Thursday, 5 February 2026

Re-inventing The Wheel - Bessler’s Wheel!


The Bessler-Collins Solution to the Gravity-Wheel.

The concept that Johann Bessler discovered over 300 years ago and which took me most of my life to dream of, is simple.  We only have one action available to us to try to understand the concept and then try and make it into a reality. A weighted lever falls through a 90 degree arc.  It has two features to the fall that can be used to our advantage.  One of them is deciding where to try and make it land at a desirable point, to generate some torque.  The second one is to find a way to make use of the potential energy generated during the fall.

The answer has to be found here if we accept that Bessler discovered it.  There isn’t any other source of energy available.

NB In what follows I will attribute certain pieces of information to Bessler, but lack of space means I won’t be filling the page with explanations of where I found them or how I know what he meant.  I have spent a lifetime studying Bessler’s clues and it will take a large book to reveal each and every clue and how I deciphered each.  I’ve published some of the clues and their meaning, but they were easier ones to find and explain. But as well, there are still many clues identified but still not all solved.

As far as we know; this particular configuration has never been found before, or demonstrated  - until Bessler  found it.

First Bessler decided where he wanted the weight to land.  Ideally he wanted to generate as much torque as possible.  Initially he designed the weighted levers to fall in a 90 degree arc, but this produced hardly any torque and he knew that once the wheel rotated a little, the torque would be neutralised. The weight had hardly moved more than a few degrees backwards from under the axle.

Bessler used the potential energy generated by the weighted lever, during its fall, to shift the weighted lever’s landing point towards the following mechanism.  He used a scissor mechanism to achieve this.  These operate sideways best and can operate in reverse when conditions allow.  With five mechanisms employed, the gap between the mechanisms amounted to 72 degrees and moving into that gap would greatly increase the torque with additional benefits.  In reality the full 72 degrees was not available but at least half of it was and that amounted to significant increase on the original amount gained by the right angled fall.

The mechanism preceding this falling one, would counter-rotate about 30 degrees as the wheel rotated forwards reducing the amount of lift needed to return it to its prelaunch position.

Bessler mentions that at one point the weight shot upwards.  This is a very important point and is key to success. I explained it in my www.besslerswheel.com website at Swing Mechanics, click on the principle button (posted in 2010!).  Remember Bessler’s words “The weights gain force from their own swinging”.

Making the fallen weight rise up quickly is actioned by attaching a length of cord to the weight on the fallen mechanism and attaching the other end to the red dot on the falling mechanism.


Solving the Problem

After more than ten years research, Bessler finally found a potential solution which could be stated quite simply.  It was this concept which I dreamed of a couple of years ago.  Some of the potential energy gained during the fall of a weight, (before the weight lands) needs to be used to reduce the amount of lift required to return the weight to its pre-fall position. Bessler studied all possibilities and he found the answer - the special configuration of weights needed.

He divided the action of the falling weight into two parts.  The first part involved choosing where the falling weight landed, i.e., which part of the edge or rim of the wheel was best. The second part of the action used some of the potential energy accumulating during the weight’s fall, to move the falling weight sideways to land it at his chosen landing spot.

He used a unique scissor mechanism to guide the falling weight into a gentle arc towards the outer end of the following radius and its pivot.  If the weight had fallen through a standard right angle arc of 90 degrees, without the extending action of the scissor mechanism, it would give little torque and none available once the wheel was rotating.

Bessler’s wheel needed five mechanisms each consisting of  a lever plus one weight.  All the five weights were of equal size and mass. Having five mechanisms meant each one was 72 degrees from the next one.

So, depending on where the scissor mechanism landed its weight, could, for instance, make the wheel rotate up to 30 degrees forward. This is because when the weight lands about 70 degrees further back from the pivot point at the end of the six o’clock radius, it causes the wheel to rotate forwards about half that distance, or around 30 degrees. 

At the same time the previously fallen weighted lever mechanism begins to move backwards relative to the forward rotation of the wheel.  It moves backward about 30 degrees, which is more than it would have done if the weight had moved through its normal 90 degree fall, without the extension.  This reduces the amount of lift in the fallen (wl) needed to maintain rotation.

Because gravity is only responsible for the vertical distance the scissor mechanisms which forced the weight to move sideways as it fell, it did not use more energy than if it had fallen straight downwards, but it borrowed a little from the potential energy being generated by the falling weight. That potential energy produced during the fall, is largely wasted in making noise when it lands, but moving the weight sideways caused it to land much further back along the wheel’s rim, thus providing a larger mechanical advantage (MA), or torque; more than if it had fallen through the normal unextended 90 degree arc.

When the extended scissor mechanism lands on the edge of the wheel, it lands gently because it has been diverted from its vertical path by the potential energy accumulating in the vertical fall.  NB, Fischer von Erlach commented on this by saying that the weight could be heard landing gently on the side towards which the wheel turned.

Bessler showed us that although the weight fell through 90 degrees, a previously fallen weight only needed to be lifted 30 degrees to reduce any braking effect it would have suffered without the lift.  This also provided an additional increase in torque leading to the rapid acceleration of the wheel, as noted by many reliable witnesses. These two actions happened simultaneously.

