Saturday, 14 June 2025

Johann Bessler aka Orffyreus Showed Us His Secret.

I often repeat myself when I believe useful information that I’ve posted seems to be ignored. This stuff comes direct from Johann Bessler’s brain via his books and in my opinion it’s too important to ignore.  Bear in mind, Bessler told us he’d rather die than give away the details about his wheel.  Also there several hints about how his machine worked and where the information was hidden.  Assuming his claims were genuine how can anyone ignore this information?

I copied the following piece from a post I made on 14 September 2011, some 14 years ago!  I've hardly changed my opinion on my interpretation on the quote. I’ve repeated this information many times but still no one takes any notice.

“He will be called a great craftsman, 
who can easily/lightly throw a heavy thing high, 
 if one pound falls a quarter, 
it shoots four pounds, four quarters high.”

Firstly, the most obvious point is that if one pound falls a quarter and lifts another four pounds then we have a total of five pounds and those who are familiar with my work in decoding Bessler’s clues will at once recognise the presence of the ubiquitous number 5 again - which I have suggested refers to five mechanisms. 

Secondly, he tells us that there are five one pound weights (one plus four), but one of them is falling. Since one of the falling weights is one pound and the other four being lifted are also one pound each, all five of them are of equal mass - one pound each..”

I then erred and assumed there were ten weights, five pairs because of this next quote :-

 “... a work of this kind of craftsmanship has, as its basis of motion, many separate pieces of lead. These come in pairs, such that, as one of them takes up an outer position, the other takes up a position nearer the axle. Later, they swap places, and so they go on and on changing places all the time.” 

But I was wrong.  My current interpretation has changed a little from my early post. It goes like this:-

In the above quote the five weights operate in pairs.  As one falls it lifts the previous weight by means of a cord which passes around two pulleys.

But if  "..it shoots four pounds, four quarters high,” then you might think that either, one of the pounds is shot one quarter high, which is no big deal from a similar weight falling the same distance, or one pound shoots the other four pounds a quarter high, which is frankly impossible.

So one pound falls a quarter.  How do we define what he meant by a quarter? In this case he was referring to a clock - something he also included in the first drawings in both Grundlicher Bericht and Das Triumphirende  - it was embedded invisibly but it was easy to find and was an essential ingredient in deciphering other clues within the drawing.  A quarter of an hour or fifteen minutes covers 90 degrees.  But how could this single right angle fall cause “ four pounds to shoot upwards four quarters”? 

We saw in the first part that the word ‘quarter', referred to, not just 90 degrees but also to a clock.  In the second part the word ‘quarter' also refers to a clock but this time he has confused us by using the words ‘four quarters’. Four quarters equals one whole hour.  Each hour on a clock is divided into 30 degrees, so the words ‘four quarters’ meaning ‘one hour’ as used here equals thirty degrees.  To paraphrase Bessler’s words, “a great craftsman would be he who, as one pound falls 90 degrees, causes each of the other four pounds to shoot upwards 30 degrees.”  
It should be also be remembered that when the bi-directional Kassel wheel was started from a stand still it required only the smallest of pushes from two fingers for it to begin to accelerate, BUT it was also reported that rotation did not begin until a single weight was heard to fall, hence the phrase "...if one pound falls..." , meaning that it only takes one pound weight to fall for the whole wheel to begin to rotate and therefore cause the other weights to move.

This happened very quickly and this quick reaction has puzzled many people.  This is easily explained.  When the fallen weight, in its slightly advantageous position, fell, it lifted the previous fallen weight which had arrived at a disadvantageous point and was negating the small mechanical advantage of the falling weight.  Lifting the fallen weight just enough to neutralise any disadvantage gave the wheel in effect, two mechanical advantages simultaneously.

The energy gained comes from the falling weight, but energy expended to lift the fallen weight, is less because it doesn’t need to be lifted 90 degrees, it needs a lift of just 30 degrees. 

I should also add that a graphic of  the 30 degree lift is embedded in one of the drawings, but the clues have to recognised correctly and interpreted.  Having said that the method is ingenious and the result is unarguably correct.

As I said at the beginning of this post, people continue to ignore the evidence and are still struggling to work out how one pound could possibly lift four pounds.  

JC

10 comments:

  1. Fascinating, can't wait for more.

    ReplyDelete
  2. John, I remember that your five lever approach was debunked last year and shown not to produce a net driving cw torque which would require that the sums shown always be positive. But I could not find the comment containing the link to the image that demonstrated that. Did you delete that comment to keep everyone from seeing it? Fortunately, I saved the image and you can see it here at this new link.

    https://postimg.cc/dLCH2XnQ

    I've studied it and I think I know a way it just might be made barely workable.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greetings anon 23:50. I wouldn’t delete any images for that reason, but anyway that design was missing some details and as you say, was unworkable. I have made good progress since then and I’m building what I hope will be a successful wheel. I’m amazed at the simplicity of this design and how actually building a model helps the learning curve.

