I’m very confidant that I know and understand the basic concept and as far as I can tell, the current configuration fits within that concept and matches Bessler’s machine
I know http://Karl said the mechanism was very simple, but it’s not so easy to design and configure the correct construction, when you haven’t seen it in reality. The last piece of information came to me about two weeks ago and yet the answer was in front of my eyes for many years! My advice to those using his clues to find the solution should examine any puzzling bits of information and try to imagine how they might fit.
There were things that had to be done to improve the actions of the various parts, mostly loosening the stiff nuts to allow some limited lateral motion and then retightening just a little. I have tried to reduce friction but not at the risk of lateral motion interfering with overlapping mechanisms. I’ve already added washers to increase the spaces between the various parts, where their actions overlap adjacent ones. I counter my fears of too much friction by reminding myself that this wheel is supposed to be able to do work, which of course means it should be able overcome minimal friction.
I’ll make the connections via the closed loop screws using my venetian blind cord. The lifted weight has to move quickly, as I demonstrated in my old web site at http://www.besslerswheel.com/ and proved that this was Bessler’s instruction in my web site at https://www.gravitywheel.com/ - and was in agreement with Bessler’s advice.
Even though I believed I’d found the solution a couple of years ago, it has proved extremely difficult to get to this point and I’m still apprehensive that I may have missed something or got it wrong. It’s for this reason I’ve only posted deciphered codes and clues and not pictures of my models. But I have few doubts that this is the right configuration and all that’s needed is to connect the mechanisms and keep my fingers crossed that I’m right.
As I’ve said before; there are five mechanisms with five equal weights and Bessler’s connectedness principle controlling their actions. The cord is always taught and the wheel will be permanently out of balance. I thought I’d proved to everyone that at least five mechanisms were needed, at my old web site, but I cannot say at this time whether eight would work but I would point out Bessler’s hint in MT numbering which I detailed in my website at www.theorffyreuscode.com The Orffyreus Code back in 2009.
There is an oddity about the numbering of the woodcuts in MT. Bessler included the number of each illustration in his woodcuts, like those in the above illustrations. These are present up to and including number 104. They are of a similar style except for the numbers 52, 72, 92 and 102. In each of these cases the number two is drawn to look like a Z. All other examples of the letter two are shown in the usual curved way.
To solve this puzzle we need to look at the identified numbers to see what is special about them with relevance to Bessler. The twos help to point to their accompanying partners, namely 5, 7, 9 and 10. The first and most obvious fact is that the number 5 is identified. The only other numbers are the following odd numbers, 7 and 9. Why would this be done, I wondered. These numbers are similar to those internal angles in the pentagram, namely, 54, 72 and 90, it seems to me that ever since I discovered the pentagon and the ubiquity of the number 5, that Bessler seemed to be suggesting that his wheel would not work with an even number of weights and that 5 was the ideal number. So 7 and 9 weights would also work but it might be difficult to fit in to a wheel. The number 10 might include a double 5, I don’t know?
If you were to use my configuration with an even numbers of weights……it would fail. Bessler tried it with four and it could barely turn.You need to get the message and stop ignoring the elephant in the room - and also please forget the ‘Y’ shaped levers, they weren’t in Bessler’s wheel, and were a product of Ken B’s imagination. The suggestion that Bessler secreted his supposedly lucky number 7 in his drawings is ridiculous, and that’s not just my opinion. There is no evidence that Bessler even thought of the number 7 in any special way - in fact there could be a much stronger argument that 5 fulfilled that role. He was only interested in providing numerous hints and clues to anyone wanting find out how he did it. I think he loved the fact that he had everyone fascinated and mystified by his invention.
So this is my last attempt at completing Bessler’s wheel, after 65 years (if I include the simple balsa wood, glue and ball bearings I began with at the age of 15!). I sincerely believe this is the closest anyone has come to success and even if this fails I believe my explanation revealing how and why it does not conflict with any physical laws will lead to a successful conclusion- a working model of Bessler’s wheel.
I will describe I’ve how believe Bessler’s worked without conflicting with the laws of physics and used the force of gravity.
That’s the plan anyway! I’m trying to get this done and tested before the end of the year. Announcement planned on or about or around New Year’s Day, win or lose!
JC
No comments:
Post a Comment