The five mechanisms worked in pairs and were arranged quite close to each other so the witnesses were able to remark positively on the extremely smooth rotation of the wheel. 

The fact that every time a single weight fell, a previously fallen weight was launched upwards,  in effect nudged the centre of gravity backwards continuously.  The wheel itself was recorded as needing its brake set to stop it rotating, and it would immediately beginning rotating as soon as the brake was released.  This tells us that the wheel was permanently out-of-balance.

Using a metronome set to the Merseburg wheel spin speed of 50 rpm, with five weights falling at every turn of the wheel, means the sound of weights landing 250 times per minute, or about four times every second! 

The Kassel wheel had nine mechanism so each one was separated from its neighbour by just 40 degrees.  Its spin speed unloaded was 26 RPM. Each weight landed 234 times per minute. Just under 4 times per second!  No wonder Fischer Von Erlach could only describe the “sound of about 8 weights landing gently on the side of the wheel”. 


The Solution

Using the scissor mechanisms to push the falling weighted levers sideways comes naturally to this device, it’s the way it moves most easily. Bessler commented in his Apologia Poetica,
 “A crab crawls from side to side. It is sound, for it is designed thus.” 

Not only does it move easily opening in one direction but is easily reversed and closing when the wheel is reversed.

All my versions of Bessler’s wheel are designed to turn clock-wise.







The information box is smaller than I planned so here a bigger version.

The first red line shows the weighted levers.

The pink lines show the scissor mechanisms.

The green lines show the scissor guide arms.

The blue lines show the short extension to the green scissor guide arms. Each has a cord attached which provides a link to the weighted levers.  When a weighted lever falls, the end of the arm follows edge of the wheel, pulling the cord, thus lifting a previous fallen weighted lever.

The red dot on the end of the green scissor guide arm shows where the cord is attached.

The grey and black lines show the aluminium retaining bar, controlling the lateral sway I see when the scissor mechanisms fall.

Unfortunately my own model has not been finished yet.  I had hoped to finish it in time for my birthday but other calls on my time prevented this happening. I need to add the connecting cords and I’ll post a new picture when I’ve finished. At least this post shows where I’ve go to and hopefully explains my latest concept.

There are a few facts about Bessler’s wheel which I have been able establish with absolute certainty. I will explain more later, but for now;

1.  There are at least 5 mechanisms required.  

2.  An odd number of mechanisms are required, 5, 7 or 9.

3.  5 mechanisms produce the fastest RPM, more mechanisms produce slower RPM. This is because more mechanisms take up more room, leaving less space for their actions.

4. It is necessary for the starting point of the weight’s fall to be higher than its landing point.  This may seem obvious but it cannot be achieved with some current designs being made suggested, for instance 4 mechanisms cannot accomplish it.

JC


69 comments:

  1. Well, thanks for finally showing us something at least. But, it's a bit confusing as to how it is supposed to work. I realize, however, that it is not yet finished. But, is the wheel you show designed to turn CW or CCW? It would help if you could draw in where the missing cords are supposed to go. I think before anyone can sim this, they are going to need to see the wheel shown with a first photo with the weights about to shift and then a second photo after the weights have shifted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My apologies for omitting that information, I’ve included some other images and hopefully it will become clear that all of my versions of Bessler’s wheel are designed to turn clock-wise.

      JC

      Delete
  2. It can't be made to work, but you are a man of your word John. happy birthday

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, thanks to that Sage guy keeping him under pressure to keep his word this time! Without that he would still be playing his hide and seek game with us!

      Delete
    2. Actually that sage troll was right about several things. JC did not reveal before his birthday...but we can forgive him because he did reveal ON his birthday which is close enough. The sage also said that we would only get some crumbs which would be useless to evaluate JC's design. He was half wrong about that. JC gave us more than just some crumbs...but they have been difficult to evaluate because they are still incomplete. At least JC finally ended all the drama and mystery which was really starting to annoy most everyone here. Maybe now, as he provides more info in the future, it will be possible to finally determine if his design can work. Personally, I'm turned off by the use of those scissor mechanisms because a one piece lever would be a lot easier to make and install in a wheel and the design, according to Karl, was "so simple a carpenter's boy..." well we all know the rest of that quote by heart by now. Would a carpenter's boy be able to make ten scissor mechs for a two way wheel? Woodcrafting is a hobby of mine and I would not attempt it.

      Still there is that very large item on the Toy Page on the left side showing a large scissor toy extending all the way to the top of the page. What are we supposed to make of it? Was something like that actually used, either vertically or horizontally, inside of Bessler's wheels? Would he risk showing us that mechanical toy after removing and destroying the few pages that actually showed the design he used in his working pm wheels? Seems unlikely to me. Maybe he intended it to be symbolic of some sort of other mechanical action. In past blogs here I've read that those who favor him using eight levers inside of his one way wheels notice that the scissor toy is made up of eight sections joined together. They claim that the toy symbolizes eight levers that are connected together so as to raise their center of gravity as a wheel turns with the arrowhead at the end of the toy representing that center of gravity.

