Over the last few years I have tended to spend a lot of time and effort in finding Johann Bessler’s clues and seeking the correct meaning and intention. I hoped that armed with as much information as possible and shared as widely as possible, I or some other person or persons would finally find the solution and share it worldwide. At this time the numerous ways of spreading this kind of information could not be better, thanks to the internet and all its variants.
I know I’ve come in for a bit of stick for not sharing my designs but hopefully my work on this old website will prove interesting. Click on each button on the left side of the page for more information.
So in 2009 I began this blog and the following year I published my latest thinking about Bessler’s wheel. Since 2009 my blog has managed to publish 869 posts and receive 30958 comments, 2862932 views. I also made a YouTube video about Bessler in 2009 Viewed 19321 times.
The numbers look impressive until you realise they cover 15 years or so!
Fifteen years ago, I published some of my ideas about how I thought Johann Bessler’s perpetual motion machine worked. You can read them on my website at www.besslerswheel.com. Back then, I had some interesting thoughts and I tried to express them with what I thought were valid points and apart from several details, I have more or less continued to support them.
My apologies for the fact that the text slightly overlaps its boundaries which makes it necessary to move it with two fingers in order to read the whole line, sometimes. This happens on my iPad but not my laptop. I’m trying to alter the boundaries of the text but it’s not so simple.
Briefly, I will first mention the words Bessler used to describe his machine thus, “according to the laws of perpetual motion, so arranged that certain disposed weights once in rotation, gain force from their own swinging, and must continue their movement as long as their structure does not lose its position and arrangement”
I will also point out that MT contains two illustrations containing swings. MT 85 and 86.
You will discover my reason for sticking to the need for five mechanisms.
It was I, who introduced the ancient art of “kiiking” to the world of Bessler, as a curiosity. Just google the word “kiiking”.
You can read my theories on how Bessler’s wheel worked, they have moved on a bit since 2010, but I still believe they hold the key to success.
JC
"...so arranged that certain disposed weights once in rotation, gain force from their own swinging.."
ReplyDeleteThis implies that the weights were attached to the ends of levers and that the levers would have been attached to pivots that were attached to the drum so that the levers could swing about as the drum rotated. Somewhere else he tells us he had an OB design of some sort. The secret of his wheels lies, imo, in his "connectedness principle" which allowed a wheel to remain OB as it rotated. Find that principle and you will solve Bessler's pm wheel mystery. Also ignore the lies from his fired maid. She was obviously bribed by Bessler's enemies to try to ruin his credibility. She did a lot of damage. I wonder how much she was paid. Wasn't she rehired by Bessler's ex father in law after Bessler fired her?
Bessler’s father-in- law died before the maid’s accusations were published, but his mother-in-law invited herself over to live with him and brought both her sons and their wives too. They became a really nasty thorn in his side and stole from him and tried to get him to go into crooked business wiih them.
ReplyDeleteJC
But what eventually happened to the maid after her accusations were published?
DeleteShe wasn’t believed but she stayed around and married a man who worked at the.Court. She was still friends with B’s mother in law.
DeleteJC
There are two links that I can't find and which you should definitely make available again. They are for those Wagner "Critiques" 1 and 2. Where are they? It's important to see how and why Wagner was criticizing Bessler, imo.
ReplyDeleteGood point anon 05:28. Both documents are on my original website at
Deletehttp://www.free-energy.co.uk/
Click on the two buttons in left panel.
JC
I agree anon 05:28. It was only from Wagner's critique that we learn that the Merseburg wheel stalled out one day and that the cause was the cold room that had caused a thickening of its lubricants probably mostly the grease on its axle end pins. That would then have provided enough drag to more than cancel out the wheel's driving torque. This is proof, imo, of how really low the torque was in Bessler's wheels. It shows how false the opinions are of those who still think his wheel's had high torque and could reach speeds of tens rpm's in only a few turns. They would actually have needed minutes and many turns to reach their full speeds. I'm sure that would have been a big turn off to any businessman considering purchasing the invention.
DeletePlease be objective. Wagner's critiques are an important source of information and offer a different and valuable perspective. Wagner says in parts X11 and X111 that he was told by a person he does not name that the Merseburg wheel gradually slowed and stopped. And that Bessler did not reach inside it to repair a defect but gave it a push and it was running again (sped up again), with Bessler offering "The wheel rubbed against something." Bessler in the AP rebuttal section says that incident did not happen, noting that Wagner did not name the person he was quoting, and calling him a liar. The inconvenient fact is there is NO corroborating testimony or written evidence from any other source who was there that his Merseburg wheel ever slowed down and stopped and was then restarted with a push, and Bessler claiming frictions caused the failure. Therefore the alleged incident is not in any way proof that the Merseburg wheel was low torque, and took minutes to reach 50 RPM. And that the written testimony of many observers that the Merseburg and Kassel wheels reached full speed in 1 to 2 turns is a fabrication by these people.
