Recently I suggested that Johann Bessler might have invented two solutions to his perpetual motion machine. I considered this possibility because of the history of the Landgrave’s offer of patronage to help Bessler try to sell his machine. Bessler had been invited to show his machine to Karl the Landgrave of Hesse, but the distance now, between Draschwitz and Kassel is over 130 miles now and journeys could take weeks for distances covered in hours today. Travellers relied on personal carriages, walking, or local wagons. Stagecoaches had begun to connect a few major towns, although service was infrequent and slow due to poor road conditions.
There is no mention of a carriage being sent to fetch him, and there would be no chance of Bessler showing the Landgrave his latest machine in his own home. It must, therefore, have been a small model of his perpetual motion machine, small enough to fit in a case on the stage coach or on horseback. Or possibly, the model he showed Karl could have been a disassembled version but whatever the truth, it had to be portable and still convincing enough for Karl to give it his seal of approval.
If Karl formed his initial opinion of Bessler’s wheel, from his examination of a small version of the PM machine, then its apparent simplicity might have been misleading. I always wondered if the inventor, having found the solution, subsequently improved it to make it more powerful. He did improve the design of the Merseburg wheel making it able to rotate in either direction and I expect that each version incorporated improvements
Karl was reported as expressing surprise that no one had discovered the solution before and Bessler himself, commented that when the secret is revealed, he is afraid that people will complain that the idea is so simple it is not worth the asking price.
This leads me to the conclusion that I, at least, am probably overthinking the problem. I’m trying too hard to use every clue he left us. Maybe they refer to his larger more complex models? All we really need is working model achieved with a simple concept, possibly eliminating scissor mechanisms, ropes and pulleys. Some may now suspect I’m underthinking the problem!
So I do have an idea that might work, but I’ll share it once I’ve tested it.
JC
"It must, therefore, have been a small model of his perpetual motion machine, small enough to fit in a case on the stage coach or on horseback."
ReplyDeleteSounds like you just came to the same conclusion Ken B did in his Bessler book that came out, iirc, in 2019. Yes, being "low born", Bessler would not have expected the count to come over to Merseburg to view the Merseburg wheel (assuming Bessler had not already axed it), it would have been Bessler who had to make the trip over to Kassal to convince the count. His prototype wheel was only 36 inches in diameter and even if he left the little weights in it, he could have easily carried it and its support base in both hands. A carriage, dispensed by the count, could have been used to take Bessler and his prototype wheel over to Weissenstein Castle so he could demo it for the count. I wish we had more details of what the count saw, but of course part of his promise to Bessler was to never reveal any of that until after the invention was sold which unfortunately never happened.
There is no documentary evidence that Karl sent a carriage to pick up Bessler, although there is a document showing that Karl ordered a wagon to bring Bessler and his family to Kassel, but only after an agreement had been reached once Kar had accepted Bessler’s wheel as genuine.
ReplyDeleteAlso there is no documentary evidence describing his prototype wheel, nor any indication of its size.
JC
"So it was that at the house of the Richters (On the hill called Nickelsberg) in the year 1712 I achieved the discovery of the wondrous device that has amazed the world so much. My industry was spared the curses which accompanied the earlier efforts. The machine stood 3 feet (schuch) high, and was mounted in such a fashion that anyone could walk all around it. On unfastening a bolt, the wheel immediately began to revolve. Whoever wished to push it or touch it at any point was free to do so. People could see there was no trickery involved, so I didn't suffer in any way!"
DeleteI think that German word "schuch" actually refers to the diameter of his Gera prototype wheel's drum and not the height of its top above the floor or a tabletop (another possible mistranslation). IIRC there's another translation somewhere saying the top of the wheel was 3.5 feet or 42 inches off of the floor. If the prototype wheel's drum was 3 feet or 36 inches in diameter and its support base held the bottom of the drum 0.5 feet or 6 inches above the top of the floor, then the top of the drum would have been 3.5 feet or 42 inches off of the floor.
ffs ! how many times do you have to be shown for you to remember something. the gera wheel size is given in GB, AP, DT, and by Wagner as 5 foot diameter. the wheel you are talking about was the first runner the public could view, which he later destroyed. the first device he mentions a few pages earlier in AP he said could revolve a little, and no dimensions are given. in AP when describing other wheels he also says "high" indicating diameter because he includes engravings and measurement legends to corroborate.
Delete@anon 00:29
DeleteMany here believe that Bessler had two Gera wheels. The first was a 3 ft diameter prototype wheel that he build after he had constructed MT 13 and figured out how to make it work because of the "rare" dream he had which he considered a miracle from God. That happened sometime in late 1711. The second Gera wheel was 4.5 ft in diameter and that is the one that was on some sort of mobile frame so he could take it outdoors and publicly demonstrate it to a small crowd who had gathered after reading an announcement of the demonstration in their local newspaper which was probably a single sheet that was tacked up on the side of Gera town hall. The first demonstration of that wheel was on June 6th, 1712. He did eventually destroy that second Gera wheel before moving to Draschwitz, but he kept the smaller prototype with him as he moved from town to town. It would have been the smaller wheel that he physically brought to Karl in Kassal to show him his secret pm wheel mechanics. After seeing it, Karl immediately agreed to house Bessler and his family and fund the construction of the mighty Kassal wheel.
Here's an artist's impression of what the second Gera wheel MAY have looked like as it was demonstrated outdoors. The drawing is from a site called orffyre.tripod.com which now seems to have recently disappeared from the web for some reason. Maybe tripod is deleting their under performing free subdomains that aren't getting enough views (and eyeballs seeing ads!) to justify the cost of keeping them on their servers?
Deletehttps://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%2Fid%2FOIP.4xLUtJTtupweNu_3EsE_PwHaGK%3Fpid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=4fd6c16c3ffd64a9d8e53eb31fae60485527f2f7f1004f300b8a2356dbe507eb
you can believe what you want . learn the difference between your beliefs and fact . no runner was ever demonstrated outdoors .
Delete@anon 21:01 Neither you nor anyone else here will ever have all of the facts about Bessler's life or pm wheels. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Unless you can provide a written quote BY BESSLER stating that he never demonstrated any of his wheels outdoors, then it remains possible that he did. When dealing with the Bessler wheel mystery, one must move beyond his vague writings and apply probable scenarios to the mystery to make any real progress. Most here are willing to do that and, if you won't or can't, then that's fine...for YOU.
DeleteThe problem is YOU present your beliefs as facts to direct the narrative and influence newbs
DeleteYet, anon 21:29 has a point. Anon 21:01 stated that Bessler's wheels where never demonstrated out of doors, yet when challenged to point out where BESSLER actually said that, he cannot. He's basing his "facts" on things not mentioned and not on what was mentioned. In my book that's just an assumption he is making so he's really no different from others here who are also making assumptions, but he wants everyone to think he's somehow more diligent or scientific in his approach than they are. He's not...he's only posturing.
DeleteYAWN , you can't prove a negative . The burden of proof is on YOU .
DeleteDouble yawn! You can prove a negative by proving a contradictory positive. Where is the quote by Bessler where he says he ALWAYS demonstrated his wheels indoors? Please show it to us IF you can which you can't! 🤔
DeleteIDIOT !!!
DeleteNo! Anon 22:56 is NOT an "idiot" even if he sounds like one! He's just wrong and there's nothing wrong with that.
DeleteThis is how conspiracy theories are developed , people choose to build "facts" on non provable subjects , this is their general Modus operandi .
DeleteI agree...like the "fact" that Bessler never demoed a wheel outside a house even though he never wrote that he did not do so. There is a newspaper report back then mentioning that he planned to demo his Merseburg wheel at some festival, but had to cancel due to some illness he had at the time.
DeleteSpeculation is a prominent part of this mystery , nothing wrong to speculate as long as one is willing to admit it .