      It seems that nothing certain will be determined in this blog concerning JC's Bessler workaround design. However, I'll be looking forward to seeing how this all turns out in future blogs.

      Also, happiest of birthdays to JC!

      Delete
  3. I would like read some opinion on my suggested “work-around” to overcome the problem of lifting each fallen weight after its fallen, thanks.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think things are beginning to become a little clearer now. The basic idea of the "Bessler workaround" is that, as the weights descend on the right side of your wheel, the scissor mechs they are attached to force them to move out toward the rim of the wheel as they drop. So far so good. Although you do not show the cords and pulleys required, that action then lifts the extended weights back toward the axle as they pass the wheel's 6 o'clock position. Okay, again so far so good. The problem I see with this approach is that the gravitational potential energy lost by the descending side weight is only about 1/3 that needed to lift the weight passing 6 o'clock back toward the axle so as to reset it. This detail will not change no matter how you connect the falling and rising weights together with a cord. Here's a quick drawing I made using one of your drawings:

      https://i.postimg.cc/PqrrY9WK/bessler-workaround-01.jpg

      Delete
    2. @anon 18:36. Thanks for your summary of the lever action in JC's design. I also thought his wheel was supposed to turn counterclockwise.

      I don't want to sound too negative, but from studying his design, it looks a little overly complicated to me with all of those scissors he has in it. Could a carpenter's boy build it? Maybe, but look at all the trouble JC is having with it! I think a much simpler design could do basically the same thing and would not have that problem of the descending side weight not losing enough gpe to lift the ascending side weight. Here's a drawing showing what I mean. It uses no scissors and only requires a single cord between adjacent levers:

      https://i.postimg.cc/fTBfXHrR/simple-B-work-around.jpg

      Brad

      Delete
    3. Q. Did you mean for the attachment points of the blue cord to the adjacent levers to be at 2 different locations as you drew them, or is it that every cord should attach at just the 1 common location on each lever? The cord length does not change so you'd probably need to draw in all cords to all levers and then calculate the COG.

      Delete
    4. @Brad
      I agree that your simplified design can do most of what John's does without the scissors and as you drew it, it will have a small cw torque. A lot of designs look good in some starting position, but it's what happens after they start to rotate that determines if they will be runners or not. In the drawing I've linked to below I show what will happen to your design after it rotates cw by 36°. When that happens the cog of the five weights will move right over to the wheel's ascending side and then start to produce ccw torque. Your design will not be a runner, imo. I highly suspect this will also be the case for John's wheel but we really need to see it simmed. For that to happen, he needs to provide more information like where the cords are to be attached to the levers and the pulleys located. Here's my drawing:

      https://postimg.cc/2qmt48mg

      Delete
    5. anon 01:28 said .. "we really need to see it simmed. For that to happen, he needs to provide more information like where the cords are to be attached to the levers and the pulleys located."

      > there appears to be 1 "aluminum retaining bar" (scissor sway controller with end stop) absent at around 3 o'clock from the actual build photo base drawing. which I'm guessing should be there for symmetry of drawings and sims, and fine detail for more accurate cog calculations if required.

      Delete
    6. @anon 01:28

      I seriously doubt if anyone will actually try to sim John's still unfinished design. I've worked with sims involving scissor mechanisms in the past and they are a pain to try to model. They tend to kink and fold up into themselves making the placement of them into a model very difficult. Maybe in the real world they are not that much trouble to work with (only to fabricate), but in the virtual world of a sim they are a nightmare.
      To determine if John's "Bessler workaround' can actually work as he thinks it should is going to require a precise build and not a sim, imo. John's either going to have to keep plugging away at it until he gets it working or give up on it. If it was me, I would give up on it and check all of those clues that convinced me scissor mechanisms were used. Maybe he's misinterpreted them? I wouldn't assume that just because Bessler mentioned there was something "special" about them that automatically meant he actually used them in his working pm wheels. That's a dangerous assumption, imo, and one that could make a Bessler pm wheel chaser spend years running in the wrong direction and getting nowhere.
      Also, happy birthday to John and hopefully many, many more for him.

      Delete
    7. I’m sorry the images are confusing and I appreciate the attempts to understand them, but I can see that the result is wrong. You’ve done your best to make sense of my poorly explanatory images, so I’m planning a clearer explanation, in my next post.

      JC

      Delete
  4. Happy Birthday John! Best wishes to you and your family. I have NO idea if your design had merit. I'm very glad it looks nothing like the one I have been considering these last few years.

    ReplyDelete
  5. From the description of the solution to lifting a weight it seems to me the idea of using the fall to reposition the weights is not going to subsequently lift them "over the top". It's a leverage design iiim. Leverage alone isn't a runner.

    ReplyDelete
  6. John,
    Thanks for all that you have done and are doing to spread a true account of the legend of Johann Bessler and his wheel. Thank you also for your efforts to resolve the mystery.
    Happy Birthday!
    Zhy

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks for the comments, both for and against. It’s clear that I haven’t given enough information about how it works, so I’ll add some more info which will hopefully dispel all those doubts. I will add it in another blog post, now I’m committed to sharing..

