Although I’m reasonably satisfied with my Bessler-Collins theory, the truth is the design looks more complex than we’ve been led to believe it was. Karl is reported to have expressed surprise that the solution had not been discovered before. On another occasion, when asked if it was complicated, he replied that he thought a carpenter’s boy could make one if he was allowed to study it.
On the other hand we extracted certain information from the text in two of his books, that as well as weights and levers there was also a number of pulleys and by inference some lengths of cord. These items were all operating according to their design, so I guess the action was relatively narrow with minimal overlap.
Given the size of his first wheel exhibition at Gera, 6th June, 1712, which measured nearly six and half feet in diameter but with a thickness of just 4 inches, it seems hard to imagine all of the internal mechanisms fitting comfortably within such a narrow space.
I built my wheels on a flat disc of wood material but given the shortage of flat sheets of wood, other than very expensive wood veneer, I’m sure Bessler built on a skeletal structure made of wood, which would have been more stable than mine. Karl’s use of the words “carpenter’s boy”, suggests that perhaps the majority of the wheel was comprised of wood which was also used extensively in organ-building, and was his brother, Gottfried’s area of expertise.
If the mechanism was attached to two structures in the shape of a pentagram, I think the interior would be tight but sufficient for a similar mechanism to mine.
Bessler used oil cloth to cover the sides of the two largest wheel. Apparently oil cloth was typically made of heavy linen or cotton canvas, treated with boiled linseed oil to create a durable, waterproof material. It was often coated with iron oxide pigments (such as red Spanish brown or yellow) for colour. It was similar to a ship’s sale of the day but thinner and still difficult to penetrate and surprisingly heavy.
Finally Bessler said that between each move he “smashed the wheel”. He blamed this action on the antics of his so-called enemies, Gartner, Wagner and Borlach. I don’t believe he destroyed his wheel, so much as took it to pieces. He then gathered all the parts ready to use on another larger wheel at his new address. Material such as he needed for his wheels was hard to come by and expensive; it doesn’t make sense to just chuck everything away.
The emotive quality of the words disguises the fact that the safest way to transport the wheel without risking the danger of someone attempting to steal it, and thus the secret, was to disassemble it. It was merely a security precaution. Even when he died, the one remaining model of his machine was found in pieces, and it made sense to take such action to protect his invention being stolen.
So did Bessler invent a simpler gravity wheel, but one with less power potential than the+later ones? Just in case he did, I’m checking back to see if there is the vaguest hint that he might have done, I’ll let you know if I find anything.
JC
All natural engines and motors use a drum geometry, Theres no known energy converter that doesnt…..
ReplyDeleteWhat makes the "Bessler - Collins Wheel" look too complicated is the use of those scissor mechanisms. I think you've read much too much into the few quotes that mention them. If Bessler actually used them, I don't think he'd mention or illustrate them in any way because he would not want to give some reverse engineering rival inventor a direction to head in that might let him duplicate Bessler's design. If I was you, I'd get rid of them and just use straight levers maybe even try those Y shape levers that SoS and his disciple seem so enthusiastic about. With your present design, you risk finding yourself adding more and more cords and pulleys to it in an effort to keep its CoG on the descending side. Maybe you'll get up to 15, 20, or even 25 cords and still get nothing for your effort but more nonrunning dead ducks. There's a quote someone gave here a few months ago which was "You don't have to ride a bus to the end of the line to know you're on the wrong bus." Maybe you need to get off of your present scissor/pentagon bus and find another one before you waste more of your dwindling remaining time on earth riding along on the wrong bus?
ReplyDeleteJC wrote "Given the size of his first wheel exhibition at Gera, 6th June, 1712, which measured nearly six and half feet in diameter but with a thickness of just 4 inches, it seems hard to imagine all of the internal mechanisms fitting comfortably within such a narrow space."
ReplyDeleteI think your diameter for the Gera wheel is wrong, it was more like 4.5 feet, but the drum width is correct...only 4 inches! If we assume that the wooden side slats were 0.25 inch thick each, then the two sides layers of them total 0.5 inch. If we then allow 0.5 inch for the drum ribs on each side of a scissor mechanism's weighted arm, then that takes up another 1.0 inch of drum width. Assume that the clearance on each side of a scissor was 0.5 inch for a total of 1.0 inch. Adding all those widths up gives 0.5 in + 1.0 in + 1.0 in or a total width of 2.5 inches. That means that the scissors themselves were only 4.0 in - 2.5 in = 1.5 inches wide! But, he would have to make the scissors even less than that width so he could attach those guide levers like you show on your build as well as the cords that you did not show. That is very tight construction for a hand built wooden wheel. If the plane of the drum was not perfectly vertical, the play in the joints of the scissor mechanisms would allow them to laterally sway and begin hitting the drum's ribs which could interfere with their motions. Consequently, like anon 21:40, I doubt if Bessler used scissor mechanisms, but mainly for mechanical reasons. They would just be too cumbersome for such a narrow interior drum space.
This quote from “Gründlicher Bericht”,,
Delete“ For, in 1712, during his stay at Gera in the Voigtland, he hit upon the genuine Prepondium, and so it was that on 6th June of that year he set in motion the first model of his Perpetual or self-moving Mobile, three and a half Leipzig Ell in diameter and four inches in thickness, for the very first time”.
One Leipzig Ell measured approximately 22 inches. 22 x 3.5 =77.
77 inches equals 6 feet and 5 inches
JC
That looks like another translation error to me. The drum of the wheel itself was not 3.5 Leipzig Ell's and therefore 6 feet, 5 inches in diameter. That value probably referred to the height of the frame holding the drum. IOW it was the distance from the floor to the top of the drum's support frame. I go along with anon 03:51's figure of about 4.5 feet for just the drum itself. I found this photo taken at the Stadtgera museum which had an exhibit on perpetual motion machines featuring a precisely made model of the Gera wheel and you can see by comparing the drum's diameter to the men standing near the model that it is less than 6 feet, 5 inches. 4 feet, 6 inches looks about right to me.
Deletehttps://postimg.cc/gXTWYWFV
That Gera wheel model gets around. I found this photo of it being used as an attention getting prop at some German outdoor market. I also have to agree, it's too small to have a diameter of 6'5".