DeleteSolving the mechanics of a Bessler runner has proved way more difficult than anyone probably imagined . The smallest detail or accuracy may prove to be critical to finally unraveling it . Dressing up opinions and presenting them as facts goes the other direction . Anon 13:30 Paraphrased and if I remember it correctly Bessler was presented with a wager by a group of gentlemen. One wager condition was to demonstrate a wheel outdoors (this is part of what the newspaper article was about) and have it translocated from one position to another . Bessler resisted this wager and subsequently the condition for an outdoors demo was dropped by the group offering the wager but the rest stood . Bessler then built and publicly demonstrated the Merseburg bi-directional wheel and ran the public translocation tests , indoors . JC's books , Wagners accounts , and newspaper articles should provide you the greater recorded context and detail for accuracy if you seek it .
DeleteOne of the uses Bessler proposed for his wheels was to pump water out of flooded coal mines. That would have required a wheel mounted on some sort of portable frame that could be taken to a mine entrance and set up, then have a wheel's axle and drum placed on it, and then have its axle attached to some sort of water pump. I don't think Bessler would have "resisted" doing an outdoor demonstration if he had to. But, why bother for a simple bet with a few skeptics? One of Bessler's main concerns was securing the secret of his wheels and having one left outside would decrease a wheel's security unless it had multiple guards watching it 24/7. Indoors, is a different story. The wheel can be permanently contained in a single room whose doors and windows can be securely locked. Placing the wheel on a second floor adds an extra degree of security because a thief would have to use a ladder and break glass to gain access to the wheel's room.
DeleteAm I the only one who senses that JC, the "old leopard" who most here believe can never change his spots, is growing more desperate with each new blog to escape from his futile pentagonal quagmire? But, eating bats captured from a cave is not the way to do it. He needs to heed the many new clues showing up on his blog because they all point to a new path for him and others to follow. May almighty God grant him the courage and strength to get on that new path while there's still time for him to do so.
ReplyDeletehttps://static.scientificamerican.com/dam/asset/2ca5bb6a-667c-4535-96ce-8cb34ed53752/2026-04-20-NEWS-Bat-cave-interactions_GIF.gif?m=1776803605.292&w=1000
No chance. I’m confident that the need for five mechanisms will be proven one day. Scissor mechanisms or Storksbills might not be needed but only if an action similar to SBs can be found.
DeleteJC
"Scissor mechanisms or Storksbills might not be needed but only if an action similar to SBs can be found."
DeleteMaybe this can help you:
https://i.postimg.cc/nLrhppgx/mechs-for-jc.jpg
I also think that JC is finally running on fumes when it comes to new ideas for Bessler's wheels. Once his creative engine finally conks out, it may never start again. Notice he wrote "I’m confident that the need for five mechanisms will be proven one day." That phrasing tells me he doesn't expect to solve the wheel in his remaining years, but can only now hope that some future research will be able to use his clues and codes to find a solution and then give some credit to JC. IOW, he's giving up on gaining recognition in the present, but hopes for it posthumously. I wish him luck with that plan, but I want my fame and fortune while I'm still breathing so I can enjoy them.
Delete"I also think that JC is finally running on fumes when it comes to new ideas for Bessler's wheels."
DeleteThe closer to the truth --- the lesser the variables , the further away from the truth --- the more variables .
You don't seem to be in any position of idea-authority .
Thanks anon 15:40. But it has to be able to react to gravity, horizontally in contracting as well as expanding. SBs are the only mechanism I’m aware of that can act in this manner.
ReplyDeleteJC
I think his design might be made to "react to gravity". When the telescope is horizontal and at a wheel's 3 o'clock, it would extend a weight at its end out and away from the wheel's axle. Then, 180° cw later, when his mechanism is at the wheel's 9 o'clock, the extended weight will be retracted back again and closer to the axle.
Delete@ anon 16:32
DeleteHere's what I came up with to make that telescoping thing work like JC wants it to. I replaced the pulleys with two weighted wood discs with rubber on their rims that can as, as a pm wheel's drum rotates cw from 3:00 to 9:00, cause the telescoping sleeve with the big weight on its end to move out away from the wheel's axle and then back toward its axle again. To prevent slippage, the wood discs could be replaced with metal gears whose teeth mesh with a rack of teeth on the sleeve. Although less reliable, it would be quieter using the discs instead of the gears.
https://i.postimg.cc/fWFKnfqb/Untitled.jpg
@anon 17:13...I think you messed up your drawing. The discs on the bottoms have to be rotating in the opposite direction to the discs on the tops so both discs on a mechanism will work to push the sleeve and its end weight in the same direction.
DeleteNo need to keep guessing what that simple perpetual motion wheel design was that Bessler showed Count Karl. I had a friend in a university library over in Germany that sent me a photo he made of something years ago that could show what that original design actually looked like. I'll dig around in my image files and see if I can find it for you guys. Give me a day or so to find it...if I still have it somewhere, that is.
DeleteFound it!
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/wBDKTwq7/bessler-s-simple-pm-wheel.png
Nice AI fake but i don't think it will fool anyone. Also, it looks balanced.
DeleteIt looks like a simplified version of the Edward Somerset wheel. His didn't work either:
Deletehttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alejandro-Jenkins/publication/51942050/figure/fig1/AS:305849785438210@1449931679602/Overbalanced-wheel-conceived-by-Edward-Somerset-2nd-Marquess-of-Worcester-circa-1640.png
It looks like a possibility to me. The weights on the two diagonal beams cancel each other out. The vertical beam weights have a slight counter clockwise torque, but the horizontal beam weights have significantly more torque in the clockwise direction. Where is my reasoning wrong?
DeleteI like this Bessler "simple" wheel too, anon 13:34. I think it should be simmed. Maybe the secret of turning it into a runner is to adjust the lengths of the two ropes attached to each weight so that they are not equal in length?
DeleteJC wrote "All we really need is working model achieved with a simple concept, possibly eliminating scissor mechanisms, ropes and pulleys...So I do have an idea that might work, but I’ll share it once I’ve tested it."
ReplyDeleteWhy not share it now before you "test it"?
LOL! No, anon 13:19, he won't ever be sharing that "simple concept" with anyone here or over on bwf. He made that grand mistake with his previous "bright shiny object" also known as his "Bessler workaround" (or "BWA 1.0") which a quick sim showed was just another one of his pentagonal delusions. He then quickly followed its failure with an announcement about finding some new clues that showed it only needed an extra rope added to it to finally turn it into a runner ("BWA 2.0"), but they were never revealed and never will be. As a substitute all we are being given is yet another replay of his decade+ year old clues again...the same ones that only led up to his recent BWA 1.0 dead duck design! Apparently, he's hoping others will find something in them that he missed.
DeleteBut then he was suddenly without his bright shiny object that he had used for years to tease everyone here with and which created the illusion that he somehow had superior knowledge of Bessler's wheels. How depressing that must have been for him to lose that. What to do about it? Simple...now we are being told Bessler actually had TWO pentagonal wheel designs!!! That SECOND design, which no one other than JC ever suspected existed, was carpenter's boy "simple", with a single glance immediately convinced Karl to fund Bessler's giant Weissenstein Castle wheel, and, most importantly, ONLY JC knows how it might have worked!!! Hallelujah!!! He has now found his SECOND shiny object and whether or not he actually does is totally irrelevant. All that really counts for him is that YOU and others here BELIEVE he does.
Already he's got you begging for more information about it which, of course, he won't provide. Now watch as the months roll by and he occasionally lets slip that he's "making progress" with it and will "soon" reveal all "whether it works or not". He's played that game for years on this blog with his former and now discarded bright shiny object and he reasons he can easily continue playing it with his brand new bright shiny object...Bessler's OTHER SIMPLER design which ONLY HE knows how it works! He's very happy about all of this now, but his bliss will only last as long as he reveals nothing about it. He will make absolutely sure that THIS TIME he won't be revealing anything about it other than a few vague hints now and then and you can mark my words on that. Like someone else here said "a leopard does not change its spots" and neither does JC!