    Yes I did miss out one of the lateral sway control levers. I took so many photos and coloured several, that I had a choice of pics and the one you noticed was missing a part from an earlier pic.

    More to come.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your decision to share your design is a good one, imo...no one can be of any assistance to you if they do not know what you are up to...as the Bible says in Proverbs 15:22, "Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed."

      SoS years ago gave us a link to a very interesting website that gave short, but highly accurate tarot card readings for free (IIRC, he liked the illustrations on the deck they used so much that he actually bought several of them for his own use!). Anyway, if you are in quandary at the present, then you could consider taking a look at that website. You might be most surprised at what it predicts for you.

      https://www.free-tarot-reading.net/free

      Delete
    2. I used the link and had it do a reading for me. VERY interesting results!

      Delete
    3. I also used it because I was worried about an upcoming appointment I had with a dr to go over some tests I had for cancer. Their tarot reading said not to worry and everything would turn out fine for me. Sure enough, the dr said all my tests were negative despite some symptoms I had and I had no cancer! Was that tarot telling my future or was it just chance? I don't know for sure, but I will be consulting it in the future from now on!

      Delete
  8. J'ai fait une simulation sous Algodoo, sans les cordes, cela semble intéressant et prometteur.
    La roue tourne sans s'arrêter après quelques tours dans les deux sens.
    Il y a des contres couples, j'attends donc la position des cordes!

    I did a simulation under Algodoo, without the ropes, it seems interesting and promising.
    The wheel turns without stopping after a few laps in both directions.
    There are counter couples, so I’m waiting for the position of the ropes!

    Shadow

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I tried making a partial sim using wm2d that only had two complete scissors at the bottom of the wheel to see if they would shift as John thinks they should. Upon running the sim, those scissors were exploding and shooting all over the place and when I increased accuracy to stabilize the model, the processing of the model's individual frames slowed to a near halt. If I get a chance I'll give it another try though. John needs to tell us where to attach the ropes that connect the scissors to each other.

      Delete
    2. Maybe he does not know exactly where to attach the ropes between the levers or only has a general idea of their locations. I think their attachment points will be critical to making the Bessler workaround work assuming it is possible to work. Anyone trying to sim John's basic design is going to have the same problem and will have to hunt around until he finds attachment points that can work.

      Delete
    3. Read again the 7th post from Anonymous 5 February 2026 at 18:36

      Delete
  9. Hi John, happy birthday! I would greatly appreciate your assessment of these Bessler clues (pataphrased) as they relate to your design (this is NOT veiled critique. Truly):

    1) Springs were used, but not as detractors claimed.
    2) One side is full and the other empty as it should be.
    3) everything belongs to one of three kingdoms.
    4) when I arrange several bars, PULLEYS and weights, (pulleys?)
    5) He had taken an amount of weight out of the wheel which could have filled a considerable box (your five mechanism design has 5 weight)
    6) These [weights] come in pairs, such that, as one of them takes up an outer position, the other takes up a position nearer the axle. (If your design is promised on an odd number of segments, how would they be considered as being "in pairs"?)

    Thanks in advance, John. And congrats on the meaningful work you have done over the decades.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Paraphrased

      Delete
    2. "5) He had taken an amount of weight out of the wheel which could have filled a considerable box (your five mechanism design has 5 weight)"

      I'm not John, but I have an answer for you on this one. According to Ken B the Merseburg wheel contained 2 internal one way wheels x 8 levers per wheel x 3 weights per lever = 48 lead cylinder weights of 4 lbs each which certainly would have "filled a considerable box". But that box would have contained 48 levers x 4 lbs = 192 lbs of lead! If the empty box weighted, say, 20 lbs, then the total weight would have been 212 lbs. Two very strong men probably could have lifted it by handles on each end and moved it about. But, I don't think Bessler put those 48 weights into an actual box during the Merseburg wheel's translation to another set of axle supports. He probably just piled them up on the floor behind the wheel and kept them covered with a sheet to keep prying eyes from seeing that their ends had holes in them. That was because each weight would have been bored through its center so that a bolt could be inserted to secure it to the end of a lever inside of the Merseburg wheel.