Delete"Bessler in the AP rebuttal section says that incident did not happen, noting that Wagner did not name the person he was quoting, and calling him a liar."
DeleteMaybe Bessler knew that incident would be a deal killer for the future sale of his invention and decided to claim Wagner was lying about it happening? Also, maybe Wagner got that description of the incident from a trusted friend of his that witnessed the event and therefore considered it the truth? So Bessler accuses Wagner of lying and Wagner accuses Bessler of lying. Who to believe? I tend to believe Wagner because in his critique he comes across as an objective critic and his criticisms seem justified to me...at least until the Kassal wheel passed that 57 day endurance test. He was some sort of math professor so he would have been trained to think logically.
To me it seems like there was more than just the high asking price for his invention that prevented its quick sale. Those interested in purchasing it, after testing it, realized it wasn't really that powerful and to meet their needs for a higher constant power, they would have to have a wheel much larger than 12 feet in diameter or enough 12 foot diameter wheels to fill a building the size of a barn!
The point is it was an unsubstantiated allegation made by Wagner, alone. I happen to think Wagner was mainly an excellent and credible commentator, with the courage to commit to paper well thought out logical positions and observations. At least as you point out until he went very quiet after the long duration Kassel wheel test which shot down his main criticism of too short a run time to be considered indicative of mechanical perpetual motion. Where this iteration of the wheel was also subjected to further load and work tests before being locked away for 54 days, such as the water screw lift test. Fischer said after being stopped it regained its former speed of 26 rpm in 2 turns, s"Gravesande said in 2 to 3 turns. It is a long bow to draw from these independent observers that the wheel took minutes or longer to reach 26 RPM in 2 turns and had little saleable torque and power. No one here is under the illusion that it could not be improved in some way, or scaled. They were wheels built for specific test circumstances, and not all purpose wheels, or commercial industrial use grade wheels.
Delete"Fischer said after being stopped it regained its former speed of 26 rpm in 2 turns, s"Gravesande said in 2 to 3 turns."
DeleteIIRC, there was some debate about the accuracy of these translations in the past. Usually, we're told that the wheels gained a "strong" speed after 2 or 3 turns and THEN regained their maximum speed. Some interpret the THEN part meaning the wheels FINALLY achieved their maximum speed AFTER some minutes and turns later. IOW that final maximum speed was not achieved in a matter or second or less than a minute. Aside from the purposely vague writings of Bessler, we also have to deal with the possibly inaccurate translations of his German writings.
You are referring to a 20 year old KB fantasy that never goes away even though we have Ai now to do our own translations of the original German and French letters etc. Below are the " offending " translations from JC's books.
DeletePerhaps you could ask JC to put up somewhere for you the original letters and you translate them and see if they are materially different in meaning and your comprehension. The third one is probably the most unequivocal imo.
' Merseburg ... - Certificate for wheel tested at Merseburg, signed 31st October, 1715
" Within about one revolution, the machine HAD acquired a strong and even rotation, even when a box was lifted "
'Kassel ... - letter from Joseph Fischer to J.T. Desaguliers, 1721
" I observed that the rapidity of the wheel augmented little by little until it had made two turns, and then it regained its former speed "
'Kassel ... - letter from Willem Jacob 'sGravesande to Sir Isaac Newton, 1721
" it acquired in two or three turns ITS GREATEST VELOCITY, AFTER WHICH it revolved at twenty-five or twenty-six times a minute.
Life would have much simpler for us if we had a single translation that said "After a gentle push from a standstill, the Weissenstein Castle wheel reached its maximum speed in only 30 seconds". Unfortunately, we do not have that and the debate will continue...at least until we can make a reliable copy of one of Bessler's wheels and see exactly how it performs when started.
DeleteI’m sure someone could simulate it to see how likely or not a 12’ wheel could get up to speed in 3 revolutions. It might have gotten 1/3 each time. 8 rpm , 16 rpm, 24 rpm. It might have taken 4 revolutions and he wasn’t able to detect it exactly. 6 rpm, 12 rpm 18 rpm, 24 rpm. That doesn’t seem insurmountable.