The Sage
The Sage by name but not by nature. Sage - a profoundly wise person, often aged, so not you then. Bit of a troll?
DeleteJC
That sage guy has been here before. It seems his self-appointed mission is to shine a big uncomfortable spotlight on every hypocritical thing JC does on this blog. Admittedly, he does point out a lot of embarrassing things which seem to be accurate. However, I wouldn't let him get under my skin if I was JC. He might be looking for a reaction from JC to see if he managed to hit a nerve. Don't give him that satisfaction! In general, ignoring trolls is the best policy. Denied the attention they crave, they soon disappear and go elsewhere looking for it.
DeleteGuy almost wrote a whole book of words where a simple comment could have sufficed .
DeleteAgreed, anon 10:38. That "Sage" character could have just said that JC is a delusional pentagon pm wheel chaser who for years got his ego thrills by trying to make everyone here think he knew more about B's wheels than they did when he really didn't and then just leave it at that. I guess our sage doesn't realize that we already know all of that! 🥱
DeleteKeep your eyes fixed on JC's SECOND bright shiny object in the link below and silently repeat the following to yourself:
DeleteJC is the ultimate expert on Bessler's wheels.
JC has found the secret of Bessler's second simpler wheel.
JC did this because he is the reincarnation of Bessler.
I will believe everything JC tells me.
I will buy a dozen copies of each of JC's books.
I will never believe anything told to me by anyone who disagrees with JC in any way.
https://i.giphy.com/14xFsgRiCff4C4.webp
Repeat this method at least five times per day until you begin to dream nightly about a giant glowing pentagon floating over your head. That is the same dream that God sent to Bessler to help him find the secret of pentagonal pm. Once your treatment is completed, you may proudly consider yourself a born again disciple of JC!
Reads like jealousy
DeleteGad dang it...dat shiny object hypnosis stuff sure enough works...I tried it for five minutes and when I closes my eyes I can sees a large glowing pentagon thing...I also feels the need to buys a bunch of John's books! Everybody here should gives it a try. Now wherd I put my credit card? I's got a pile of them somewhere and one should still not be maxxed out alls the way...Thanky kindly to anon 15.25 for giving us this nice method to try so we cans become born again disciples of JC...not for the Jesus Christ JC...but for the John Collins JC!
DeleteHmm...It pains me to say it, but I find myself agreeing with a lot of what the Sage wrote about JC!
DeleteJC, imo, should have revealed what he was working on YEARS earlier so it could be simmed to determine if it was, in fact, a runner. But, obsessed with keeping all the credit to himself, JC did not do that. He kept procrastinating, repeatedly making and breaking promises to placate those complaining about his endless delays, and continually disappointing long time members of this blog. Earlier disclosure followed by his design being found to be useless after accurate simming, could have given him years of extra time to seek a different approach. All of those years he could have had were totally wasted and can never be recovered. Now he's an octogenarian and his building and testing days are mostly if not completely behind him. His case should serve to illustrate how too much secrecy can backfire and sabotage one's progress. Each of us pm wheel chasers are only granted so many productive years and when they are used up, they are used up...forever.
John, I think you are definitely over/under thinking things. If weeks of travel is how things got done then that's how they got done. Certainly Karl could make transportation happen, and would there necessarily be a surviving document reporting it? Is there any reason to believe that he couldn't have spent weeks building a new wheel at Karl's location? Even if a small wheel WAS used for Karl's demonstration why would a different design be necessary. A larger wheel based on the same design would be more powerful. I don't understand the point of this post.
ReplyDelete"I don't understand the point of this post."
DeleteThe point is rather obvious. JC couldn't get his pet pentagon scissor mech wheel aka BWA 1.0 to run despite his occasionally working with it. When it was finally, after years of requests, revealed, it was seen to be a somewhat complex design that no one, especially Count Karl, could fairly describe as "...so simple a carpenter's boy could...". That required JC to cook up a second design...a simpler version, sans scissors, that someone like the count could describe as "very simple". Was the Kassal wheel just an oversized version of Bessler's second simpler wheel? Good question which will have to remain unanswered until JC's hypothesized "second simpler wheel" is finally seen. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen though.
I’m amazed at some people’s ability to read my mind, it’s uncanny how accurate they are - not! They know what I was thinking years before I knew. There is so much hate and jealousy apparent in the vindictive language they use. They pretend it’s humorous or ironic but it’s just plain nasty.
DeleteJC
Plain nasty? So far everything I've read above seems to be accurate although definitely told in a satirical way especially by "The Sage". Maybe it annoys you because it truthfully exposes your various foibles and failings? I've noticed over the years that you always acted like it was your destiny to solve the Bessler wheel and now that that is seeming less and less likely, you are having difficulty adjusting to that reality?
DeleteJohn is not the subject of this blog .
DeleteI’m the author/creator of this blog.
DeleteJC
These people have a habit of making you the subject of discussion instead of your presented subject .
Delete"Anon 27 April 2026 at 14:32 wrote
DeleteJohn, I think you are definitely over/under thinking things. If weeks of travel is how things got done then that's how they got done. Certainly Karl could make transportation happen, and would there necessarily be a surviving document reporting it?"
Karl asked for & had his private viewing to prove a runner was genuine, which was a condition of his payment to Bessler & future support. There are no records available that I have seen of where this viewing and audience took place. So Karl could have gone to Bessler or Bessler gone to Karl & we may never know.
"Is there any reason to believe that he couldn't have spent weeks building a new wheel at Karl's location?"
He may have spent weeks building a demo runner at Karl's invitation & under Karl's roof. However in DT he says it took him about 6 months to build a runner, which he said good craftsmen could knock out in much shorter time. It seems more likely he either built a model while as a guest of Karl, or he took a model with him (or had one ready to go if Karl came to him) etc that showed the working principle behind a runner. One thing against Bessler traveling to Karl & then building under his roof from scratch is that Bessler would have to sleep etc. That leaves a lot of risk & opportunity for someone to sneak a peek & steal his secret. The risk to me seems too large to build a model on site under Karl's roof. On balance I think it more likely Bessler took a disassembled & packaged up model to Karl, which he then reassembled, to control the security & situation as best he could.
"Even if a small wheel WAS used for Karl's demonstration why would a different design be necessary. A larger wheel based on the same design would be more powerful. I don't understand the point of this post."
I think it more likely he found one working principle, & other than refinements and improvements with each iteration he would stick to that basic tried & true mechanical principle. Some items might be able to be swapped out for others but the same basic principle of self-movement mechanics would be common to all iterations in my opinion.
"I think it more likely he found one working principle, & other than refinements and improvements with each iteration he would stick to that basic tried & true mechanical principle."
DeleteExactly! Once you get the right basic recipe, you stick with it. Any modifications he made to later wheels would have been necessitated by the increasing sizes and masses of their parts and the extra mechanisms needed for them to be bidirectional.
While others here have been busy mocking JC for his past mistakes, I've been taking his "Two Wheel Solution Hypothesis" very seriously!
ReplyDeleteThe idea is something that I've seen occasionally hinted at on this blog in the past, but no one ever carried through on it with an actual design drawing. I do agree 100% with JC that Karl would not have described Bessler's invention as "very simple" and "wondered why no one else had thought of it", have paid the full cost of the construction of the huge Kassal wheel, have allowed it to be built in his castle, gave Bessler a lucrative government job, and also have given Bessler's entire family free room and board if Bessler had shown him a small prototype wheel loaded with a confusing number of springs and lever connection cords. It needed to be something much simpler which would immediately have convinced Karl that Bessler had indeed found the secret of mechanical perpetual motion. But, what was it?