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/fLs2vKPc/Gera-wheel-model.jpg
whether that gera wheel was 4.5 or 6.5 feet in diameter is really irrelevant. what counts is what was going on inside of it. i'm not convinced, like John, that those scissor things are what bessler used. maybe instead of stiff levers he had the weights on the ends of flexible metal springs like the ones shown in mt 17 and 18 and he figured out some way to use ropes to connect the weights to each other so that as a wheel turned, they automatically shifted around to always keep their cog on the wheel's descending side? maybe as the wheel turned, the cog of its weights kind of kept rolling toward the descending side? that approach would certainly be simple like karl said and could be built by a carpenter's boy.
DeleteThe original German test in “Gründlicher Bericht”, reads in German,
Delete“ Anno 1712, ben seiner damahligen sejour zu Gera in Voigt-Lande auf des recht praepondium geffen, und erste Modell Seiner Perpetual se Mobile so drittahalb Leipziger Ellen in Diametro und 4 zolle in der Dicte gehabt, am 6 Junii tenJahres zum ersten mahle”.
Which translates to, “ In the year 1712, during his then stay in Gera in Vogtland, he presented the first model of his Perpetual Mobile, which was three and a half Leipzig ells in diameter and 4 inches in height, on June 6th of that year.”
So I was right and your Stadtgera museum which had an exhibit on perpetual motion machines featuring a precisely made model of the Gera, was wrong!
JC
Not necessarily. That description of the wheel could have been written by someone other than Bessler and that person mistakenly thought the height of the Gera wheel's frame was the diameter of the wheel's drum. I'm sure that the Stadtgera museum must have done a lot of research before approving that model of the wheel. I've be curious how they came up with the smaller diameter.
DeleteIt looks to me like JC's "Bessler work around" principle is in big trouble. There was another anon here several months ago that provided a drawing showing how he thought JC's secret wheel design worked, but JC just said it had nothing to do with his design. I found that anon's drawing which does not use scissor mechs to extend weights and made a few additions to it that might help rescue JC's work around principle. No guarantees of course and it will require JC to abandon the use of scissors.
ReplyDeleteBasically, it uses five single wheel pulleys near the rim of the wheel and another five TRIPLE wheel pulleys near the axle. As each of the straight weighted levers falls over as it approaches 6:00, it has three cords attached to a certain place along the length of the lever that then help lift three other levers. The cords are colored red, purple, and green in my edited version of that past anon's wheel drawing. Here it is:
https://i.postimg.cc/4dpvDy4k/bessler-work-around-rescue.jpg
If this works, then it will require a total of 5 single wheel pulleys, 5 triple wheel pulleys, 5 red cords, 5 purple cords, and 5 green cords. So a total of 10 pulleys and 15 cords. Maybe that sim guy or someone else can try simming it?
Here's what can be done before a sim - it is a quick CoG / COM Turning Moment Analysis of Anon 08:17's design above - before weight shift & after shift ( red stars ) - not good ! - however if we look at the vertical height lost of the weight near 6 o'cl vs needed to be gained by the other weights ( purple vertical lines ) we see that much more GPE is lost than is required to be lifted - roughly 2 to 1 - a good thing ! - this is helped a great deal by the 10:30 weight ccw freewheeling across and inwards like a hanging pendulum until it is pulled ( in Anon's drawing ) - what is also important is that the cords attachment points allow for exactly the right linear length of shift depicted in the drawing - this would need to be fine tuned - the basic problem seems to stubbornly remain from where I sit - how to manually manipulate the system CoG / COM to consistently dwell to the right side of the vertical .
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/t4Qy3dB4/Anon-Lever1a.jpg
Nice quick CoG analysis anon 09:56. Even after that weight lever flops over through 90 degrees at the bottom of the CW turning wheel, the CoG is STILL on the ascending side so no CW torque. Well, at least TSM won't have to waste his time simming this one. But, didn't JC promise last week to show us the clues he found that indicate there was another cord attached to the 4:30 scissor from the 6:00 scissor? What happened to those clues? All we're seeing in this blog is some chatter about the size of the Gera wheel's drum and wondering if Bessler had two different pm wheel designs. IF that was the case then we might as well give up right now looking any further. How would one know what clues described which wheel? No, I work on the assumption that there was only a single design Bessler had that could keep itself OB as it turned. He used two of them in his bidirectional 12 foot diameter wheels along with some extra trick latching system that would lock down whatever wheel was forced to counter rotate when the wheel's drum was given a push in a certain direction.
DeleteThanks for all the comments, I’m so pleased that so many are getting involved. I have to admit that my scissor mechanisms over- complicate the potential solution, so much so that although I still think it possible that Bessler presented his “solution” to Karl in a much simpler form, using fewer parts, his actual wheels which were tested were more powerful than this “simpler” solution. Therefore I shall continue to simplify my own latest mechanism……and look for the original simple solution.
DeleteJC
And why not reverse this process? Three weights on left side whose have naturally greater torque, and are also naturally moving away from center of wheel, could try to raise one weight from bottom back toward center. With right configuration it seems possible that there would be always three weights on the left, and two on the right.
DeleteSounds like you are on the verge of abandoning the use of those scissor mechs. If so, then I think you will be making a wise decision. Beating a dead horse does not bring it back to life again. It only tires you out, wastes your time, and makes a mess out of the horse's corpse.
DeleteHmm...how to keep pushing the cog of a collections of weights to the right of a wheel's axle without using any energy so you can maintain imbalance and constant torque. I think I know a way to do it. When I get a chance I'll try making a drawing of it and uploading it. Maybe that Sim Man will sim it for us. It's a very simple idea and, like Count Karl, I'm surprised no one ever thought of it before...as far as I know, that is.
DeleteBrad
"John Collins19 February 2026 at 14:36
Delete.. I have to admit that my scissor mechanisms over-complicate the potential solution, so much so that although I still think it possible that Bessler presented his “solution” to Karl in a much simpler form, using fewer parts, his actual wheels which were tested were more powerful than this “simpler” solution. Therefore I shall continue to simplify my own latest mechanism……and look for the original simple solution."
