain that the design was appreciably simple for Karl to make another remark:
Delete"Karl stated to his ministers that he believed the wheel was indeed a perpetual motion and that he was amazed that no one had invented a similar machine before Bessler. "
(http://www.orffyre.com/overview.html)
He was "amazed" so those before his time easily had the technology/know-how to build one. I believe all of us at one point or another had a "why didn't I think of this before" moment. When it happens it implies the item/idea was available to us in the past but wasn't realized and it was probably right before our eyes. Further, the item/idea is likely simple and elegant.
Reportedly the wheel always held some maximum speed with or without a load and in either direction. So for the load of stones to come down at a constant speed would naturally follow I think.
What Bessler invented was an unprecedented feat for his time and even today. Here you have a contraption that is self-motive -- I don't think it was perpetual motion in the strictest sense -- and does work. It is because of him and the enigma of his machine that we are here exchanging ideas and hopefully leading to the the betterment of our (beautiful) planet. Yeah that sounded bit cliche/trite but I'm ok with that. :)
"It is because of him and the enigma of his machine that we are here exchanging ideas and hopefully leading to the the betterment of our (beautiful) planet".
DeleteUnfortunately this isn't entirely true. Many are here to take advantage of others sharing their thoughts, in the hope of being the one who finds the solution, they do not share their thoughts because they are too worried that someone may use them and become the inventor. The betterment of our beautiful planet is not their main concern. Them having fame and fortune is far more important to them.
Others are here to tell us they have found the secret, but they will not tell anyone what it is, because it's a secret.
There are also those who are here to tell us that Ken has found the solution, and that we should all be building Ken's wheel because it is so amazingly wonderful and definitely exactly the same as Bessler's.
There are a few who are sharing their thoughts, in the hope of bettering our beautiful planet, irrespective of who actually invents it.
We're a strange bunch collectively, with all our differences, but we do all have the same goal of seeking the solution to Bessler's wheel.
"We're a strange bunch collectively, with all our differences, but we do all have the same goal of seeking the solution to Bessler's wheel.'
DeleteAnd by extension, I would say it is the diversity of thoughts, of motives, of forms, etc. that makes our short time on this planet a most wondrous and interesting experience!
By the way my surname is Yang as y'all are curious. Too bad my first name isn't Yin. Then again it wouldn't make sense as I am a male. ;)
From Michigan, USA
I've also often wonder why people come here.
DeleteI think that most that come only lurk and are probably looking for information that they hope will finally allow them to solve the Bessler wheel mystery. They have probably been thinking about it for years. Occasionally one of them will anonymously announce that he has finally figured it all out and may even give some general description of it. Rarely do we see any drawings of his big discovery. That announcement probably gives him a good feeling, but it can rapidly fade when he sees the criticisms of his genius design from others here. That might make him rethink his solution and consider changing it, but I suspect he only assumes that he is still right and others here refuse to acknowledge that either because they are envious of his achievement or incompetent to do so.
Some who come here may actually be actively building a wheel, but are frustrated at their inability to make it work. Coming here gives them an excuse to get away from it for a while, clear their minds, and maybe get some new ideas to try. Also, reading about the continuing failures of others with their wheels might make them less annoyed with their own failures as they realize that when chasing Bessler's pm wheel or any pm wheel, failure is the rule and success is the very, very, very rare exception. You really need to have the kind of luck involved in winning a jackpot prize in a multi-state, multi-draw lottery to finally build a working pm wheel. If you do, then who knows if anything will ever come of it.
Look what happened to Bessler. He build at least six wheels that we know about and publicly demonstrated them for YEARS to THOUSANDS of people, yet most of the people today who learn of his story just dismiss him as a clever crook with a fraudulent wheel! What makes anyone think that he won't have the same fate IF he manages to duplicate Bessler's wheel? History has an uncanny way of repeating itself.
And I suppose some who come here are skeptics who, confident that pm is physically impossible, find the pro-pm comments of most here to be amusing. They consider them to all be deluded and in need of psychotherapy to get this pm nonsense out of their minds so that they can stop wasting their time pursuing it. These skeptics consider building a pm wheel about as possible as making a four sided triangle.
Making a four sided triangle is easy. Start with a four sided figure and just make sure that the interior angle between two adjacent sides is exactly 180 degrees and that the other three interior angles add up to exactly 180 degrees. PM skeptics are blockheads. Just ignore them.
DeleteI bought some four sided triangles a while back, they cost me a fortune.
DeleteMy wife, while cleaning up my junk, put them in the box with all the squares and now i can't find them, they look exactly like squares and you just can't tell the difference.
I think a triangle has five sides. The three sides plus the front and back.:)
Delete"Look what happened to Bessler. He build at least six wheels that we know about and publicly demonstrated them for YEARS to THOUSANDS of people, yet most of the people today who learn of his story just dismiss him as a clever crook with a fraudulent wheel! What makes anyone think that he won't have the same fate IF he manages to duplicate Bessler's wheel? History has an uncanny way of repeating itself."
DeletePossible answer: Patent Laws?
Okay assume someone duplicates Bessler's wheels. Since it's Bessler's design and not his, he can't patent it. But, maybe he can make the claim that there's no real proof it actually is Bessler's design. Then to patent it he would also have to NOT claim that it was actually making energy since that violates the 1st law of thermodynamics.
DeleteTo do that he could come up with some Ken B style explanation that the energy coming out of it derives from the mass of its moving parts. Fine. Maybe the patent office accepts that and he finally gets a patent. Then his wheel better be putting out lots of energy or industry will dismiss it as useless. If he can't improve it to make it put out the kind of power they want, all he will wind up with is something that a toy manufacturer might be interested in.
Then his invention could get rejected by them after they did a little research and discovered they would have to give the toy a retail price of over $100 in order to make a small profit on their investment in manufacturing it. As a result, they conclude that the market of people willing to pay that much for a toy is too small to go after.
The inventor could spend years traveling around the globe looking for some company willing to license the manufacturing rights to his invention. Meanwhile, his travel and legal expenses are mounting and he's just getting older and more depressed about the whole thing. In the end, he might wish he'd never heard of Bessler and his wheels!
They could just show how it works on YouTube, let the rest of the world fight over it as much as they wish, and get on with their lives.
DeleteTo Anonymous 4 August 2022 at 19:01 :
DeleteToo many what-ifs and assumptions with your comment. I can do the same and say the opposite. I'm certain that if the Bessler wheel was built today employing modern tools, materials, and our expanded body of knowledge it would surely be an improvement over the 300-year-old originals which admirably were operational and usable.
I can agree today's patent applicant can claim there is no evidence that his/hers is Bessler's design as the latter never published the internal mechanisms. Regardless the Bessler wheel was never patented so it's going to be a first come,first serve for the businessbodies at the patent office...
And who says a patented toy can't be successful?
https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2018/12/23/iconic-patented-toys-games/id=91631/
It would probably be viewed as just another fake pm device video on youtube to be added to hundreds maybe thousands of them already there. We live in a world filled with scammers and hoaxers who are making more and more people not believe in anything. As soon as anyone starts believing in anything, the risk to his wallet goes way up. But the scammers know that many people are still gullible enough to fall for what they see and hear.
DeleteA scammer will promote his scam to thousands hoping to hook one big fish. Truecaller estimates that about 59.4 MILLION Americans lost $29.9 BILLION to phone scams over the past year! That's an average of $503 per victim. But that's just an average. There was a small percent that lost over $100,000 each! Most victims are too embarrassed to even report the crime.