As many know, I hope to one day achieve the numerological abilities of my hero SoS on this blog, but I do occasionally dabble by making designs of my own. Unfortunately, all of my past designs here were quickly shot down as being unworkable and I then felt the need to apologize to everyone for wasting their time with them. However, I think I can now provide with some detail what the simple wheel model was that Bessler showed Karl to convinced him Bessler had a working design. Later today when I can find some time, I'll make a paint sketch to illustrate it.
Brad
PS Also, people need to stop being mean to JC here. I wonder how they would feel if all of their past mistakes were being collected, regularly updated, and then documented online? People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones as they say. Everyone has some skeletons in their closets that they want to keep there!
Thank you Brad, your kind support is much appreciated. I know I have a history of broken promises and over-enthusiastic posts, but in my defence I would like to say that extreme self-confidence and optimism is a vital ingredient for Bessler wheel researchers.
DeleteI have occasionally apologised for missed promises and here again, the I m sorry if I’ve given the impression that I think of myself as the reincarnation of Bessler, nothing could be further from the truth - although I do have fear of heights! Seriously I just present the facts as and when I find them, and my opinion about the things I’ve found are just speculation; a search for meaning and answers and definitely open to criticism.
The trouble is my over confident postings make people want me to share my findings and to be honest I tend to calm down the next day and regret being so effusive with what in reality is just speculation about clues and such like. I am a naturally optimistic person but I’m trying to restrain my excitement and not publish predictions too early.
Thank you for your patience guys and please feel free to continue with your ironic, satirical absurdities about me and work, as long as you keep commenting I’ll be happy or otherwise.
JC
Also thanks from me Brad. Any drawings you can make for us are always very welcome here. So your past designs were dead ducks? So what? That's the rule around here and not the exception. I'm sure your idea for that simple Bessler wheel will be of interest to John because it can help to support his two wheel solution idea. I'm also eager to see it!
DeleteJC wrote: "The trouble is my over confident postings make people want me to share my findings and to be honest I tend to calm down the next day and regret being so effusive..."
DeleteI'm not a doctor, but it sounds like you might have bipolar disorder. It can cause the victim to experience emotional highs one day where everything seems possible and he is full of enthusiasm. Those are followed by lows where the person experiences depression, self doubt, and feelings of guilt. These mood shifts can create havoc in a person's life and interfere with relationships and employment. If you've never been screened for the disorder you might consider doing that. There are meds available that can "smooth out" the emotional extremes and allow one to lead a more normal and productive life.
PART ONE
ReplyDeleteOkay, here's what I have to offer as a possible second and simpler Bessler wheel prototype that may have been what Karl saw and which impressed him so much.
First I have to mention that last year I finally obtained a copy of that huge Ken B book on Bessler and his wheels and read and studied it for over a month (it's 800 pages long!). In it he gives the construction details of Bessler's 3 foot diameter Gera prototype wheel and also the 12 foot diameter Merseburg and Kassal wheels based on his analysis of dozens of little numerological clues he found in Bessler's drawings and in particular the two portraits of Bessler that appear at the front of DT. Imo, it was a much more simplified version of Ken's small Gera prototype wheel that would most likely have been what Karl was shown.
In his book Ken gives a design for the 3 foot diameter prototype that is basically a miniature version of one of the two thinner 12 foot diameter one way wheels used inside the thicker drum of the Kassal wheel with the exceptions being that the prototype wheel uses little hand cast lead ingots (IIRC they weighed 6 oz each) at the ends of its levers instead of a trio of 8 lb lead cylinder weights as would have been used in the much larger Kassal wheel. However, Ken's little prototype wheel still contains a total of 16 springs and 40 connection ropes! I certainly would not consider it to be "simple" even though he claims an average person could build it in a month of part time effort and he gives very precise instructions for doing so.
It's possible that what he shows is the prototype wheel that Bessler originally had only he then later greatly simplified it to help sell the design to Karl. It's also possible that Ken is wrong about what he considers the original prototype's design to be and Bessler only ever had my simplified version which he then later more complicated for use in the Merseburg and Kassal wheels because of the much heavier weights they used (a trio of 4 lb weights weighing 12 lbs for the Merseburg wheel and a trio of 8 lb weights weighing 24 lbs for the Kassal wheel at the end of each lever) and the need to make them able to turn in two directions which involves adding latching mechanisms to each lever. We may never be sure what the situation was.
Brad
CON'T
PART TWO
DeleteAnyway, what I did was take a screenshot of Ken's version of the 3 foot diameter Gera prototype wheel that appears in his youtube video and make some edits of my own to it with paint in order to simplify it to the bare minimum. The result is a one way wheel that only uses 16 cords instead of 40 and 8 springs instead of 16. I've replaced the cords in the screenshot of his wheel with 4 straight lines colored blue and 4 straight line colored purple. Ken calls these cords "long lifter cords" or something like that. It is very important that these two sets of 4 cords be kept separate from each other as the wheel rotates to prevent them from rubbing together because if a single cord breaks, the wheel will not run smoothly or may actually stop. Ken distributes the cords connecting levers together in his version of Bessler's one way wheels into 5 separate parallel layers sandwiched between two parallel Y shaped wood lever pieces. In my simplified version there would only be a single Y shaped wood lever piece with a single spring attached directly to it. Its lead ingot weight would be attached to the end of one arm of a lever with a single screw through the ingot's center. I do not use five separate layers like Ken does. My two sets of 4 long lifter cords are just loosely attached to screws on the two sides of one of the wood arms of the Y levers. The green colored cords connecting adjacent levers together could also be attached to screws on the side of the levers so they do not rub against the single spring attached to each lever. My cords, shown as straight lines, all look tight in my drawing but that is not how they would be in an actual wheel where the distances between their connection points to levers constantly change during wheel rotation. I've labeled the tight cords with the letter T and the loose ones with the letter L. If a cord is shorter than the longest for its color, then that shorter cord will always be loose.
Here's the drawing I came up with:
https://i.postimg.cc/VLXQc7Z7/the-simple-wheel.jpg
Brad
END
Gee thanks Ken
DeleteThx Brad. I agree it's simple and I can understand how it would work just from looking at it. I do think it would convince the count especially with a working model he could play with. But without just five levers in it John won't be interested.
DeleteThank you Brad, but seeing Ken’s wheel for the first time in a long time, I’m kind of disappointed that my original opinion of it has been reinforced rather than raising doubts about my first judgement.
DeleteIt’s true that without five mechanisms I know it is not the same as Bessler’s wheel. But even without them, it simply won’t work. It’s way too complex and definitely not simple. Karl knew straight away that Bessler’s wheel was genuine.
I intend to prove to you all that five mechanism is a vital ingredient to Bessler’s wheel, and I need to do this to save all of you time and expense on trying to succeed with four or eight mechanisms.
JC
Brad , a runner runs , this is how you know .
DeleteI figured John would reject Brad's simplified eight lever Bessler prototype wheel so I decided to see if I could make one using only five levers. Here's what I got:
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/4dSDG6NY/simple-with-5-levers.jpg
I immediately ran into problems with it. Because of the odd number of those long lifting ropes forming a pentagon around the axle you must have at least three layers to keep any two of them from rubbing together. That means you can't just use the two sides of a single lever. You have to start making open frame type levers like Ken B thinks Bessler used. Also it looks like to just use both sides of single levers without a rope hitting the axle you need to use a minimum of six long lifting ropes. I think Brad's design is probably the best with eight ropes in two sets of four attached to the two sides of single lever if you want to have a simple design that would run as smooth as possible.