Deleteit's been simulated at BW.com. the best scenario for rapid acceleration is a low mass wheel with 8 heavy weights. the worst scenario is a high mass wheel with 8 light weights. for either scenario and any combination in between the amount of surplus torque generated is the critical factor on how fast (how much time) it takes to get to 26 rpm in 2 to 3 turns. It is very unlikely that a wheel taking minutes or more to reach 26 rpm in 2 or 3 turns would have any appreciable acceleration or surplus torque, and also be able to do significant work (like lifting stampers) that the wheels were recorded performing. to takes minutes would be a wheel that could do little external work, which is not the case.
Deleteanon 20:47 "Life would have much simpler for us if we had a single translation that said "After a gentle push from a standstill, the Weissenstein Castle wheel reached its maximum speed in only 30 seconds". Unfortunately, we do not have that and the debate will continue...at least until we can make a reliable copy of one of Bessler's wheels and see exactly how it performs when started."
DeleteWe all wish that detail had been recorded, but it wasn't, but it can be inferred from what was said by various witnesses.
Bessler's first successful prototype only just turned itself. Probably a low acceleration and low rpm achieved (re. revolve a little), possibly taking a noticeable time to reach maximum rpm even if it was a low rpm, though that is not mentioned. And with little usable torque obviously. Then once he had the right idea he greatly improved on its efficiency. This is noted in the witness accounts of the power and noise of the next generation one way wheels after being released.
' Draschwitz ... - Letter from Teuber to Leibniz, 19th January, 1714
" Upon the cord being released, the machine began to rotate WITH GREAT FORCE "
Bessler "for I put together the very first device which could spontaneously revolve a little. I saw that I had finally made the right choice, and why the earlier ones had been wrong. My heart leapt for joy at the sight of this genuine Mobile" – AP pg 271 ...
I go with the low torque/high mass wheel theory. Here's part of what Christian Wolff said about the Merseburg wheel in a letter to Leibniz dated December 19th, 1715:
Delete"Furthermore, the machine may be of little value to the public unless it can be improved. At the moment it can lift a weight of sixty pounds, but to achieve this the pulley had to be reduced more than four times, making the lifting quite slow."
That wheel's axle was 6 inches in diameter or 3 inches in radius and a rope wrapped around it could not directly lift a 60 lb. weight hanging off the axle. It could only lift it slowly when some sort of overhead compound pulley system was used that increased the mechanical advantage by at least a factor of five. That means that the pulleys made the weight feel like it only weighed 60lb/5 = 12 lb as far as the wheel was concerned. So, by using the pulleys, they had the equivalent of 12 lbs. at a distance of 3 inches or 0.25 foot from the center of the axle acting on the wheel to stop it. To overcome that counter torque so that the Merseburg wheel could begin to more and accelerate, the wheel's driving torque had to be at least slightly larger than 0.25 foot x 12 lbs. = 3 foot-pounds! If you want to see what that torque feels like, attach a 3 lb weight to one end of a one foot ruler and hold the ruler by the other end. It's not that much torque at all. Now imagine that torque trying to accelerate a wheel with a mass of hundreds of pounds up to 40 rpm's in less than a minute. Ain't gonna happen no matter what the "high energy wheel" enthusiasts want to believe.
Bessler had a marvelous invention...but it was, unfortunately, a WEAK wheel. Potential buyers knew it and that, imo, is the real reason he could never sell it aside from the fact that he was constantly being publicly accused of being a scammer which he was not. Of course, like any good salesman, he would have had a dozen different excuses as to why such low torque was not a problem. For example, he might have said that the wheel was "only a model and its low torque was to be expected" or "you can put more than one wheel on an axle" or "just make a wheel's diameter bigger and use heavier weights", etc., etc. But, apparently, no one was buying that. They wanted something that could perform like a MUCH less expensive water wheel that had a MUCH higher torque and reached FULL speed in SECONDS. Bessler could not provide that and, most likely, if we ever duplicate Bessler's wheels, neither will we.
I think your approach is not quite right for estimating time taken to reach peak rpm of say 40 rpm in say 2 turns. Assuming it starts from 0 rpm then after 1 turn has 20 rpm, and after 2 turns has 40 rpm to simplify the exercise. iow's after each complete revolution from a standing start its angular velocity is increasing by 20 rpm. The rim speed can be calculated after each full turn. A 4.0 meter diameter wheel will have a circumference of approximately 12.5 meters. At 20 rpm it will rotate 1/3rd of a revolution in 1.0 seconds. iow's take 3.0 seconds to do 1 full revolution which is approximately 4.2 m/s rim velocity. It is easy enough to estimate that the final rim velocity is approximately 8.4 m/s at 40 rpm. If acceleration is uniform it would take twice as much time to reach 40 rpm as it did to reach 20 rpm. Then calculate foot pounds torque required to reach 40 rpm in say 60/120/180 seconds ( 12 minutes ) to compare to your previous estimate.