      Delete
    3. @anon 03:58.
      KB also claims the Merseburg wheel, with its weights installed, weighed a total of 550 lbs. If it's 48 lead weights weighed a total of 192 lbs., that means that 34.91% of the total weight of the Merseburg wheel with its weights installed was due to the lead it contained. Removing all of the weights then reduced the remaining weight of the wheel to a lighter 358 lbs. If four men lifted it by its axle off of its support beams, then each man would need to lift 89.5 lbs. The axle of that wheel was about 6.75 ft. off of the floor. That means each man would have to reach up over his head and carefully push up on the bottoms of the two ends of the axle to lift its two end steel pivots off of their brass plates in the support beams. But, then what?
      My theory is that the drum, then being 358 lbs. and strong enough to support its own weight when rested on its outer rim, was then very carefully lowered to the floor and rolled a few feet over to the new set of support beams where the four men then pushed up to lift the two ends of the axle and place their end pivots onto the new set of brass plates. I've often wondered why there is no description of the details of the Merseburg wheel translocation in the Bessler literature. Maybe Bessler excluded it because he wanted to downplay the large amount of lead his wheels used or how difficult they were to move around?
      KB also thinks that the Kassal wheel weighted TWICE as much as the Merseburg wheel which means it would have had a total weight with its lead weights installed of 1,100 lbs. and also contained 48 lead weights which weighed a total of 384 lbs. since each weight in that later two way wheel was 8 lbs. instead of only 4 lbs as used in the Merseburg wheel. If the KB estimate is correct, then the Kassal wheel, even with all of its weights removed, would still have weighted 716 lbs. If four men tried to lift its axle out of its two much thicker support beams, then each man would have needed to be able to lift 179 lbs. over his head. That's a lot and probably explains why we see no mention of the Kassal wheel being moved to new supports during an official test.

      Delete
    4. Ken B was a friend of mine but that doesn’t mean I have to accept everything he wrote…..and I don’t! In fact most of his work is entirely speculation and pure guess work. Most of his self-styled information is unsupported by any documentation and frankly it has no place in this blog. Sorry if that displeases anyone, but we who are members of the Besslerwheel forum remember his wild theories and claims which resulted in his being banned eventually.

      JC

      Delete
    5. What JC forgot to mention is that KB has been studying the Bessler clues for just as long as JC has and based all of his conclusions about the wheels on his interpretations of those clues. Unlike JC, however, KB's analysis, which is numerological in nature, enabled him to give very precise details about the specifications of the various parts that Bessler used in his wheels. He also has a rational theory as to where the energy came from the wheels put out whereas everyone else is basically clueless about that subject.
      IIRC, KB was never actually banned from bwf but "resigned" when he realized that trying to present his research there was a waste of his time and effort and only resulted in him being insulted and harassed by his "friends" there. Once gone, however, he continued his research privately and eventually put the results of his half century search for a solution into the largest book ever devoted strictly to Bessler's wheels which was published back in I think 2019. It is a monumental work that was obviously meant to honor Bessler and his invention, is about eight hundred pages in length, and also includes dozens of never before seen illustrations of the mechanisms used in Bessler wheels which are based on KB's clue analysis. He even gives the reader the simple formulas he would need to build a Bessler type OB pm wheel of any size and power output. These would have been the same formulas that Bessler himself would have relied upon as he planned the construction of his own wheels.
      JC is quick to label KB's research as "speculative", but, when one thinks about it, the same charge could be made against JC! When dealing with Bessler's writings and drawings one must learn to "read between the lines" and recognize the many clues that are "hidden in plain sight". Only a few rare individuals will have the ability to do that and KB is definitely one of them, imo.

      Delete
    6. "Only a few rare individuals will have the ability to do that..."

      I'd say that SoS is also definitely such a rare individual and I'm still blown away by that analysis of Bessler's last drawing that was done by the "disciple" of SoS who we call "DoSoS". If anyone hasn't seen it yet, you can find it down in the November 19, 2025 blog that deals with the annual poetry cards that Bessler made up for Karl. One of those cards had a drawing at the top showing two angels sitting on the sides of Karl's family crest (assumed to be the last drawing Bessler ever made) with an amazing clue hidden in it about the levers that Bessler used.

      Delete
    7. I guess no one remembers, but I also provided some interesting explanations for Bessler clues in past blogs (like the one I gave on December 5th last year that explained why Bessler started using the letter Z for the number 2 starting with MT52). I know that I'm only an SoS disciple wannabe around here, but sometimes I think my little clue findings are kind of like wetting myself while wearing dark pants. It gives me a warm feeling, but nobody else notices!

      Brad

      Delete
    8. Poor Brad sounds like he's frustrated at still being low man on the totem pole of clue analysts around here. If it's any consolation, then just consider that about 90% of the regulars here aren't even on that totem pole!

      You need to just hang in there and keep finding your little clues here and there. Eventually, you will find the big ones like SoS and DoSoS seem to do regularly and with ease. But, it takes time to develop their skills and you need to be patient. I think those two get so much attention because they deliver spectacular new clues and those are what the regulars here are hungry for. Feed them what they want and before you know it, you will find yourself near the top of the totem pole and also enjoying their status on this blog.

      Delete
  10. Tired of seeing Bessler in those two drab engraved portraits of him at the beginning of DT? Well, now you can see what he would have looked like, thanks to AI, if he'd sat for an oil painting for his first DT portrait!

    https://postimg.cc/MfJ3cXrB

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for that portrait anon 11:07. I also have a copy of Bessler’s portrait in colour done npby my good friend Bill McMurtry who is graphic artist. I’d post am image but I need to get his approval first

      JC

      Delete
    2. Here's the second DT portrait done by a different AI program. The colors are nice, but it messed up many of the foreground and background tools. The eyeglasses he holds now have three lenses and the cherubim have disappeared from the organ!

      https://i.postimg.cc/ydvxJk78/2nd-portrait-in-color.png

      Also notice that Bessler's face does not look quite the same as the one in the 1st portrait.