I also made a change to that Y shape lever some seem to prefer. Instead of it having a fork angle of 45 degrees I gave it one of 72 degrees because I thought it might work better for some reason in a wheel with five levers.
Sorry John but I did give it a try for you.
I wish I had the ability to use sims. I’m too old a dog to learn new tricks, but I do wish….. Thanks for trying, it was good effort. I have a similar problem making a simpler version of my latest wheel. I gave up but I might post a picture of it so people can see what was trying to do.
DeleteJC
@JC...if you post a clear image of your latest wheel, then someone will probably sim it for you. That sim guy seems to do a nice job simming.
DeleteYes, that sounds like a plan. Thanks.
DeleteJC
OMG! Now I finally understand why John MUST reject any design that does not have five levers in it!
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/BvfpLsCr/jc-eyeglass-problem.png
He needs to visit his optician as soon as possible to correct this problem he has!
After reading all the above, I think I am in agreement with anon 13:53 that an odd number of levers is not the best way to go to obtain a "simple" Bessler overbalanced type pm wheel. I think it's got to be six or eight levers to keep construction as simple as possible and get a wheel that does not just become "bottom heavy" as it rotates (didn't Bessler mention somewhere that his connectedness principle would allow that famous German engineer Jacob Leupold's overbalanced pm wheel to work which, IIRC, had an even twelve levers in it?). I also thank Brad for motivating me to finally get a copy of that Ken B book. I want to see exactly what his instructions are for making Bessler's 36 inch Gera prototype wheel. If it looks like his instructions are beyond my skill level, then I will try construction using Brad's simplified, single lever piece design. I've made a copy of Brad's drawing and his two part comment for future reference.
DeleteOne of the obvious problems with building a small model of an overbalanced type pm wheel with very low torque is that the drum, before any weighted levers are installed, has to be as perfectly balanced as possible. So carefully balanced that if a fly landed on its rim, the drum would start to rotate! Then one must make sure that all of the weighted levers have as close to the same weight as possible. For a small model that means actually weighing them on a digital scale with an accuracy to maybe 1/100th of an ounce.
If I find success, I will post the results here along with some photos and videos.
@Anon 20:54
DeleteGood luck with your plans to make Bessler's simplified wheel. For those that have never seen the particular Jacob Leupold's pm wheel that Bessler referred to in MT, here it is:
https://i.postimg.cc/9FKWRk5w/Leupold-s-Wheel.jpg
As shown, it's supposed to turn counterclockwise. It's normally another nonrunner, but Bessler hinted that his "connectedness principle" could turn it into a runner. Now ask yourself how adding some cords and springs to it would accomplish that little miracle. If you can answer that question, then you will be well on your way to duplicating Bessler's pm wheels!
JC's MT .. No. 9 Because one has learned that little is to be accomplished with the sphere-wheels like those just now seen in the figures and diagrams, one speculates on another principle, namely: on weights! In all places where I have found weight-figures, these weights are seen to be simple and nothing is attached to the ( with ) belts or chains. Such is the case with Leupold, but nothing is to be accomplished with his thing unless one acts out of my connectedness principle; but here I do not yet wish to show or discuss the figure for the time being.
Delete2007 JC's MT Hard Copy .. No. 9. Because experience shows us that the ball-driven wheels like those seen in the present figures and diagrams were of no avail, people speculated on another principle, namely: on weights. To be sure, in all the weight drawings that I have found, these weights appear simple and are not connected together with belts or chains, even in Leupold, but nothing is to be accomplished with any device unless my principle of movement is activated; but here I neither wish to show or discuss the figure for the time being.
https://i.postimg.cc/jdW38xCd/24-Leupold-73.jpg
See Brad's post below. He's already figured out how to make the Leupold wheel into a runner! I think Bessler would have been proud of him!
DeleteI had some time to spare and decided to take up anon 23:55's challenge to see if I could apply Bessler's "Connectedness Principle" (or what I think it is!) to Leupold's 12 lever wheel to turn it into a runner. Here's what I came up with:
ReplyDeletehttps://postimg.cc/WFVHvJ1d
The modified wheel would contain 12 weighted levers, 12 short cords between adjacent weights (purple), 6 long diametrical cords (shades of blue and only three shown so drawing does not become cluttered), 12 springs (green and only six shown so drawing does not become cluttered). I also had to add an extra arm near the pivot of each lever (gray) to which the ends of the long diametrical cords are attached. For the ropes I use the letter L near one to indicate it is lose and the letter T to indicate it is tight. For the springs I use the letter U to indicate it is unstretched and the letter S to indicate it is stretched and applying force between its attachment points that tries to pull them together. Note that the short purple cords between adjacent weights bulge out away from the axle of the wheel when they are loose. That is due to the centrifugal force applied to them when the wheel is turning clockwise at high speed.
I'm uncomfortable with all of the diametrical cords converging at the axle of the wheel, but it might be possible to bend the extra arms near the lever pivots so that the six cords are kept in six different planes and no two can touch each other. They must also be kept from contacting and rubbing against the wheel's axle which would be made of wood. This could be accomplished by attaching six small pulleys around the axle in the plane of each diametrical cord that would allow it to move back and forth a short distance along its length while keeping it from making physical contact with the surface of the axle.
Now the question is was this what Bessler had in mind when he mentioned that his Connectedness Principle could make Leupold's pm wheel work? Good luck to anyone who decides to sim it to find out.
Brad
Very impressive solution, Brad. I never thought I'd see something like that. Anyway, you wrote:
Delete"This could be accomplished by attaching six small pulleys around the axle in the plane of each diametrical cord that would allow it to move back and forth a short distance along its length while keeping it from making physical contact with the surface of the axle."
Pulleys would work, but then you have the problem of keeping the cords in them when a cord gets slack. I'd just use little stainless steel eyelets screwed into the wooden axle for each cord. A bit of silicone gel lubricant on the short portion of each cord that travels back and forth through the eyelet would let it do so without much wear.
Looks good. I think you should also have mentioned that you would need to clip off the short piece of each lever that extends back from the pivot toward the wheel's axle. If that is not done, there's the risk of those parts hitting the cords that are attached to those short gray arms you added to each lever at its pivot.
DeleteAlso, I think you picked the best levers to put the blue cords between. They are the ones whose motion keeps the cog of the twelve weights on the ccw turning wheel's left descending side. The continuous shifting of the cog is caused by a combination of the cw swinging of the weights in the lower right part of the wheel between about 4:30 to 6:00 and the ccw swinging of the weights in the upper left part of the wheel between about 10:00 to 1:00. It's like the cog of the weights is constantly being thrown over to the left side of the axle as the wheel rotates ccw.
I’ve posted a couple of pics on the pages link, at Bessler Wheel pics, top of right panel.
DeleteJC
Excellent analysis by Brad. Maybe his past designs were all dead ducks, but this one looks like a winner to me. If Bessler claimed he could turn that Leupold wheel into a runner I can't imagine any other way of doing it. This one definitely needs to be simmed.
DeleteThis is my take on the "Connectedness Principle" as discussed by some commenters. The phrase in the MT9 English version notes (Collins) was somehow translated from the German "zusammen gehangten principo" which literally means Together Hung Principle. I prefer the literal translation of it and I don't feel the word "connectedness" means quite the same as "together hung".
DeleteTogether hung/Hung together suggests to me that objects are suspended in proximity to each other. Maybe Bessler was being cryptic when he mentioned Leupold's wheel and wasn't really talking about its lever-weights not being linked to each other by belt and chains. Perhaps the wheel hints at a Bessler runner. Observing the ascending side of the Leupold, one can see 3 rigid levers "hanging" closer to each other from 4:30 - 6:00. One observes a similar pattern with MT17 where 3 spring assisted curved levers bunch up on the ascending side from 6:00 - 7:00. Of MT17 Bessler advises that "an acute mind will readily see and grasp what to make of this thing." Bessler goes further with its sister MT18 showing flexible spring arms and says its principle should not be dismissed.