Deletewhile we wait estimation ... assuming uniform acceleration of a solid disk as the benchmark, with only 3 foot pounds of torque then a 500 pound wheel would take about 7.5 minutes to reach 40 rpm. a 300 pound wheel would take about 4.5 minutes using rough integration. the Merseburg certificate said it took only 1 turn.
DeleteNice estimates anon 01:44. I'm a bit leery of any test descriptions like "speedy", "full speed", "powerful", "strong", etc. because they are really just subjective and not objective. What looks "speedy" to one person might not seem so to another. Also, before one can make an accurate measurement of a wheel's speed using a stop watch, the wheel has to have ALREADY reached that speed and that takes even more time.
DeleteWhere is there a sim of it on BW.com?
DeleteThere is another detail of Bessler's wheels that I think everyone is forgetting. Apparently, his wheels had their maximum torque at start up and that torque gradually decreased as wheel speed increased which caused the increasing CF acting on their weights to begin to interfere with the swinging actions of a wheel's internal levers (which would then presumably cause a wheel's CoG to slowly move toward the center of its axle). Eventually, the torque would be so low that it could only counter any aerodynamic drag acting on the wheel's moving parts and the low friction even of lubed bearings. At that time the wheel would stop accelerating and just rotate at a constant speed.
DeleteSo, we cannot assume constant torque in any calculations. I'd recommend halving that torque of 3 ft-lbs. that anon 23:32 calculated above be reduced to only l.5 ft-lbs. If that is done, then it doubles the time for a rotating disc to reach a given rotational speed. Anon 01:44's estimate of 7.5 minutes for a 500 lb. Merseburg wheel to reach 40 rpm then becomes 15 MINUTES!
I also agree with anon 07:22's suggestion to dismiss any verbal descriptions of a wheel's amazing performance as tending to be exaggerated. When confronted with something like a working pm wheel, it would be easy for a person to become excited and loose their objectivity. This could also be further worsened if he was not used to making precise measurements of large rotating objects like a 12 foot diameter drum.
Anon 13:55 ... "Where is there a sim of it on BW.com?"
DeleteIINM Fletcher built it and explained it. IIRC it was an ideal sim that demonstrated the correlations between combinations of wheel mass, number of weights, weight mass big or small, reported max wheel rpm, at maximum torque available. IOW's they all directly trade off or reinforce proportionately as is discussed in the above posts. He also made some assumptions for the exercise to keep it simple. That the disk was a solid, that the weights were near the rim, that acceleration was uniform/constant, and that it was not affected by Cf's to slow the acceleration/torque influence as rpm increased. He did that by building a cheat sim where the weight mass reduced to near zero grams on the ascending side but had full mass applied on the descending side as they circulated. In that perfect "ideal" situation the Merseburg proxy sim reached max rpm in a matter of seconds. But if the disk mass was increased substantially, or the weights mass reduced significantly for example, the max rpm reached was still the same (sim paused at the max rpm) but the time to reach max rpm varied proportionately, IOW's you can make a table of inputs and outputs and calculate the required torque (ft-lbs) over a number of hypothetical time periods to reach max rpm. That's when the direct proportionality of inputs becomes very clear. An easy job for Ai I would say if you want more.
While I agree that words like "great force" are subjective my personal feeling is that the Merseburg wheel might have taken mere minutes at most to reach max rpm and hold there. Mainly because not one commentator bothered to record how long it took to reach max rpm (wish they had), including the official certificate signed by many. In any case it was within 1 to 3 revolutions. But mainly because not even Wagner bothered to highlight that it was boringly tedious to reach max rpm. Yet he was very vocal about the Merseburg run tests only being 1/2 hour, before and after translocation. If it took 15 minutes to reach max rpm of the 30 minute run time (1/2 the time of the run) that would have been recorded by someone, especially Wagner who was very thorough in his critiques on most all things else. So I assume the wheels took a few minutes to reach max rpm and that the torque generated was not inconsequential but not huge either (lowish to middle-of-the-road) and was not uniform. Probably way more than 3 ft-lbs. But as said if you feel strongly let your fingers do the walking and let Ai quickly put a table together with those variables to test the ranges. There is no doubt that the wheels had momentum contributing to the lift tests performance, but Bessler countered that argument by Wagner at the Kassel test. With a water screw constant lifting test and running for 54 days, way beyond the 8 days Wagner thought was maximum for an "intrinsic wheel" could achieve. Bessler blew him out of the water at Kassel once Wagner outlined what he required in his critiques to convince him an intrinsic wheel could be promoted to a perpetual wheel, Bessler describing it as both.