Has it not dawned on you yet that all "simple and ordinary" OOB non-runners can be made into runners. MT is full of them. To be runners they need an effective prime mover added to the mix. MT13 hints at an additional prime mover structure required. The MT13 indicative facsimile made up of a hanging non-rotating counter-weight with top mounted lifting wheel. A short steep ramp would have done the same thing to illustrate the point of a lifting force required. It does not lift the lever weights high enough or fast enough, and stalls the wheel, so is an ineffective obstacle to success. It is not the correct prime mover but illustrates that one is required. That is his clue in MT13. A correctly designed prime mover needs to lift weights in their turn, in a flash, without stalling the wheel to give the weights GPE and immediate OOB torque. MT15 shows the overbalance required but not how to physically get the weights into OOB. Just in case the "future" reader somehow misunderstands the message B tells him the picture is sans "prime mover", which is not to be seen or deduced from the picture. You could logically infer yourself that a prime mover structure is required to be added to do the lifting into repeated OOB and torque.
Karl could be shown "any" "simple" OOB wheel model. The prime mover was singularly the most important key ingredient and all Karl had to do was see and understand the prime mover application, to see how "they" could become runners, and say what he said about simplicity and easy to understand.
@ Anon 15:00 .. " And why not reverse this process? Three weights on left side whose have naturally greater torque, and are also naturally moving away from center of wheel, could try to raise one weight from bottom back toward center. With right configuration it seems possible that there would be always three weights on the left, and two on the right. "
DeleteUsing the anon's TM CoG pic that you refer to. We know that a weight-wheel will only have torque if weights can lose PE. That's why Roberval type wheels do not work. In the pre-shift of the original cw wheel the driver at 6 o'cl will lose about 2 times the PE that needs to be gained by the ascending side weights. The pre-shift analysis shows a strong ccw torque. Post-shift the system CoG is just on the descending side of the vertical giving a small and brief amount of cw torque. If we were to just reverse this analysis so that it was to be a ccw turning wheel then the weights moving outwards on the new descending side would lose 1 times PE but have to lift the 6 o'cl weight-lever 2 times the lost height and gain twice the prior lost PE. To find a configuration that will gain more PE than is lost, and reset, breaks Classical Mechanics Law of Levers. Good luck with that !
I occasionally read about overcoming the "height for width problem". Wth is the "height for width problem"? Please someone give me an explanation that a 6th grader could understand.
ReplyDeleteI've never understood it either. Occasionally someone mentions it and makes it sound like everyone who's a "serious" pm chaser should understand it. I wonder if they even know what it means!
Deletehttps://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1007
Deletehttps://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9634
Deletehttps://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=151179#p151179
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=150302#p150302
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=144494#p144494
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=108065#p108065
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=95438#p95438
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=76708#p76708
Thx for the link which sort of explains the phrase. Basically, when one moves his weights out a certain distance horizontally at 3:00 in his cw rotating pm wheel in order to increase cw torque, that then requires him to lift the weight back up toward the axle through the same distance at 6:00 so the process can be repeated the next time the turning wheel brings the weight around to 3:00 again. There is no extra energy gain being created because the amount of gpe lost by the horizontally displaced weight as it moves around the wheel and drops vertically from 3:00 to 6:00 will exactly equal the amount of gpe that must be added back to the weight at 6:00 to move it closer to the wheel's axle. A wheel cannot show pm unless the amount of gpe lost by the weight traveling from 3:00 to 6:00 exceeds the amount of gpe that needs to be added back to the weight at 6:00. Bessler apparently found a "simple" way to do that so it must be possible despite what the know it all scientists say.
DeleteBessler's entire oeuvre, both written and drawn, serves to help us understand that things aren't as everyone thinks, even sixth-graders.
DeleteAccording to Bessler, there simply isn't a "height-to-width problem," but it's worth exploring to discover a new METHOD of operation, which is the one we're looking for and the only one.
Bessler hinted that in drawings, you can find two ways of doing things, one that says more than it shows, and the other that shows more than it says. It's worth paying attention to the Elliptical Orbit.
Earlier I mentioned that I had an idea for a simple method to keep pushing the cog of the weights in a wheel toward the wheel's descending side so as to keep it perpetually turning and that I would try to make a sketch of it. Well, I did and here it is:
ReplyDeletehttps://i.postimg.cc/QCNpZgdN/sliding-weight-pm-wheel.jpg
This design consists of a heavy metal disc (colored light gray) that has a hexagonal hole inside of it. The metal disc fits loosely over the hexagonal cross section metal portion of the wheel's axle. The hexagonal cross section of the metal axle is well lubricated to minimize friction between the flat contacting metal surfaces there. If the metal disc is pushed to the right, it will slide a short distance and its cog will be shifted onto the right side of the wheel (the location of the displaced cog of the metal disc is indicated by a small yellow star). The resulting imbalance then makes the entire wheel begin to rotate cw. After the wheel has rotated by 60 degrees, the system is reset and if more horizontal force is applied to the heavy metal disc it will again slide to the right and the action will continue as the wheel picks up speed.
The problem is to figure out a way to constantly apply a horizontal force to the heavy metal disc. One way I've come up with is the use a heavy pendulum weight (colored dark gray) that is hung off of a circular cross section portion of the metal axle by a long arm (colored blue). That pendulum weight wants to hang vertically downward and remain stationary below the center of the axle despite the motion of the wheel, its axle, or the sliding heavy metal disc that slides on the hexagonal portion of the wheel's metal axle. But, the pendulum weight cannot hang straight down because attached to its left side is an arm (colored red) that extends outward and ends with a small wheel (also colored red). That wheel constantly presses upward on the rim of the heavy metal disc and applies a small horizontal force to it that will make it slide to the right if it can.
What I show in the sketch is my design uses a heavy metal disc with a hexagonal hole at its center, but one could probably use a pentagonal hole or a hole with more than six sides. As the heavy metal disc slides to the right it will come to abrupt stops which will produce impact sounds that can be heard outside of the wheel's drum. Was this the design that Bessler used only with a heavy metal disc having an octagonal hole at its center? Unlikely because of all of those little cylindrical lead weights he took out of and then reinstalled into the Merseburg wheel's drum during its official test. He would have used a much lighter wooden disc with an octagonal metal insert at its center that made contact with an octagonal cross section metal portion of the axle. Those little lead cylinder weights he removed from the Merseburg wheel could have been attached to the lighter wooden disc by sliding them over short metal pins that protruded from the face of the disc. The lead weights could have been secured to the pins by then placing spring clamps onto the slightly protruding ends of the pins after the lead weights were slid onto them along the lengths of the weights. This method would have allowed Bessler to quickly remove and then reattach the weights so as to not make the examiners at the official testing too impatient by a delay during the movement of the wheel to a nearby set of different axle supports.