There is MT11 which shows 2 sets of rigid levers. Bessler says, "This figure is doubled...there is more in it than meets the eye, as will be seen when I pull back the curtain and disclose the correct principle at the appropriate place, as mentioned previously [referring to the good principle of MT 10 which has curved elongated levers]". MT15 also shows 2 sets of levers and only in this drawing is the infamous "prime mover" mentioned among the MT collection.
Finally eyewitness Wolff said of the Merseburg bi-directional wheel, "I conclude, not only from this but also from other circumstantial evidence, that the weights are attached to some moveable or elastic arms on the periphery of the wheel."
My conclusion from the notes of MT9, 10, 11, 15, 17 and 18, Leupold wheel and Wolff's statement is that a Bessler Wheel is a Two-Arm Solution (pardon the pun on the blog title). Specifically there are two sets of elongated arms with weights located at their ends and they behaved similarly to each other on each side of the wheel (MT11, MT15). One set of arms comprises of flexible/elastic spring arms (Wolff, MT17, MT18). The other set are rigid, pivoting arms (MT11, Leupold wheel). On the ascending side of the wheel a number of arms, probably 3, of each set bunch up or "hang together" (zusammen gehangten) around the 6:00 region. On the descending side the arms of both sets extend out towards the wheel rim.
@anon 20:54
DeleteThanks for your more literal translation of "Connectedness Principle". But, ask yourself this simple question: would the double wheel I've described be one that Karl would look at and declare was "...so simple that a carpenter's boy could...build it"? Imo, it wouldn't be and I think you'll find most here will agree with that opinion.
I'm amazed at how quickly someone found a solution to making that Leupold wheel a runner! I guess that's how discoveries happen. Long periods of no results followed by brief "Eureka" moments when all of a sudden the pieces of some puzzle all fall into place. Let's hope something can be done with this with Bessler's wheels. Fingers crossed! 🤞
DeleteAnon 22:06
DeleteTo that, I say what is considered simple is subjective! Remember Karl never built the wheels; he only observe them. The person who did construct them (ie, Bessler) made these two seemingly contradictory statements:
"It's reached the stage now where even a poor workman could put the thing together without a lot of head-scratching; and get it completed almost before you could notice." AP 308
"If I were to sell my art one could run to craftsmen who in the space of 4 weeks could build what I can scarcely build in 6 months." AP 297
- Anon 20:54
I'm a little embarrassed that I have not been able to contribute anything to this blog's comments or those of the previous blog, but I've had a lot of distractions of late that have kept me from my usual Bessler clue research. I'm in a lull, but, hopefully, I'll soon be back and pointing out new clues I've discovered. Meanwhile, I too am most impressed by Brad's efforts to turn Leupold's wheel into a working pm wheel as Bessler hinted could be done by the application of his connectedness principle. Brad could have actually solved a long standing mystery for us. Thanks Brad!
DeleteAs I looked at his solution, however, I realized that anyone trying to build or sim it would have to deal with a dozen levers! That's a lot and I'm wondering if the "Brad solution" would still work if one reduced the wheel's number of levers from 12 down to just 6? IOW, remove every other lever. Something for the simmers out there to consider.
I'll try to be back next blog with something interesting for everyone to consider. I hate these lulls, but they can happen. Maybe they are actually necessary so that one's brain can rest up and renew itself for future activities?
Disciple of SoS
Hmm...yeah...it might work with as little as six levers but imo not as little as four levers.
Deletemaybe 5 lol
DeleteNo need to feel embarrassed, DoSoS. We all have to work at whatever pace is comfortable for us. If we try to push ourselves beyond that pace, then the quality of our work will inevitably suffer. Imo, after your amazing analysis last year of that lever clue Bessler hid in the last drawing he made for Karl, you've earned the right to take as much time as you need. I will always be looking forward to your future contributions here.
DeleteAs for me, I'm very happy that people here have found my possible solution for turning the Leupold pm wheel into a runner to be of interest. I made it on the spur of the moment. Will it work? I don't know. I'm not a builder or a simmer, but I do like to draw and I'm always thinking about how Bessler could have made actual working pm wheels. However, my main interest is still doing SoS level numerological analysis to find the many other clues that Bessler hid in his drawings that still have not been uncovered. I know that they are there and that we are making slow, but steady progress in finding them. It's not an easy task, but then again neither was deciphering the Rosetta stone or finding the sequence of genes in the human genome. Both projects took years to complete. In our case, though, generation after generation has been at it for three centuries! No wonder the scientists keep telling us that we're all wasting our time.
Brad
I finally found that "amazing analysis" that Brad occasionally refers to and which was done by DoSoS. It's in JC's November 19th, 2025 blog and shows how one can obtain the Y shaped lever design that many believe Bessler used in his pm wheels. Here's a link to a drawing that DoSoS provided in one of his comments for that blog:
Deletehttps://postimg.cc/jw80YsFj
The engraved image that the design was hidden in appeared at the top of one of the annual name day cards that Bessler made in 1719 to honor his patron Karl. The image appears to have actually been done by Bessler. There was also a second drawing DoSoS provided which highlighted three unusual parallel lines that also appear in his first drawing and which he colored orange in his second drawing. Someone noticed that the ratio of the lengths of those three lines corresponds exactly to the ratio of the lengths of three of the coordinating ropes that were used in the Merseburg and Kassal wheels (which were determined by Ken B in his Bessler book). Here's that second drawing by DoSoS:
https://postimg.cc/McC0g2q2
I'd recommend those interested in the DoSoS analysis read the entire comment section of that blog for more information (it had 117 comments in it!). It can be found here:
https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2025/11/johann-besslers-annual-greetings-to.html#comment-form
Note that the historical figure we call "Count Karl" here was actually Charles I, Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel (often called Karl von Hessen) and he was born on August 3rd, 1654 and died on March 23rd, 1730 having almost reached the age of 76. In 1719, he would have been 64 years old for most of the year until he turned 65 on August 3, 1719. Most likely, Bessler's poetry card for him containing the lever's secret design was finished just before that date and about two years after the completion of the construction of the Kassal wheel at Weissenstein Castle in Saxony.
@Brad
DeleteI like your design for "mobilizing" the Leupold wheel and it might even be an important breakthrough. There's only one modification that I would suggest to you. Make that cord between the 6 o'clock to 12 o'clock levers tight instead of loose which you did and indicated in your drawing with the letter "L". That will result in the three cords that you show being tight while the other three cords that you do not show would be loose. I also agree with anon 30 April 2026 at 03:32 that using steel eyelets to guide the cords would be better than pulleys...at least for a small model wheel.
I remember discussions about the correct translation of the “connectedness principle” way back in 2019 on BW forum, It was “hung together” was thought to be more accurate. Funnily enough I was in contact with Andrew Witter who did the original translation, earlier this week. I’ll ask him what he thinks
ReplyDeleteOf the latest view of the phrase.
JC
Uh oh! Looks like it's time to play the "Let's parse 18th century German phrases game" again!
DeleteI asked ChatGPT to translate "zusammen gehangten principo", based on the general context of MT 9's note, into modern English and it gave "“the principle of weight carrying levers/pendulums that are connected/suspended together as a system”. In other words, the "principle" just refers to a collection of weighted levers which are somehow mechanically connected together so that they function as a whole instead of individually. I don't see why there is any confusion about this simple description.
Hmm..."hung together" to me implies that a wheel would have several weight levers that were arranged so that each lever was connected by a rope to two adjacent levers with all of the levers in the same plane as the wheel. But as they say "the devil is in the details". Knowing that Bessler's wheels had their internal weight levers connected to each other is one thing...knowing exactly HOW they were connected is something else.