The big error most Bessler wheel performance analysts make, imo, is that they confuse the constant power output of his wheels with their much greater power output during a short time period. Reading that his Merseburg wheel could hoist a 70 lbs. weight with a pulley outside a window can lead one to think that the torque provided by the 6 inch diameter axle was 0.25 ft x 70 lbs. or 17.5 ft-lbs. and that this was a constant torque which was available the instant the wheel was given a push start and would continue forever. That, however, is not how Bessler's wheels worked during load lifting demos.
DeleteFor such a load lifting demo, a wheel was push started and, using its much lower constant torque for several minutes, allowed to gradually reach its maximum speed and only then was the rope snagged via a loop at its end onto a protrusion on the axle so that the rope would begin wrapping around the axle, tighten, and finally begin lifting the load. These were basically braking tests where the load was slowly lifted while the wheel gradually slowed down as it lost rotational kinetic energy as the gravitational potential energy of the load increased with its height above the ground. Years ago, Ken B made an interesting video where he showed a load of stones weighing 200 lbs. being lifted about 50 ft. up the side of Weissenstein Castle where it conveniently stops right outside of a window as the Kassal wheel comes to a dead stop. The entire lift takes 98 seconds! You can see that video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiJtnJ6kh88
So IOW, Fletcher's sim showed an acceleration that would require the wheel to dump its weights at BDC, similar to a conventional water wheel. I'm sure the witnesses would have noticed the weights being dumped at the bottom and a ready supply of new weights dropping out of the ceiling. there's obviously another explanation for greatest velocity in 3 turns.
DeleteThere's no way to they took 15 minutes to reach greatest velocity in 3 turns. That's impossible. More like 15 seconds.
Anonymous 13 November @ 1:14 said:
I think your approach is not quite right for estimating time taken to reach peak rpm of say 40 rpm in say 2 turns. Assuming it starts from 0 rpm then after 1 turn has 20 rpm, and after 2 turns has 40 rpm to simplify the exercise. iow's after each complete revolution from a standing start its angular velocity is increasing by 20 rpm. The rim speed can be calculated after each full turn. A 4.0 meter diameter wheel will have a circumference of approximately 12.5 meters. At 20 rpm it will rotate 1/3rd of a revolution in 1.0 seconds. iow's take 3.0 seconds to do 1 full revolution which is approximately 4.2 m/s rim velocity. It is easy enough to estimate that the final rim velocity is approximately 8.4 m/s at 40 rpm. If acceleration is uniform it would take twice as much time to reach 40 rpm as it did to reach 20 rpm. Then calculate foot pounds torque required to reach 40 rpm in say 60/120/180 seconds ( 12 minutes ) to compare to your previous estimate.
JC wrote "I will also point out that MT contains two illustrations containing swings. MT 85 and 86."
ReplyDeleteI'm a very big fan of SoS (I've collected every clue he's ever given on this blog!) and I'm always trying to analyze drawings like he would. When I saw you mention MT85 and 86 I decided to us my "SoS eyes" on them. I didn't find much in MT86, but what I found in MT85 is most interesting and shown in the drawing I've attached a link to here:
https://i.postimg.cc/1X9YtDrJ/MT-85-Y-Clues.jpg
First the number of the drawing is 85 and adding the digits gives us 13. 13 is a number associated with Jesus in the Bible (12 apostles + 1 messiah = 13 people) and, imo, is a clue from Bessler to more carefully study MT85 which is exactly what I did. I immediately saw the large Y lever in the upper right hand corner of the drawing as well as the smaller Y formed by the arm of the man and one of the supports of the swing he sits on. Note the huge + sign in the middle of the wheel as well as the smaller one on the man's back. This, as SoS has taught us many times, is Bessler's way of telling us to add some numbers together. But which ones? Unlike MT drawings MT84 and MT86 there are NO letters in MT85 that we can turn into numbers and add! What the heck did he want us to add together?
After studying MT85 for a while I realized what we are supposed to add. It's the number of those diagonal VANES on the water wheel! You have to count the vanes in four separate groups as shown in my drawing. The first group is the visible portion of the water wheel from the man's head up to the top of the right side water tower which contains 5 vanes. The second group is the visible portion at the top of the waterwheel and contains 9 vanes. The third group is the visible portion of the water wheel to the left of the left water tower and again contains 5 vanes. Finally, the fourth and last group is the visible portion of the bottom of the water wheel between the left water tower and the man's outstretched toe! His toe tells you where to STOP counting the visible water wheel vanes. Note that his toe points directly at the 6th vane in that last group.