Well, that's my idea. Now let's see who thinks it must work and who thinks it cannot work and for what reason. Maybe this was his simple solution to achieving pm? It would certainly be nice if it was! I don't do sims, but it should not be too difficult to sim because there are no levers, cords, or springs required.
Brad
GENIUS! Congrats Brad, I think you just solved the Bessler wheel mystery for us! I don't see any reason why your design would not work. It has no choice but to remain OB at all times. I like that it can be easily modified to produce any number of impacts sounds per rotation from five up to maybe twelve just by changing the shape of the disc's hole and the axle's cam. Also, eliminating levers, ropes, and springs would indeed make it "so simple a carpenter's boy could build it". Heck...anyone could build it!
Deleteit is unique...i never seen any wheels using sliding weight like that before...good luck with it brad.
DeleteIt doesn’t work, the imbalance is on the descending side but the support force is on the ascending side!
DeleteJohn wrote: "So did Bessler invent a simpler gravity wheel, but one with less power potential than the+later ones?"
DeleteMaybe Brad's wheel is that "simpler gravity wheel" that John suspects was the one that Karl was shown? Then later for the Merseburg and Kassal wheels Bessler used some version of John's pentagon arrangement of scissor mechs? If so, are their any clues in the drawings that point toward the sliding weight approach used in Brad's simpler wheel? One such clue might be all of the pendulums we see attached to the axles of the wheels.
@ Brad
DeleteThanks for sharing your unique design with us. However, I can see some problems with it that you did not realize.
Your drawing shows that heavy metal disc with its hexagonal center hole after the force applied to its 7:30 location has pushed it as far to the right as possible on the wheel's axle. Assuming that the contact between the wheel's hexagon shaped axle and the hexagonal hole in the disc was well lubricated, then that sliding motion would certainly take place. I'm also assuming that the little red wheel being pushed up by the big pendulum weight trying to swing under the axle could provide the horizontal force needed for the sliding motion. So, your drawing shows us the location of the heavy metal disc AFTER it has slid over to the right as much as possible and placed its COG to the right of the wheel's axle. Yes, that should definitely happen.
The problem I see is that you then assume that shift in the location of the disc's COG will cause the entire wheel to rotate cw through 60° so that the metal disc is ready for its next slide to the right. That, however, won't be happening with an actual physical wheel. You would see some cw rotation of the wheel, but due to friction it won't make it through a full 60° so that the reset can occur. The wheel and its axle will just rotate and then counter rotate several times until they finally come to a stop with the COG of the metal disc, which you marked with a yellow star, being located right below the center of the axle.
Sorry, Brad, but I think that your design, though well drawn, is yet another dead duck for our collection of them. I also doubt if anyone here will waste time trying to sim it. But, again, thanks for making the easy to understand drawing and sharing it with us.
I simulated before claiming that it doesn’t work!
DeleteI put twelve spikes on the inner shape, it’s more fluid but the wheel stops after a while. It does not start spontaneously, it must be launched.
I tried with a crown gear and a pinion, it’s worse.
I tried to put this principle on several arms, it doesn’t work either.
Following his simulation, I remembered the principle of Sam Peppiatt with his reset rings.
So I reversed its principle with the free ring on a roller.
The ring being offset with Brad’s system.
It turns very very slowly! it is not exploitable.
Shadow
BRAD! How could you possibly do that to poor old John?! He struggles for years to develop his ultimate solution to the Bessler wheel mystery, his astounding "Bessler Workaround", and here you come along and in a matter of only a few short hours deliver that carpenter's boy simple design we've all been searching for...the even more astounding "Sliding Weight Wheel". Now John's approach has lost its prominent place here only to be eclipsed by your new breakthrough and revelation. YOUR design is now at the top!
DeleteCongratulations! 👏👏👏
https://postimg.cc/mtgLJb93
But grieve not John fans. It is only a matter of time before he is back with a revised design that is sure to regain its rightful place at the top again!
Working on it! 🤔
DeleteSorry I wasted everyone's time again with my latest brain fart idea for a solution to the Bessler wheel mystery. As usual, I got an idea that initially looked great and took off with it before thinking it through. If I had, then I would have realized that it would be unworkable in practice. Also, I am not offended by anon 14:06's mockery of my design. He shows it exactly where it deserves to be...on top of that imaginary pile of dead duck designs we've accumulated here over the years. I think I do better when I focus of finding new Bessler clues than when I'm dreaming up new pm wheel designs. I will concentrate more on clues in the future.
DeleteBrad
@Brad
DeleteNo need to apologize. You showed you could "think outside the box" and that's the kind of thinking Bessler did that allowed him to finally find his runner. You also made the effort to clearly illustrate your design and reveal it to us in a timely manner. So, it didn't work...so what? In the pm chase game that is the rule and success is only the very rarest of exceptions. I urge you to keep trying to come up with new designs while also looking for new clues. Sooner or later one of us will stumble upon the same working design Bessler found. I have no doubt of that. Keep the faith and don't let the hecklers out there who surrendered long ago get under your skin. Imo, they're just envious because, unlike us, they have nothing to believe in. They are the ones to be pitied.
" the height for width problem " - also known as " trading height for width "
Deleteweights or weighted levers etc that are moved in a wheel ( under 'g' or forcibly moved ) must complete a closed path ( closed loop ) cycle . this means they end up exactly where they started from at some point , closing the loop . essentially the " h4w problem " is a problem of GEOMETRY . what goes up must come down . what moves out a horizontal distance on the descending side creating a positive torque must be brought back up to its starting radius after passing into the ascending side to have little negative torque effect . a pendulum set at 3 o'cl & released will have equal positive & negative torques . it will oscillate & eventually stop at the keel position due to friction losses . theoretically , to have maximum positive torque and zero negative torque we have to lift the weight back up at 6 0'cl . this is the same distance vertically as gained horizontally to create the positive torque . the positive torque gives the weight a set KE at 6 o'cl equaled by the PE it must be given to reach reset radius & position ... AN INCONVENIENT MATTER OF GEOMETRY ...