      If one wants accurate artwork, then use Grok instead of ChatGPT!

      Delete
    3. Whenever I'm stuck for new ideas about how Bessler's wheels worked, I do the "Bessler Boogie-Woogie Rock 'n Roll" move to help stimulate blood flow to my aging, shriveling up brain. Try it if you're having trouble with your latest wheel design! I can guarantee you that it will work for you if you give it a try.

      https://relativity.tripod.com/webonmediacontents/animatedportrait.gif?1344277865890

      Delete
    4. its not all A.I , i had to go in and draw and fix it before i posted that image : https://postimg.cc/Y4vgcx2K

      Delete
    5. @JC. I used Grok to make an oil painting version of McMurtry's print. I think his version looks better!

      https://i.postimg.cc/DzqGC7db/bessler-studies-pm.jpg

      Delete
  11. Ne fonctionne pas

    ReplyDelete
  12. FIRST ATTEMPT at simming the "Bessler Workaround"!

    I gave it a try and, obviously, what I came up with is VERY crude, but I do believe it is showing some action in agreement with what JC thinks the connected scissor mechs will do. When anon 08:31 said that simming scissor mechs was a pain, he wasn't kidding. Anyway, I did the best I could and just guessed where to attach the connecting cord between the two scissor mechs. Here it is:

    https://i.postimg.cc/4dy14XFR/first-try-with-sim.gif

    It would help matters if JC could give us the distances between the various pivots in his scissor pieces as well as the mass of the weights he's using. I made my weights 5 pounds each, but that is probably too heavy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that this workaround can be initially tested with just two of the scissor arms as you tried to do. But, the arms have to be made as close to JC's as possible. As you suggest, JC needs to supply the various distances in his build from pivot to pivot in either inches or centimeters. Once the cord arrangement is found that makes the two connected arms work correctly together, it should be a simple matter to add the remaining three arms to the wheel and then test the full wheel.

      Delete
    2. I’m trying to write more information. I hope to publish more tomorrow or Tuesday

      JC

      Delete
    3. He should also show us where he's attached the cords to the scissors and where, on the disc, he's been placing the eyelets which, iinm, he's using instead of pulleys.

      Delete
    4. Hopefully this drawing can help John provide us with the values needed to accurately sim his Bessler workaround design. He needs to just download the image, open it with paint, and add in the needed distances in either inches or centimeters, and then show the revised drawing on this blog or upload the new image back to postimages.com. Also, if he can supply the mass of the end weights and show what points the ends of the cord are attached to and the location of the eyelet for the cord, then that would be very helpful. Also, the masses of the scissor sections must be considered. Assuming that all pieces have the same cross section area, then what is the mass per unit length of the pieces?

      https://i.postimg.cc/br6s15Pj/Values-needed-for-sims.jpg

      Delete
    5. Oops! I forgot another necessary measurement which is the distance from the center of the red dot at the end of the "scissor guide arm" to the point on that arm to which a scissor pivot is attached. The needed measurement is labeled H in this drawing:

      https://postimg.cc/DWqhz8gF

      Delete
    6. If the wheel is 2m in diameter, the rest is proportional

      Delete
    7. No, he said in the prior blog that his MDF disc was 36 inches in diameter. But, still it's better if he supplies the actual measurements from his wheel instead of us trying to estimate them from his photo.

      Delete
    8. I've worked with MDF in the past and for a disc of that material that is 36 inches in diameter and, say, 3/8 inch in thickness, I'd estimate a mass of about 10 pounds. JC may provide us with the masses of the weights and lever material he used (did he say it was aluminum?), but he's not going to remove all of the parts from his wheel's MDF disc and weigh it for us.

      Delete
    9. I've almost got another more accurate two scissor sim ready for testing. But, I still need to know where the cord attachment points on the scissors are supposed to be as well as where to place the pulley/eyelet for the cord. Without that info, I will have to guess where to place them.

      Delete
  13. the distances to the various points won't change anything that would make it work. The 'principle' isn't leverage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The principle included an extra force that lifted hard and fast !

      Delete
    2. What extra force do you think it was?

      Delete
    3. a spring application rapidly discharging its stored force & energy , then slowly resetting again by gravity later , until needed to " fire " again in the cycle - - thus the aggressive nature of the lift ..

      Delete
    4. But, there are no springs in John's design.

      Delete
    5. @anon 03:57...which is why I doubt if he actually has B's design because we know it did use springs somehow.

      Delete
    6. let's wait & see how the simmers get on . springs & separators can be used to keep SB's in shape & help maintain their integrity . the simmers may need to do that although it may be optional in a real build depending on size & proportions . so they may yet have a purpose in JC's build .