When you add up the vanes in the four groups, you get 5 + 9 + 5 + 6 which equals 25. I'm sure that SoS would say that this is even more proof that Bessler used Y shaped levers in his wheels. I, of course, would agree with that.
I hope everyone found my analysis of interest. I haven't made any signed comments here before so, rather than being just another anon, I think I'll use the pseudonym below and hope it's okay with SoS since it's meant to honor him (if it's not okay, then I'll quickly change it of course).
Disciple of SoS
Amazing, DoSoS! You truly are a disciple of SoS. I've looked at that mt drawing a lot over the years and never noticed that four spoke clue forming a giant plus sign and telling us to add the vanes in the wheel. To make sure you weren't miscounting them, I added them myself and like you say they equal 25. Bessler had to carefully put the vanes in to add up to that number. Not an easy clue to find either.
Delete@DoSoS
DeleteWow! Your "master" would be well pleased with his "disciple". I never notice before that all of the MT drawings from 81 through 90 have lettering EXCEPT for MT85!!! Bessler obviously is calling our attention to that particular drawing for a reason and your analysis is spot on, imo. What else could it be except for the 25th letter of the alphabet or Y letter clue it contains?
There's something else unique about mt85...it's the only mt drawing showing a machine powered by a human. All the other mt machines are self powering or supposed to be.
DeleteOops, my mistake. Mt86 also shows a man on a swing so that machines is also human powered. If I get a chance I'll take a closer look at that drawing and see if I can find any new clues in it like DoSoS did in mt85.
Deletefwiw imo in the general sense what MT's 85 and 86 show is that an ordinary OOB wheel can become a runner with augmented energy input structure added.
DeleteThanks everyone! I'm glad that my analysis of MT85 was well received. I decided to take another look at MT86 only this time to use the original image from that university library instead of a blurry copy from online somewhere. As a result I did find some interesting clues in the drawing that you will find colorfully circled in my drawing below:
ReplyDeletehttps://i.postimg.cc/sfLCs2tT/MT86-Analyzed.jpg
At the top of the swinging pendulum use the letters with yellow numbers next to them. The letters are E, F, G, and G again. Their number values, 5, 6, 7, and 7 again, sum to 25 which represents the letter Y and tells us Bessler's wheels used Y shape levers.
Below those yellow numbers there are two conical vats (the left one made transparent like it's glass so you can see what's happening inside of it) that two equally large cone shaped plungers are alternately moving up and down in as the man on the swing swings from one side of the machine to the other and back again. I think that the twin conical vats represent the two counter rotating wheels that would be found in one of Bessler's two direction wheels. The left vat has the letters A and C with turquoise colored numbers 1 and 3 and SHARES the letter B with a navy blue colored number value of 2 with the right vat's letters A and C which have sky blue numbers near them. Adding the number values of A and C for the left vat gives 1+3 or 4 and then multiplying that by the number value of B or 2 gives 8. The exact same analysis using the sky blue numbers applies to the right side conical vat. This means EACH of the two wheel's inside of one of Bessler's two direction wheels contained 8 levers. The sharing of the value of B for both internal wheels could symbolize that, inside of Bessler's actual two direction wheels, each internal wheel shared something like brass bearings, steel pivots, or structural parts with the other internal wheel.
The one letter that did not seem to fit anywhere was that little D with number value 4 near the pendulum's pivot (and also near another Y shape structure attached to the ceiling that holds the pendulum's pivot). I noticed that the letter D was perfectly level with the bottom of that corner box containing the MT drawing's number of 86. That suggested to me that I needed to combine all of these numbers, 4, 8, and 6 in some way. It took a bit of work, but it was worth it because a real surprise came out of it!
Using the orange colored numbers, the D has a value of 4 and the sum of the 8 and 6 in the box is 14. Multiplying them gives us 4 x14 which equals 56. I had seen that number before but could not remember where. Then it hit me. In a past visit by SoS he showed that the pivots of the Y shape levers Bessler used were, in a 12 foot diameter wheel, located exactly 56 INCHES from the center of the wheel's axle. The radius of a 12 foot diameter wheel is 6 feet or 72 inches. Finally, I divided the distance from the axle center to the Y shape lever's pivot (supposedly located where the fork begins), which is 56 inches, by the radius of a 12 foot diameter wheel in inches or 72 inches and got 0.777... That's Bessler's "Lucky Ratio" which is something SoS discovered years ago!!