DeleteI'm reasonably sure that Bessler's levers were not just simple straight levers like we see in MT. All of the pm wheels using such levers have been tried and they simple do not work. I go along with guys like Brad with his L shaped Leupold wheel levers having two arms or like SoS with his Y levers having three arms. This means to me that any two levers did not just have a single rope connecting them together. There may actually have been two or more ropes connecting any two levers together.
Anon 15:46
DeleteIt behooves me to include the full phrase: "zusammen gehangten principo agiret".
According to -f (fletch) commenter from past blog https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2022/07/johann-besslers-connectedness-principle.html:
" 'agiret' is the verb in the sentence and is a German word meaning 'to perform/to act'
'zusammen gehangten' is the adjective i.e. the together hung principle.
When including the agiret verb .. acts/performs the together hung (connected) principle "
As I see it, a phenomenon occurs during rotation wherein mechanism(s) "hang together". In other words there is an action to be observed. Levers "somehow mechanically connected together so that they function as a whole instead of individually" is not an action; it is a design characteristic of the wheel. My humble 2 cents.
- Anon 20:54
How about:
Delete"...zusammen gehangten principo agiret..." = "...the principle of [the wheel's] performance is that its weighted levers are connected to each other and act together instead of individually..." ?
they act together I.E. one having influence on another E.G. item A on the Toy's Page representing a circular chain of substantial mass near the circumference . IF the chain can be periodically pushed outwards , at say 3 o'cl , it will deform outwards and cause an overbalancing torque , then after the impulse recover its original shape and balance until pushed again
DeleteI had an idea a long time ago for a unique kind of OB wheel. You ever see how they stand up and then line up those little black with white dots on them domino tiles and then when one knocks one over at one end, that tile pushes the next one over which then pushes the next one over...and so on until the last tile falls over? Well, my idea was to have them arranged inside of the curving outer rim wall of a hollow drum carried on a horizontal axle. Each tile would be attached to the drum by a tiny hinge that would restrict its falling over motion to within an angle of only 90°. Then as a tile at the 6 o'clock position fell over onto the drum's descending side it would imbalance the drum and begin to make it turn. That turning would then trigger more tiles one by one to fall over onto the drum's descending side and the imbalanced drum would continue to accelerate. As the fallen tiles went up and over the drum's 12 o'clock location, they would hang straight down toward the drum's axle and actually reset themselves so they could begin falling over as they approached the drum's 6:00 location again. Like most of my ideas, I never got around to trying to build this one, but I've had it bouncing around in the back of my mind for decades. If anybody cares to build or sim it, then please feel free to do so.
DeleteIs it a runner??? YOU decide!
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/rmNCwWtR/fdtpm-wheel.jpg
One thing is for certain. Bessler's main secret to keep the imbalance isn't going to be seen as early as MT9, not literally or metaphorically.
Delete@anon 03:54
DeleteIs it a runner? If it is, I'm not even sure what direction it would turn in! Nice drawing, though...reminds me a little of MT21 minus that paddle thing on its axle.
@anon 05:51
You're probably right. Years ago someone here said that the secret of Bessler's wheels was probably contained in the first fifty or so MT drawings that have some notes to them. Personally, I don't think the complete secret is in MT...at least not after he removed the final drawings that actually showed it! All that remains are nonrunning designs showing SOME of the parts used in his working wheel design in some way. Just springs and ropes and levers which is not much to go on. It's like someone handing you a catalog of various mechanical parts and saying that, with a "discerning mind" and by combining some of the parts in the right way, you can use the catalog to build a working internal combustion engine!
@anon 03:54
DeleteVery unusual pm wheel you have there. My guess is that the center of gravity of its 32 tiles is located to the lower left of the center of the axle which means it should turn counterclockwise (or "anticlockwise" as they say in the UK). To make it easier to run, I'd replace the tiles with iron bars and well lubricate their sides. The lube would allow the side surface of a rising bar on the lower right side of the wheel to more easily start raising the next bar following it. That would then reduce the friction in the system as the wheel rotated...assuming it did self rotate. This one looks like yet another design that needs to be simmed.
anon 03:54
DeleteI don't see any reason (yet) why it would not run and keep turning ccw. You don't show how the hinges prevent the tiles from flopping over too far to the wheel's left side, but there would have to be something extra there for that. Maybe stops attached to the drum's outer wall to block the swinging motion of a tile or something attached to a tile itself? Whatever, it's another design I haven't seen anywhere else before. Thanks for sharing.
Just when many here were convinced that Bessler's wheels would eventually save planet Earth from doomsday Climate Change, along comes his announcement!
ReplyDeletehttps://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/energy/articles/worlds-first-commercial-fusion-power-191824959.html
When it comes to promised "breakthroughs" in fusion reactor research, my philosophy is to believe NOTHING I read about them UNTIL I actually SEE one of them DOING what it was claimed it would do. I've read about claimed fusion power breakthroughs for about forty years so far and still they're not putting out enough power to light a 4 watt nightlight bulb. After this latest one follows that usual pattern, all of the investors who sunk billions of dollars into it will be crying on the way to their banks! 😭
DeleteYour philosophy about fusion is the exact same one that the scientists today have when it comes to claims made about pm machines! Today we pm chasers face all the same skepticism that Bessler faced...and he actually had a working pm machine!
DeletePourquoi donner des idées à John Collins ?
ReplyDeleteLa roue de Bessler a été inventée en 1712 et Isaac Newton fut mis au courant.
Les franc-maçonnerie fut créée en 1717 par des juifs et des disciples de Newton aux idées unitariennes, un retour débile à l'arianisme .
"En 1717 la première loge maçonnique fut fondée: 90% des membres en étaient juifs. Vingt
ans plus tard la loge maçonnique King David fut fondée. Elle était entièrement juive; "
https://web.archive.org/web/20230930200222/https://www.centroafrobogota.com/attachments/article/9/El%20martirio%20y%20el%20holocausto%20de%20los%20negros%20por%20lo%20jefes%20traficantes%20esclavistas.%20Roger%20Dommergue.pdf
A votre avis, pourquoi ? Pourquoi toutes les inventions de l'énergie libre ont-elles échouées dans le monde anglo-saxon ?
A cause de l'Eglise et sa déplorable affaire Galilée ?
Pas du tout, à cause des franc-maçons qui veulent coopter les découvertes pour se justifier spirituellement, parce que cette organisation à été créée pour ça sauf qu'elle détruit le but de leur objet en insultant les inventeurs inspirés par Dieu.
Les anglo-saxons ont créé un système persécuteur de la pensée pour vouloir s'attribuer les inventions qu'ils avortent des meilleurs de leur société, un paradoxe, ce qui ne veut pas dire que tous les anglo-saxons sont comme ça mais que leur système est ainsi, avorteur et inique.
Avec moi, ils sont très très mal tombé...
In English:
Delete"Why give John Collins ideas?
Bessler's wheel was invented in 1712 and Isaac Newton was made aware.
Freemasonry was created in 1717 by Jews and followers of Newton with Unitarian ideas, a stupid return to Arianism.
"In 1717 the first Masonic lodge was founded: 90% of the members were Jewish. Twenty
Years later, the Masonic lodge King David was founded. She was entirely Jewish; "
https://web.archive.org/web/20230930200222/https://www.centroafrobogota.com/attachments/article/9/El%20martirio%20y%20el%20holocausto%20de%20los%20negros%20por%20lo%20jefes%20trafficking%20esclavistas. %20Roger%20Dommergue.pdf
In your opinion, why? Why have all the inventions of free energy failed in the Anglo-Saxon world?
Because of the Church and her deplorable Galilee affair?
Not at all, because of the Freemasons who want to co-opt the discoveries to justify themselves spiritually, because this organization was created for it except that it destroys the purpose of their object by insulting the inventors inspired by God.