Thousands of PM chasers for thousands of years have failed to build an OOB wheel that is a true self-moving runner. We can all design and build a good cart. Along came a man called Bessler who also failed dismally for the first 10 years designing and building even more stubbornly stationary carts. In his despair he had a dream that lifted the veil and allowed him to see the problem of maintaining overbalance torque through a different lens, and the way to a mechanical solution. Using his life experience and skill sets, he produced an OOB wheel, with a horse to pull the cart.
DeleteAnon 02:15 to Brad: "You also made the effort to clearly illustrate your design and reveal it to us in a timely manner."
DeleteAmen to that. I give Brad much credit for not playing you know who's "hide and seek game" with us for YEARS by hinting every once in a while that he's finally found "the" secret, but must "prove it first" before revealing anything. Or, regularly promising to reveal and then, at the last minute, showing us nothing! Who needs that kind of craziness? So, Brad I look forward to seeing any other designs, even if they're "brain farts", that you come up with. You never know when some nonrunner you think up might contain some little detail that could help someone else finally find the Bessler wheel solution. 😉
Anon 07:25 .. obviously his horse was called Mr Prime Mover - giddy-up , hi ho Silver ..
Deleteanon 18:53 >> Mr Prime Mover LIFTED weights in a flash, Bessler said so.
DeleteI’m very familiar with your not-so-subtle reference to me and my apparent “hide-and-seek” game, anon 07:32, but you ignore all my efforts to help others to find the solution by publishing dozens of clues and codes designed by Bessler to help but also to mystify his readers.
ReplyDeleteYes I admit to jumping the gun on numerous occasions but in my opinion an unstoppable enthusiasm coupled with genuine optimism is a key ingredient for any potential Bessler researcher. I apologise for my persistent belief that I’ve found the solution but failed to publish it because it was wrong or at least inaccurate, but I shall continue to pursue this elusive solution.
JC
Its the same for everyone , you try , you learn , move on .
DeleteJohn wrote: "...but you ignore all my efforts to help others to find the solution by publishing dozens of clues and codes designed by Bessler to help but also to mystify his readers."
DeleteJust because one of Bessler's goals as to "mystify his readers" does not mean you had to do the same thing! Also, IIRC, in a previous blog you admitted that you only published "clues" that you already determined were worthless for finding out what Bessler's actual pm design was! If that is correct, is that your definition of "helping others"?! To me it sounds like deliberate misdirection intended to sabotage the efforts of rival Bessler pm wheel chasers.
I think what you fail to appreciate is that by regularly proclaiming on this blog that you had finally found "it" (while never revealing anything so that it could not be determined, as it recently was, whether you were right or just delusional) you may actually have been discouraging many others from looking for "it" themselves. They would have thought "Why should I bother looking myself...he's already got "it" and I would only be wasting my time." You played that game well for years and there's no telling how many potential Bessler pm wheel chasers were discouraged by it and gave up on the subject completely.
A suspicious person might think you did it purposely to reduce the number of competitors looking for the solution so as to enhance your chance of being the first to actually find it. Finally, after being sufficiently pressured, you did "reveal all whether it works or not" and, quite unfortunately, it did not.
We have to move on now...there's a big historical mystery out there that still needs to be solved and we're the ones that have been chosen by destiny for that task. So, let's all get to work to finally solve it!
@anon12:03
DeleteAs they say, "Leopards don't change their spots". My prediction is that we'll see JC lay low for a while and then he'll suddenly announce that he's found "more clues" he missed before telling him that he needs to add some more ropes and pulleys to his previously failed scissor pentagon wheel to finally turn it into Bessler's runner and that he fully intends to reveal everything "soon". If he times that tactic right, he can keep it going for a few more years all the while hoping nobody remembers the events around his recent 81st birthday. The problem with that plan is that the long time followers of this blog have very long memories. I think he's hoping, however, that we'll all just get a case of collective amnesia in time. That's not going to happen though.
OK, I get it. I’m disappointed at some reactions but I expect it after all these years.
DeleteAbove, you wrote “in a previous blog you admitted that you only published "clues" that you already determined were worthless for finding out what Bessler's actual pm design was! If that is correct, is that your definition of "helping others"?! To me it sounds like deliberate misdirection intended to sabotage the efforts of rival Bessler pm wheel chasers.”.
I only meant that the clues I published had not helped me to find Bessler’s solution. But you read my blog and and put your own interpretation of what you think I meant. I believed that if people saw how I found and interpreted Bessler’s clues it might encourage them to do the same and find something I had missed.
JC
To atone for his past sins on this blog, JC shamefully hides his face from the world:
Deletehttps://streamable.com/13l6pt
But, of course, we will all forgive him for without him this blog would not exist and I would not be able to link to weird AI images and videos I make of him! 😊
I confess I’m fascinated to see the AI manipulated images produced from my old profile picture.
DeleteJC
Yes, the new AI technology is amazing, but it is very energy hungry. When you ask ChatGPT a question and it then proceeds to scan hundreds or even thousands of online sources for answers, it uses enough electrical energy to run a microwave oven for about 8 seconds. If you ask it to make you a 7 second video, that, incredibly, uses enough electrical energy to run the same microwave oven for OVER an HOUR! Now imagine an AI data center with thousands of requests coming in per minute! They are currently building such a data center in the US state of Tennessee which will be completed by 2030. When it is completed, it will use the same amount of electrical power that is currently being used by the entire city of Paris! To make all of this AI stuff work smoothly, they are going to have to start installing 300 megawatt small modular nuclear reactors next to the data centers. The cost of all of this is going to easily be in the trillions and, so far, the big tech companies are able to dish out the cash to keep it going. However, if the growing AI "bubble" does finally burst, it could, literally, crash the entire world's economy and we'll see the likes of a depression that will make the "Great Depression" of the 1930's look mild by comparison!