I'm glad I took another look at MT86. It actually contains a lot of clues, but they are mostly numerological ones.
Disciple of SoS
More from you this blog, DoSoS?! Very impressive. Even SoS doesn't provide this much when he drops in with his latest new clue for us. He has taught you well.
DeleteWhat impressed me the most about your MT 86 analysis was how you managed to find Bessler's "Lucky Ratio" of 0.777 in it. SoS discovered that ratio years ago in the MT drawings and it created a bit of a stir at the time as I recall. It was a major breakthrough. Finally, we knew where in his wheels' drums Bessler was locating the pivots for their eight Y shaped levers. Then people here began discovering that same ratio in some of the non MT drawings and reporting their discoveries in their comments.
John, however, took a dim view of this new clue (many believe because HE did not discover it) and he began deleting their comments in an effort to suppress the discovery. And I don't mean a few comments. It was more like 40 comments in a single blog! But, like all truths it survived and it's nice to see it surfacing again today.
Keep up the good work, DoSoS, and don't hesitate to reveal any other new clues you find. SoS always reveals some remarkable clues for us, but he only drops in every now and then. We could use a kind of "resident" clue finder here and, based on what you've shown us so far, I cannot think of any better candidate for the role than you!
Bessler stated somewhere that the secret of his wheels was contained in the words of Jesus. Wagner scoffed at that in one of his "Critiques", but I think I know some of the words of Jesus that Bessler was referring to. In Matthew 18:21-22 we read about how Peter approached Jesus and asked him:
Delete“Lord, if my brother sins against me, how many times must I forgive him? Up to seven
times?”
Jesus then answers:
“I do not say to you up to seven times, but up to seventy seven times.”
So, Jesus' answer contains a lot of sevens and could be written as 7, 77 or 777 times. I think Bessler locked onto this verse and incorporated those 7's into the construction of his wheels by making the placement of the lever pivots 0.777 times the radius of a wheel. We now refer to that number, 0.777, as "Bessler's Lucky Ratio". The idea is that if your wheel's lever pivots are located relative to the outer rim's distance from the axle's center so as to have that particular ratio, then you will be very lucky because you will be a lot closer to finding your runner than you ever have been before.
In the beginning of his Critique 2 Wagner wrote referring to Bessler:
Delete"He is all the more ridiculous when he alleges that his perpetual motion is mentioned in the Holy Scriptures, particularly in Christ's words in the New Testament. He is careful to omit these words because the good man himself does not know of any."
Wagner was obviously wrong about that when it came to that "lucky ratio" number. But I doubt if we will ever find any other scriptures which give exact descriptions of the parts Bessler used in his wheels. At best, we'll only find general descriptions of how his wheels' mechanisms worked.
Anon 07:48 wrote "We could use a kind of "resident" clue finder here and, based on what you've shown us so far, I cannot think of any better candidate for the role than you!"
DeleteI thank you for your suggestion which I do appreciate, but I do not really want to assume such a role because it would tend to pressure me into producing new clues every blog and people would then begin to expect it from me. I work best when I have no pressure on me. However, I can promise to reveal whenever I think I have something that might interest those here. Clue finding is not something that can be done on an assembly line basis. It is a slow and deliberate process that is part logic, part intuition, and, in the case of SoS, part psychic power!
Thanks to anon 09:35 for his revelation about the possible scriptural origin of Bessler's "Lucky Ratio". I too have thought about that remark that Bessler made about his perpetual motion wheels being mentioned in the words of Jesus. A while ago I reviewed all of the sayings of Jesus in the four Gospels in an effort to see if I could locate the exact verses where Jesus mentions perpetual motion of any kind. I was not successful.
However, the one thing that caught my attention was the miracle known as the "multiplication of the loaves" which, aside from the resurrection, is the only miracle Jesus performed which is mentioned in all four Gospels. Surely, I thought, this would also have caught Bessler's attention and he would have incorporated some of the numerology involved in it into the construction of his wheels. We have to keep in mind that Bessler was VERY religious and claimed that he only found the secret of pm because God gave it to him as an act of divine mercy due to all of Bessler's anguish and suffering in his quest for pm (also keep in mind that Bessler wanted the money from the sale of his invention so he could found a new version of Christianity and spread it all over the world). As a sign of his gratitude to God for the mercy he showed Bessler, it is only logical to expect him to use any numerology in Jesus' saying in his wheels. So, what numbers came out of the "multiplication of the loaves" miracle?