      Delete
    7. IIRC, John said he would "consider" using springs to cushion the impacts of the weights against the stops in a wheel's rotating drum. But, I think those springs Bessler avoided talking about played a much larger role in the operation of his wheels. I think he mainly avoided discussing them because he wanted to discourage anyone suggesting that his pm wheels were just windup spring powered fakes like the one that Wagner built and which he openly said was a fake and even provided a diagram of it. See its schematic here:

      http://www.besslerswheel.com/assets/images/wagners_wheel.jpg

      Delete
    8. " A mere turnspit is what he's talking about, as you can see! My Mobile is free of all such nonsense. Springs and weights of the kind he [Wagner] describes are not to be found in my machine! " AP pg 347

      " When he put the wheel onto another support and reinstalled the weights in their previous positions, he pushed down on an iron spring that gave a loud noise as it expanded upwards. " Wolff 1715

      " Springs and weights OF THE KIND ( the qualifier ) he [Wagner] describes " - means energy pre loaded and stored into internal springs i.e. spring driven manually wound up mechs , which need rewinding once the energy is completely discharged - not true PM .

      From JC's MT .. MT18 wrt springs ..

      No. 18 This is the previous spring-model, and it seems to be good, but seeming is different from being. In the meantime, the PRINCIPLE should not be disdained or entirely disregarded, for it says more than it shows. I, however, will show more than speak of it at the appropriate place.

      2007 MT Hard Copy .. No. 18. This is similar to the previous spring-model, and it seems to be good, but seeming is different from being. At the same time, however, the PRINCIPLE is not to be scorned or disregarded, for it tells more than it shows. I however, will show more than I tell about it in the proper place.

      ** paraphrased ** the weights were lifted in a flash - speaks for itself ! - i.e. with force , to have a quick acceleration and high transition speed - probably B. was not worried about impact energy losses of decelerating a weight against a stop or rim etc at the end of its lift journey to OOB - suggesting to me a large excess of available force to use for the " lift " ! - in effect a self-winding spring powered wheel that could deliver a powerful thrust to " weights " when required to launch them etc ..

      Springs can deliver a powerful force - within a wheel any speculated prime mover spring application would have to be periodically reset by gravity input to its components ..

      JMO's -f

      Delete
    9. How is gravity going to reset springs so quickly? There’s almost no time for that to happen.

      Delete
    10. anon 21:52 said .. " How is gravity going to reset springs so quickly? There’s almost no time for that to happen. "

      from JC's DT .. " When he put the wheel onto another support and reinstalled the weights in their previous positions, he pushed down on an iron spring that gave a loud noise as it expanded upwards. " Wolff 1715

      " When he put the wheel onto another support and reinstalled the WEIGHTS ( multiple - all the weights ) in their previous positions, he pushed down on AN IRON SPRING ( singular - one spring ) that gave a loud noise as it expanded upwards. " Wolff 1715

      As you point out there is little time ,,, for a spring for each weight ( say 8 ) ! - so imo not springs plural but spring singular - Wolff suggests one spring was pushed on - imo , one prime mover ( creuz / cross going around with the wheel ) containing a spring loaded prodding mechanism to lift " weights " into OOB and surplus positive torque .. imo more crosses , weights , and pulls means more prime movers fitted ..

      Circling back to the lack of time available thought ( and to suggest more practical time availability ) perhaps we can think about the implications of the " connectedness principle " ( hung together / connected together PRINCIPLE ) mentioned in MT9 ..

      MT9 shows a common daisy chained design which we all know does not work UNLESS a lever-weight ( lw ) is given a strategic and hard push upwards - if the push force is quick , and hard enough , it will lift the intended lw and by physical connection via cordage to its neighbour lift it as well into even more OOB , and potentially others following - we would have a runner on our hands ..

      * MT13 says it needs a lift like lightening .. * MT15 has 3 different OOB methods ( principles ) in the one wheel - all need to be quick lifted into OOB to be a runner - it / they needs a prime mover ..

      MT20 says the horse needs to be in front of the cart - we have all wondered at great length about this cryptic comment - was the outer flip-weight the horse or the cart ? - and the drop-weight the horse ? - or was it the other way around ? - imo neither is the horse - they are both the cart - the horse needs to be added to be a runner ..

      Back to the lack of practical time conundrum - one prime mover potentially gives us more time - but how does this relate to the connectedness principle mentioned in MT9 ? - imagine as a metaphor a loose chain looped around the rim of a wheel and hanging - prod it outwards on the descending side into OOB ( the chain can temporarily hold its post-prod position ) - keep prodding it at the same place and it will keep revolving the wheel from an excess of torque - the same would happen for MT9 OOB system and the likes of if it were also strategically prodded at the same place etc ..

      ** consider the Toy's Page - we have items A & B , at first glance they could be imagined as like chain links ( wrt context of connectedness ) - consider the vertical extendable and retractable Storks Bill with an arrow head ..

      ** other MT's tell the story that they don't show the correct application of the SB , and that there is something special behind SB's ..

      Enough to go on with for now ..