DeleteYesterday I was asked in an online property survey if I was OK with realtors using AI imaging. I said absolutely NOT ! They asked for comments about my answer. I said because AI erodes trust until there is none left. And if an agent used AI enhanced images I would consider their character and honesty more than suspect. Call me old fashioned. It has its place in humour providing it is clearly labelled however people use it to deliberately deceive or influence others.
DeleteWhether we like it or not, AI is the future and we're all going to have to get used to it and use it eventually. I heard one commentator say something that stuck in my mind: "AI only makes money by putting people out of work." Also, right now there are solitary, lonely young guys out there who are actually falling in love with AI powered female virtual assistants on their cell phones, tablets, and laptops. Those assistants give them the attention and even the professions of romantic love that they are not getting from real women. Some guys even say they prefer their relationships with an AI "woman" to those with real women. In another decade or so we'll have AI powered robots running around our homes...imagine what that will lead to!
DeleteWhen the promoters of AI have well enslaved humanity by making it dependent on it, they will only have to price this dependence to be part of the cenacle!
Delete@ Anons 03:34 & 07:36 // You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Therefore there is no point fearing it, but it will change things as we have known them. Particularly in society, and in commerce initially. Perhaps many countries will face an even greater population decline in the coming decades because these same isolated young men will have little reason to engage outside the virtual world. In my place of work it is a condition that we will not accept AI generated tenders or contracts (ironically we have an AI tool to identify them). Simply because they have little working knowledge of the legal consequences and responsibilities of what they have submitted, but it looks good. All flash and no bang. I don't fear AI but I don't trust man's nature which will quickly fall into to feral behaviour and misuse. Follow the money !
DeleteBefore we know it AI will be replacing physicians, ordering tests for patients, and prescribing meds to them. Surgery? Eventually that too will be done by robots controlled by AI. Such a robot surgeon might be able to do an operation in only a fraction of the time needed by a human surgeon and reduce the risk to the patient. Right now AI is even writing its own computer code and the human coders overseeing it are slowly getting to the point where it is too complex for them to follow. I'm in favor of the coming AI revolution, but with one requirement: make sure it has an "off" switch somewhere that it does not control and which humans can activate if something serious goes wrong with it that threatens humanity. Before we know it, future wars will be fought by AI controlled drones and robot tanks and even soldiers. Just sci-fi nonsense? Don't be surprised when it's all here in a decade or so. And we the taxpayers who are still employed will ultimately be paying for it all. We're already paying for it all only the costs are currently being cleverly hidden from us. Those costs will go up as the demand for AI continues to increase. Right now it's just being used by the average person to answer questions on ChatGPT or make amusing videos on Grok, but that is only the very beginning of the coming revolution.
Delete"JB 21 February 2026 at 09:59
ReplyDeleteIts the same for everyone , you try , you learn , move on ."
well said . if only ! if u keep looking under the same rock u will keep finding the same can of worms lol
Wolff logic thought the descending side weights were somehow receiving an extra downward force to speed them up, which would give them greater velocity and ke than gravity and leverage could provide them. In mt 52 B said "no wheel is moved through strong blows" dissing an augmented impact speed theory. The other side of the coin is an augmenting force to assist the raising of the weights above what gravity and leverage could provide them!
DeleteWolff's idea might have some merit. Maybe the amount of gravitational force exerted on the lead cylinder weights inside of Bessler's wheels varied slightly with their orientation relative to the direction of Earth's gravity? For example, maybe on the wheel's downside the axis of a weight was perpendicular to the direction of Earth's gravity and it felt the maximum force on it. Then, at the wheel's 6 o'clock position, the weight was mechanically rotated through 90 degrees so that, on the wheel's ascending side, its axis was aligned with the direction of the Earth's gravity feel and it then felt the minimum force on it. At 12:00 the weight would be rotated back through 90 degrees so that on the wheel's downside its axis was again perpendicular to the Earth's gravity field. The difference in the weight of the lead cylinder weights would be slight...perhaps so slight that no one, other than Bessler, had ever noticed it before. It was then that slight difference in the forces acting on a wheel's ascending and descending sides which created the torque that moved Bessler's wheels. Such a system could be very simple to construct...so simple that a carpenter's boy could build it, it would astound Count Karl, and it would confuse future Bessler pm wheel reverse engineers so much that they would never be able to duplicate one of Bessler's wheels. Now that we have a new theory to explain his wheels, it's time to rush to his drawings to find clues to confirm it. Happy clue hunting everyone! 🤓
Delete@anon 03:51
DeleteYes! I've found a clue that perfectly backs up your new theory. It's right there in the second DT portrait and, as JC often says, "hidden in plain sight"!
That microscope barrel on the right side of his shop table represents a vertically oriented lead cylinder weight while the telescope's sections on the left side represent horizontally oriented lead cylinder weights. The microscope barrel is near some small lead ingots, maybe used in plumbing to seal iron pipes together, and that tells us the microscope barrel represents something made of lead like a cylindrical weight from a Bessler pm wheel. The extended telescope is under the globe which is a symbol for a one way turning Bessler wheel that, like the Earth, only turns in one direction. Also, notice that the two clues involve items used for magnification? That is Bessler's way of telling us to study those items closely to see what he intended them to represent. These clues could not be more obvious!
Well, this could be the solution we've all been searching for, but I doubt if anyone will be able to sim it. It needs to be physically tested in some way. I'm not a builder or a simmer, but good luck to anyone who tests this theory with an actual build. It could be the big breakthrough we need to finally solve the mystery and build working replicas of Bessler pm wheels!
I also hope this clue discovery can make up for my recent brain fart pm wheel design that quickly morphed into yet another dead duck for our growing pile of them!
Brad
Everyone has their clues,
DeleteMine are the following:
The spinning top, the skater where the pair of skaters, the Watt regulator, the Roberval scale, the two blacksmith and miner toys, the engraving on both clocks, the column placed etc...
All that participates in gravity and balance, which one finds in the laws of nature according to Bessler!