      I’m still firmly committed to the five mechanisms and I have absolutely no doubt that it is the right way to go. I have discovered so many points of confirmation by Bessler that I’m certain that this design will be found to match Bessler’s.

      My work is slowed down by getting the right length of each part and the right positioning of the holes needed for attachment points. It’s difficult and requires some trial and error work. But the design concept is right and I’ve never seen it in any other design…..ever!

      JC

      Delete
    2. PS anon 23:50. Thank you for including the image, it looks complicated!

      JC

      Delete
    3. From studying the design, the reason it cannot work is obvious. It has three weights on the ascending (left) side and only two on the descending (right) side. The big problem is that weight hanging down on the bottom of the ascending (left) side. Something must be done to pull it in closer to the axle. I took that other poster's image and made a few additions to it to solve the problem. Basically, you need to add an additional pulley and rope from the bottom descending (right) side lever that, as that lever swings through 90 degrees, will pull that bottom descending (left) side lever inward toward the axle. I show that extra pulley as a larger green circle around the diagram's original red circle that represents a pulley. Both pulleys need to be the same diameter and mounted on the same axle, but must be able to rotate independently of each other. The full wheel will then contain a total of 15 pulleys (10 near the axle and 5 near the outer circumference) and 10 ropes.

      Here's a link to the new diagram I've made:

      https://i.postimg.cc/5ytCFV8Z/Small-CW-Torque.jpg

      As the bottom descending (right) side lever swings through 90 degrees, it will raise TWO other levers and their weights simultaneously as shown. The lever on the top descending (right) side will swing up through 30 degrees and the lever on the bottom ascending (left) side will swing up through 45 degrees bringing its weight much closer to the axle. When that happens, the net torque on the wheel will become +30 and in the cw direction.

      In order for the motion to be continued, that cw torque will have to remain positive through about 72 degrees of cw wheel rotation. If it does, then the wheel should work and continue to accelerate. I cannot tell from eyeballing the design if that will happen. Instead of you trying to build it, I recommend you get someone to simulate it to see if it's a runner.

      Hope this helps.

      Brad (formerly "Anon 23:50")

      Btw. Like many, I am not a believer that Bessler used five weights. I'm an eight weight man. But, I'm prepared to have someone prove me wrong and if this modified wheel works, it would do much to convince me (and probably many others) that he really did use five weights.

      Delete
    4. Brad, try drawing in all the cord and pulley sets for the 5 weight gravity wheel with no slack in the cords to see if the arrangement can be done. A lever and weight set falling under gravity can only lift another if the vertical distance of the lift is less than the vertical drop height. For example, if the distances were the same there would be zero lever and weights movement because there would be no change in gravity Potential Energy. If you want this fall and lift sequence to happen with speed then the vertical fall height must at least be greater than the total rise height. The difference in gravity mgh loss to mgh gain will convert directly to the speed of the weights falling and rising such that the excess mgh of loss becomes a function of deriving their new Kinetic Energies of movement.

      Delete
    5. Thanks to both of you. As I mentioned there were some details omitted and others wrong. I’m happy to include both your drawings if either of you wish, but apart from the five mechanisms there are some variations to my drawing which both simplify it and correct it. I’m working to finish my model and have only the cords and pulleys to install, then we shall see. Don’t hold your breath, I’m a slow worker!

      JC

      Delete
    6. Bessler said -one word can betray his secret.
      Can You say that about your solution.
      WZ

      Delete
    7. You’re referring to this comment in my biography of Bessler -

      “He would mix in made-up Latin words, and then clam up tight, and people
      would whisper that he had worn himself out with excessive study. ‘Never did
      I hear a word of praise, though I was criticised from all directions. But I never
      changed, never once wavered, because a single word could have betrayed
      my wondrous achievement.’

      I think he simply means that in any circumstance there might be an occasion where one wrong word might give away too much information. So I think he was using ‘poetic licence’ to achieve emotional impact but not literally true. So if I could give away one word, it might be ‘five’, although that is no secret now!

      JC

      Delete
    8. anon04:02 said
      "A lever and weight set falling under gravity can only lift another if the vertical distance of the lift is less than the vertical drop height."

      Brads change to the wheel will let that rightside lever falling through 90 deg. lift BOTH the other levers as he shows and it will result in a small cw torque. But I doubt if that torque would last more than about 20 deg cw rotation before the cg of the five wts went directly under the axle center and the torque went to zero. As Brad says this wheel would have to mantain cw torque through 72 deg. I think thats impossible with only five levers. Just my opinion. Agreed it should be simmed by someone.

      Delete

Additional Special Orffyrean Code Information.

Johann Bessler had already made plans for the moment when he finished his perpetual motion machine.  During a visit to Prague,  some years b...