Actually, not much. All we learn is that a large crowd of 5,000 people had gathered hoping Jesus would miraculously cure them of their various ailments. After a while that crowd got hungry and Jesus decided to feed them. There was a problem, however. The apostles only had two fish and five loaves or barley bread to feed five thousand hungry people! No problem, however, for Jesus. All were fed and there was even some left over that needed to be gathered up!
So, we only have three numbers from that miracle to use in an analysis: 2, 5, and 5,000. Not much to work with, but with enough arithmetic manipulation, many more numbers can be generated from them. Such as: 25, 2.5, 0.25...12.5, 1.25, 0.125...6.25, 0.625...52, 5.2, 0.52...500, 50, 5, 0.5...etc. I would expect numbers like these or their reciprocals or their sums or their products or their quotients or their squares to be somehow showing up in the construction of Bessler's wheels. Of course, finding out which numbers he used won't be possible until we finally have working replicas of his wheels. We were actually very lucky to find the saying that refers to Bessler's "Lucky Ratio".
Disciple of Sayer of Sooths
I’m sure the apparent significance I of the 5 loaves and 2 fishes cannot have escaped people’s attention? I refer of course the pentagram embedded in all five drawings by Bessler plus of course the large number of pointers to the those two numbers, 5 and 2. Thank you DoSoS for bringing the quotation to my attention.
DeleteJC
Looks like a ray of hope for JC's pentagon theory. The 2 fish could mean that each of B's two direction wheels contained 2 opposed one direction wheels and the 5 loaves could mean each of those wheels contained 5 weight levers! But, what about the 5,000 people fed? Maybe that was the number of days one of B's wheels could run before something snapped inside of it and needed to be fixed or repaired so that the wheel could start up again? 5,000 days equals 13.69 years!
Delete"I refer of course the pentagram embedded in all five drawings by Bessler..."
Is this FINALLY a NEW clue from you?! If so, then do please show us where all of these pentagons are located.
"the large number of pointers to the those two numbers, 5 and 2."
Deletee.g. 2 & Z swap in and out in the MT numbering
Finally a "NEW clue" from JC?! Impossible!
DeleteIf he does actually show us anything that is truly new FOR HIM, then it will only be because he was shamed into doing it after he saw how many genuine new clues are being revealed here by others. I've seen more from them in the last few blogs than I've seen from him in the past year!
I still firmly maintain that we will NEVER see any simmable wheel designs or new clues from him EVER.
Some poor soul a few blogs ago was actually deluded enough to believe that JC would start revealing both before the end of THIS month of November. That's just 16 days from now. Watch and see if you get anything new from him by then. I can assure everyone that you won't! Then the next date for the hopeful to obsess about will be the beginning of next year.
In that case...happy soon coming "nothing from JC again" New Year 2026 everyone!
What rock have you been hiding under? JC has always said there were pentagrams in the engravings.
DeleteI'm surprised that DoSoS didn't seem to notice that the 2 and the 5 from that Jesus miracle, after being put together to make 25, are yet another symbol for the 25th letter of the alphabet or the letter Y which he and his "master" are convinced was the shape of Bessler's wheel levers. I'm also convinced his levers actually had that particular shape because there are just too many of those number 25's showing up in Bessler's drawings. The 25 DoSoS got by adding up the vanes in the "Godly" MT 85 drawing is really impressive, imo.
DeleteI’ve posted numerous clues in various place, mainly in my web sites and blog. I can’t be bothered to point them all out yet again. I’m really surprised that anyone is unaware of them. They’ve been available for at least fifteen years!
DeleteJC
The problem with those pentagons John draws inside of the circular drum faces of Bessler's wheels is that, as others have pointed out here in the past, one can find almost any polygon shape in them by carefully selecting its corners at the rim of a drum. I've seen others here get triangles, hexagons, and even octagons from the drum drawings and, tbh, I found them more convincing than John's pentagons. As far as the "codes" he has found in Bessler's writings go, who knows if they have anything to do with the mechanics of his wheels or not. Nothing has come from any of them that can be simmed or built. John needs to stop delaying and start showing us the actual design he is working on. It's either a runner or can be turned into one or it is not. If it's not, then it's time, imo, for him to either be looking for a new approach to try or to be calling it quits.
DeleteThis past October 26th he wrote:
"I don’t want to give a date yet to publish everything until I know I’ve tested the whole construction to see if it works, but it will be before this year is out."
There are now only 47 days left in this year...the clock is ticking...is he a man of his word or not? I already know what anon 20:36's answer to that question would be to that question!