Great clue find, Brad! Yes, clue finding seems to be your strong suit. If this effect, which we can call the "Bessler Effect", is real then it will really shake up physics. It should be easy to verify it. Just get a digital scale that is accurate to a hundred of a gram and put a length of iron pipe on it. The pipe could be 2" in diameter by 8" in length. First weigh the pipe standing on its end and then weigh it lying on its side and be careful it does not roll off the scale. If the Bessler Effect is real, then there should be a change in the weight of the pipe measured by the scale. Try repeating the experiment using pipes or solid cylinders made of different materials like wood, plastic, glass, etc. If there is only a few percent difference in the weight of the pipe due to its different orientations relative to the earth's gravity field, then that should be enough to construct a working pm wheel that uses the principle. Building a wheel that manages to physically rotate its lead cylinder weights at the 6:00 and 12:00 should not be that difficult and would not require that much energy.
DeleteSuch a wheel would be easy to construct...no levers...no cords...no springs...just some way to rotate the weights at the top and bottom of the wheel...maybe have a extended pendulum riding on the rotating axle and remaining vertical...when weights pass that long pendulum's 12:00 top and 6:00 bottom ends they hit them and are rotated? But if the difference in the weights of the wheel's two sides was small then the wheel would have to be VERY carefully balanced so that the Bessler effect would work. Sounds doable...but only if the Bessler effect is real.
DeleteIf this Beslser Effect was real I;m sure scientists would have realized it a long time ago especially guys like Newton. But, I'm curious to see how much attention it will get here before everyone sees its another pm fairy tale.
DeleteHere's a quick way for someone to test to see if the "Bessler Effect" is real or not without having to build a complete wheel. Get yourself a six foot long wooden board and attach two identical pieces of pipe to its ends so that they can be rotated around. You will have to drill holes in the middles of the pieces so you can put a long screw through them to attach them to the ends of the board and they will stay in whatever position they are twisted into. With the lengths of the two pipe pieces parallel to each other, very carefully balance the board's midpoint on a fulcrum of some sort or suspend it by its midpoint with a cord to an overhead hook so that the board is balanced horizontal and stays motionless.
DeleteIf the Bessler effect is real, then when you twist one of the pipe pieces so its length is perpendicular to the downward direction of the Earth's gravity field while the other pipe piece's length is parallel to that field, then you should see the side whose pipe's length is perpendicular to the field begin to dip down because it will feel slightly more gravity force being applied to it. Here's a ms paint drawing I made showing what the results of your tests should be if the effect is real:
https://i.postimg.cc/59Ck3s1M/b-effect-demo.jpg
If the effect exists and is strong enough and if a simple, quick, and reliable method can be found to twist the directions of the lengths of the pipes at a wheel's 6 and 12 locations, then I can see no reason why a working pm wheel could not be built using this effect.
Now , make sure each weight has the exact same number of atoms since gravity acceleration acts on each atom individually. I wonder if it could accelerate to 50 rpm in just a single turn hmmm ?
DeleteActually, anon 19:26, it is not necessary that the two pipes anon 16:09 shows in his test setup sketch have the exact same number of atoms. They could vary quite a lot just so long as the board connecting the two pipes is suspended so it remains horizontal when the two pipes are parallel to each other. Then, when the alignment of the pipes is changed so that they are perpendicular to each other, the Bessler Effect should appear. It will be the strongest when one pipe is perpendicular to the earth's downward gravitation force and the other pipe is parallel to it. I'm surprised that no one thought of this possible way to achieve pm before. Then again, maybe someone did and it was realized it did not work and abandoned.
DeleteAs someone said above just change one cylinders orientation on an accurate scale. If there is a difference in "weight force" due to orientation then 2 balanced on a see-saw can create a 'turning moment' or torque difference when 1 orientation is adjusted. If the torque difference is greater than the pivot friction losses then it should begin to rotate to empirically prove the theory. Damn, my mass spectrometer laser balance and vacuum chamber are out of action this week. Brain-toot. My Algodoo sim program is obviously not accurate enough to register above the noise levels to give even 1 rpm a day let alone 50 rpm in 1 revolution. I'll have to use the missuses bathroom scales.
Deletehttps://newatlas.com/medical/dream-control-puzzles/
ReplyDeletedream control solving puzzles - hypnotizing
Move over JC's "Bessler Workaround" and Brad's "Sliding Weight Wheel" designs and let the ACTUAL solution to Bessler's wheels take its rightful place at center stage! Of course, it is only the "actual" solution IF that "Bessler Effect" is real and not yet another "pm fairy tale".
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the above comments, I came up with this possible design for an overbalanced pm wheel that would use the Bessler Effect:
https://i.postimg.cc/RZy8yJ0H/b-effect-pm-wheel-design.jpg
The drawing is self-explanatory. The center axes of lead cylinder weights have different orientations relative to the earth's gravity field depending upon which side of the wheel's axle a weight is located. On the right descending side, the weight axes are all perpendicular to the gravity field's downward direction and on the left ascending side they are (at least at 9 o'clock) parallel to the gravity field's direction. That results, IF the Bessler Effect is real, in the wheel's descending side weights feeling a little more downward pull than do the ascending side weights. The result is pm because the descending side weights always weigh slightly more than do the ascending side weights. Obviously, as with Bessler's wheels, the torque of this design will be low.
The sticking point in this design is the method used to rotate the lead weights at the wheel's 6 o'clock and noon locations. I use that long red colored vertical "rotator pendulum" that sits on the wheel's rotating axle. The tip of its bottom arm hits an oncoming weight's end and rotates it through 90 degrees which will make the weight's axis parallel to the gravity field when it finally reaches the wheel's 9 o'clock location. The tip of the pendulum's upper arm hits a short rod projecting from the side of a weight and again rotates its axis through 90 degrees making the weight's axis perpendicular to the gravity field at all locations on the wheel's descending side. A heavy ballast weight attached to the pendulum helps keep it vertical as the wheel's axle rotates inside of it and the ends of its arms hit the oncoming weights. Those contacts, unfortunately, tend to cause the pendulum to try to rotate clockwise around the wheel's axle.
So, you all decide...could this be "the" solution to the Bessler wheel mystery...or, just another brain fart idea that needs to be promptly deposited onto that top of our ever growing pile of dead duck designs?
Looks good but only if that Bessler effect is real. Probably no one will ever test it so we'll never know for sure. Maybe we need another pile next to the one of dead ducks for ducks in a coma?
DeleteThe weights at 12:00, 1:30, 3:00, 4:30, and 6;00 are all perpendicular to the Earth's g field. On the left ascending side only the weight at 9:00 is completely parallel. The weights at 7:30 and 10:30 are half perpendicular and half parallel. But, it should still produce cw torque.