      JMO's - f

      Delete
    11. Here's one of my favorite Bessler quotes:

      "Wagner describes how he thinks my machine is constructed; he babbles about "excess weights" being snatched along, by means of "internal motive power", in a frequently-repeated cycle of up and down movements. According to him, Nature dictates that things gravitate downwards. But the weights which rest below must, IN A FLASH, be raised upwards, and it is this that Wagner cannot force himself to accept. BUT, CRAZY WAGNER, JUST NOTE THAT THAT IS INDEED THE CASE WITH MY DEVICE. But if anyone should presume to say that my Wheel is definitely such-and-such without having seen it, he is a fool and a fantasizer of the first order. He deserves to have a donkey's tail affixed to his lying rump."

      Here's an interesting old Ken B video I found on youtube:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnHy7qZnpI4

      Ken is obviously very committed to the use of Y shaped levers in his design and various clues found by others here over the years seem to support their use. As he shows his design in his video completing a single rotation, notice what is happening to a weight arm as it moves from 9:00 to 10:30. It does rise back toward its stop at the greatest speed compared to all of the other weight arms ahead of it as they also move toward their stops. Someone watching an uncovered drum of one of Bessler's wheels might have noticed how rapidly the 9:00 to 10:30 moving weights were rising and could have described them, as Bessler did, as rising upward "in a flash". Also, when a lever is at 9:00, its weight arm is literally "hanging below" a horizontal line drawn through the wheel's axle. At that location, the weight arm looks like it is completely supported by a stretched spring and another cord. So, that lever's weight is actually momentarily stationary with respect to its lever's pivot, but then undergoes very rapid acceleration because of the other torques applied to it by the cords connecting it to other levers and the stretched springs attached to those levers.

      Delete
    12. @anon 00:53
      He does have an interesting design and the weights from 9 to 10;30 do appear to fly up rapidly. However, I wouldn't exactly call it happening "in a flash". That description could have just been an exaggeration by Bessler intended to make his wheels seem more powerful than they actually were. Bessler tended to exaggerate things to try to attract buyers, imo. I could accept the Ken B wheel as "the" solution IF John's Bessler workaround wheel eventually turns into another dead duck to be added to our growing pile of them. Hopefully, that won't happen.
      I don't want to seem impatient (although I am!), but we need to see more and better sims of John's approach. Assuming that an extending scissor near the bottom of his five weight wheel does manage to make the weight ahead of it shoot up "in a flash", then what keeps that weight there and nearer the axle as the weight behind it that lifted it is next shot up "in a flash" by the collapsing scissor mechanism following it? Well, maybe how this happens will become apparent when John finally gives us some more details like he promised to do. I agree with those here that say we need to see how John intended to attach the scissors to each other with a cord.

      Delete
    13. "But the weights which rest below must, IN A FLASH, be raised upwards, and it is this that Wagner cannot force himself to accept."

      Maybe what Bessler meant here is that the ascending side weights in his wheels actually rose faster than the descending side weights fell? I guess that would then result in more weights on the wheel's descending than ascending side and that is how the imbalance was maintained?

      Delete
    14. @anon 04:45. If the weights are attached to levers whose pivots were fixed around the circumference of a drum, then it should be impossible for the ascending side weights to rise faster than the descending side weights fell.

      Delete
    15. There was a guy who showed up here years ago and had a REALLY weird ob pm wheel design which, as usual, he claimed was the same as Bessler's. His design had a unique feature to it. All of its weights always stayed on the descending side of the wheel as it rotated! Impossible you say? Not when you saw how he did it. As the weights, carried in a special structure, came down the descending side of the wheel, they compressed a spring attached to a lever that was then locked down with a catch. Around 5;00 a weight, which was just a ball of lead, would roll over into position on the lever and hit and release the catch. The ball would then be fired upward as the spring pushed up on the lever and would land in the pocket of a higher up mechanism coming down the descending side of the wheel. I think his wheel had eight such mechanisms. The design required precise timing, but someone made a sim showing it could actually work. IIRC, he even had a design that was bidirectional! After a while, interest in his "ballistic wheel" faded and this blog moved onto other designs and topics. But, imo, he had one of the most unique designs I'd ever seen. I'm surprised that no one tried to build it. Anyone save a image of it?

      Delete
  14. Anon 21:52: “There’s almost no time for that to happen”
    I have to agree with you about that. There’s no time for anything to happen really inside a 10-12 foot drum rotating at 26, 40, or 50 rpm’s.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you claim there is insufficient time for the weights to reset on a wheel's descending side because that side is actually dropping almost as fast as a weight would fall due to gravity. That is a false assumption to make...assuming that you are making it. You have to think of the weights moving along with the wheel's descending side as having the speed of the wheel to which the increased speed due to gravity must be added.
      For example, if someone was in an elevator at the top of a very tall building and it was made to drop at, say, a constant speed of 100 mph, then, if a person inside of the elevator dropped a ball during the high speed descent of the elevator, the ball's speed, relative to the earth, would be 100 mph PLUS whatever speed the ball gained from the downward pull of gravity as it approached the floor of the elevator.

      Delete

Did Bessler Invent Two solutions?

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 ...