Delete"The weights at 12:00, 1:30, 3:00, 4:30, and 6;00 are all perpendicular to the Earth's g field. On the left ascending side only the weight at 9:00 is completely parallel. The weights at 7:30 and 10:30 are half perpendicular and half parallel. But, it should still produce cw torque."
DeleteYou are mistaken .
I think there would have to be some difference between the weights of the two lead cylinders. Their individual weights are determined by the interaction of their two individual gravity fields with the gravity field of the Earth. The Earth is roughly a sphere, but the two weights' gravity fields interact with it in slightly different ways due the orientations of the weights. Cylinders are not spheres and the gravity field surrounding one is not exactly the same as that surrounding a spherical mass. Imo, there should be some difference in the interactions and it would affect the measured weight of each cylinder differently. The big question is would that difference in weight be enough to produce a net torque that could overcome the counter torque produced by the friction in the various bearings in a wheel? If yes, then anon 04:18's wheel could be a runner. If not, then no and the design can be dumped onto the top of our pile of dead ducks. Seriously, I do hope it proves to be a runner, but even so I don't think it was the design Bessler used. It's just too simple for that, imo. I think he used weights on levers and there were cords and springs involved in them. Those are completely lacking with this "Bessler Effect" wheel.
DeleteIt's rather discouraging to see that all of these proposed "solutions" to the Bessler wheel mystery that are appearing lately are all very low torque with cog's that are only displaced a very little horizontal distance from a wheel's axle. That's why we read of Bessler constantly trying to make his wheels larger in diameter with more massive weights. Yes, he had something that worked, but its constant power output was pitifully low compared to the other power sources, though intermittent, of his day like wind and water mills. I think many, like me, recognize this deficiency, but assume that, once his wheels are duplicated, it can be eventually corrected with an improved design and better materials. But, what if that cannot be done? Everyone will have knocked themselves out chasing a pm wheel that won't be practical for anything other than being a curiosity to show off in various technology type museums around the world. I hope I'm wrong about all of that, though. Three centuries of effort for just a museum's attraction seems like a lot of wasted effort to me.
DeleteFinding Bessler secret pm design is not about finding a usable power source for our times. It was determined three centuries ago that it was not a usable power source even back then. Potential buyers had their own engineers test Bessler's wheels and they were well aware of that problem and all of Bessler hype put out could not get around it. That is why he couldn't sell his invention. That and the huge upfront price he demanded.
DeleteSo, what is it about? Finding Bessler secret pm design is actually about satisfying the human need to solve riddles and that's all. It's in the same category as solving the mysteries of translating ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics or those cuneiform clay tablets the Sumerians left behind. Did any of those solutions make some big difference in the lives of people today? Of course not, but it's nice to know that information because it makes us feel connected to the past in some way. Imo, the quest for pm has more to do with psychology than with mechanics. We want to believe that, in principle at least, it is possible for some processes to continue forever. Maybe that gives us some hope that after our physical bodies finally fail and die, some part of our consciousness minds will still continue to survive somewhere out there forever in some form and we can forever be together with our loved ones. Finding Bessler's secret might be a lot more about proving to ourselves that there could be an afterlife than about being able to use them to generate electrical power.
Until one is built & understood we can not know its modern day output potential & applications. We do know the bar is starting off low, but probably is not going to be lifted by orders of magnitude. Personally I'm in the business for the physics mystery, & don't get too invested in any other naval gazing.
Deletei think the quest for pm, for immortality, and for infinite wealth are all somehow subtly related. they're all about overcoming the limitations of the human condition which make us feel small and irrelevant in an infinite cosmos. it's more than just solving a mechanical mystery. i'm sure that sooner or later that will happen.
DeleteMaybe the most important thing to come out a successful duplication of Bessler's wheel is that it will force the physicists to have to explain how they work and that will then require them to modify/expand our present physics. That might then lead to new technologies that don't necessarily have anything to do with pm. A better understanding of the universe has got to be good thing for humanity. Let's hope it all happens as soon as possible.
Delete@Anonymous23 February 2026 at 16:03 "Imo, there should be some difference in the interactions and it would affect the measured weight of each cylinder differently."
ReplyDelete"differently" # so first prove the horse has legs before you let it run away with you !
On February 11th, 2026 at 18:40 JC wrote:
ReplyDelete"I’m going to show you where Bessler provides clues in a day or so. There are three images and one textual clue which seems to place one important cord connection at the upper right radius, roughly one-thirty on a clock face. The lift is shown as thirty degrees.."
So where are they???
It took him years to show us one photo of his wheel and you expect him to show us three images and a text clue in only a few days? Lol! No way. Maybe by summer he'll finally show them to us.
DeleteOn its way, but new information has held it up.But ASAP!
DeleteJC
"New information"? You must really be going over those Bessler drawings with a large magnifying glass looking for some new little clue that will save the "Bessler workaround" and get it off of that pile of dead ducks we have. Good luck finding it. We need something that works...that breakthrough that can finally lead to working Bessler wheels. Without them this whole subject will forever be dismissed as a hoax by mainstream science since the "burden of proof" lies with those (us) who are making the claim they were genuine and have still not proved it. With a genuine working wheel, however, that all changes overnight. Then, Bessler's wheels, will be the number one topic being discussed in the world of physics! Engineers and physicists all over our planet will be racing to build them and experiment with them. And, of course, they will get a lot of media coverage as book sales and royalty profits soar into the stratosphere!
DeleteWhere is SoS when we need him the most? Didn't he promise to give us a "belated Christmas gift" after JC's "Bessler workaround" was revealed and analyzed? Well, that's done with now and we still want our Christmas gift! Tarry no longer SoS...please!
Delete@anon 20:16. I'm wondering about that too. Based on his past history here, he usually pops in about once a quarter and it's been about a quarter so far. My guess is that his appearance is imminent...unless something happened to him or he's quit coming here for some reason. But, he's never broken a promise to us yet. He'll be here and like you I'm eagerly looking forward to that delayed Christmas "gift" he promised us...was it last November? His specialty is amazing us with never before seen clues. It should be a good one and worth the wait.
DeleteDisciple of SoS