The Anglo-Saxons have created a persecuting system of thought to want to attribute to themselves the inventions they abort from the best of their society, a paradox, which does not mean that all Anglo-Saxons are like that but that their system is so, abortive and unjust.
With me, they fell very badly..."
Why would anyone be giving me ideas, I’ve got enough of my own, I don’t need anymore. Just to be really annoying, unless you are designing Bessler’s wheel with five mechanisms, you will fail. I don’t k ow how much more clear I can make it. I’m putting together a blog which explains why there has to be five mechanisms, then prhapscwe will finally succeed!
DeleteJC
Absotutely, John! With your leadership, I K OW that PRHAPSCWE will succeed! 😣
DeleteJC: "I’m putting together a blog which explains why there HAS to be five mechanisms..."
DeleteThat should be a most interesting blog...IF we ever actually get to see it.
John wrote "I’m putting together a blog which explains why there has to be five mechanisms..."
DeleteI thought that John's pentagon approach had finally (and mercifully!) been totally debunked in the February 11, 2026 blog using accurate simming. Has he suddenly found something to UNdebunk it? If so, then yes do please share it with us! 😃
No the five mechanisms are still critical to success and once I’ve shown why, you’ll all be convinced.
DeleteJC
@anon 22:24
DeleteLol! JC is hoping that everyone here has, after a three month lapse, forgotten all about that past TOTAL debunking of his pentagon nonsense that took place right here last February. Right now he's eager to begin using his second "bright shiny object" which he wants to be that Bessler workaround 2.0 or BWA 2.0 wheel he mentioned back then, but now calls Bessler's "Second Simpler Wheel". But in the last three months he could not get it working, finally just gave up on it, and also hopes no one remembers him saying that. The simple reason that all of his efforts failed is because pentagon wheels are NOT the solution to Bessler's wheels despite what he thinks. Unfortunately, he is still completely blind to that reality.
Still, like a scratched and skipping phonograph record, he's right back here again trying to sell his debunked pentagon design theory to everyone. Why? Because IF he can manage to do that, it will make all of the future ego tripping hints he plans to drop about how much "progress" he's making on Bessler's "Second Simpler Wheel" seem more believable...at least to any newbies that show up here and have not followed this blog for years like the veterans here have.
I'm sure in the very next blog he will once again shower us with all of the "codes" and "clues" he found OVER a decade ago that "prove" (but only to him!) that Bessler only used five levers in his pm wheels. We will, once again, read about Euclid, pentagons, 18 degree angles, etc. with maybe a few Bible verse numbers thrown in to spice things up. That will be accompanied by equally old Paint drawings he made showing all kinds of lines in Bessler's drawings that he somehow manages to get to form nearly perfect pentagons. At no time will we see anything that is actually new from him because he does not have anything new to show us!
Now everyone please do just sit back, relax, and watch how 100% correct I will be about all of these predictions I am now making. Then you will know why I call myself "The Sage"!
The Sage
If John wishes to continue to believe and promote the belief that pentagons are somehow the solution to Bessler's wheels, then that is certainly his right to do so especially on HIS blog. I intend to listen carefully and respectfully to whatever he has to show us. Even if I do not happen to agree with any of it, there's always the possibility that something in it might give me some new idea to try. That's the main reason I visit this blog...to hopefully find some new ideas to try and I thank John's efforts over the years to make it possible for me and others.
DeleteYou are covering up your own inadequacies, Sage. Many comments are attempts to project the writer’s own insecurities, depression or jealousies onto others to feel better about themselves. Some users may be using the comments to vent, indicating deeper personal issues. These are mental health issues, but usually only visible because anonymity and the lack of face-to-face interaction cause people to feel invisible and invulnerable, leading them to act in ways they never would in person. They’re best ignored.
DeleteJC
Sage aka Anonymous4 May 2026 at 00:17
DeleteYou are the least to talk about having pet "clues" to bolster ones believes .
Well if they were intended to. bolster my ego they have been more of a non-runner than any of my “per” clues.
DeleteJC
Despite Sage's raving on this blog, I AM looking forward to seeing how John is going to show that "...five mechanisms are still critical to success and once I’ve shown why, you’ll all be convinced." I'm very skeptical about any odd lever design being a runner, but I'm willing to see what John has to offer to convince me otherwise.
DeleteI also agree with John's quick psychoanalysis of Sage. He is obviously a very frustrated individual, most likely a failed Bessler pm wheel chaser and I think he somehow blames John for that. Maybe he feels that he would not have wasted so much time pursuing the subject if he had not been somehow lured into it by reading John's blog over the years? If that's his story, then he's probably really mad at John, wants to get even with him, and waits for any opportunity he can to try to embarrass him by pointing out any mistakes he makes. Well, maybe Sage is blaming the wrong guy for his own failed Bessler pm wheel research?
I think he should be blaming Johann Bessler because it was his stubborn refusal to sell his invention for a far lower and more affordable price that eventually resulted in him taking its secrets to his grave. As a result we are ALL victims here and John has absolutely nothing to do with that! So, Sage, stop blaming John and either keep chasing Bessler's secret pm wheel design or, as most eventually do, just drop out and find something else to chase. There's more to life than finding the secret of pm.
But whatever you do, just leave John alone! 😠
Very well said, anon 16:10! 👍💯
DeleteEvery one here is sure gonna be surprized when they find out that sage guy was 100% right AGAIN!
Delete"Now everyone please do just sit back, relax, and watch how 100% correct I will be about all of these predictions I am now making. Then you will know why I call myself "The Sage"! "
DeleteTranslation - hey i predict tomorrow the sun is going to shine again , and afterwards the sun is going to go down and it is going to become night time 🙌 this is why they call me "the sage" because i state the obvious .
I think JC's biggest problem right now is finding what bits and pieces of past blogs he's going to copy and paste into his next blog for us. He'll then add a few sentences at the beginning and end of it to make it look "fresh", but it will still be just more stale rehash from the past. I agree we need to see some new stuff from him for a change assuming he even has any new stuff.
DeleteEarlier in this blog's comments he wrote "...I have a similar problem making a simpler version of my latest wheel. I gave up but I might post a picture of it so people can see what was trying to do." I think I'd rather see a photo of his "latest wheel" than more of his codes and clues. That will give us a lot more to think and comment about and maybe someone can suggest some change to it to turn it into a runner.
JC: "I’m putting together a blog which explains why there HAS to be five mechanisms..."
Delete"has to" . John doesn't do physics so don't expect any . he does interpreting "clues"
Unfortunately in the Bessler pm wheel research game, which involves a lot of ambiguous clues and subjective English translations, one man's clues can just be another man's nonsense and quickly dismissed or ignored. Everyone eventually becomes convinced he has the TRUE clues while everyone else is 100% wrong about how they interpreted their "clues". It's always been like this and, most likely, it will remain like this well into the future. Even if someone miraculously does build a runner based on his clues and others eventually acknowledge that he does indeed have a runner, most of them will then just say that there is NO WAY it could be the same as Bessler's runners because it cannot be explained using THEIR clues. I don't think we'll ever know for sure exactly what design Bessler had. If it was possible don't you think it would have happened by now after three long CENTURIES? So have all of the "fun" you want with all of your sims and builds and online debates about this oddity and that which you think you "see" in Bessler's drawings or writings...but at the end of the day I'm sure that you will be getting absolutely NOWHERE with any them! 🤔
DeleteAnon 23:31 wrote "John doesn't do physics so don't expect any . he does interpreting 'clues' "
DeleteThat's the intuitive method and it can work. For example, when I looked at Brad's fix for the Leupold pm wheel above, I could just feel that it was right. I did not need a lot of fancy expert mechanical explanations or sims to convince me. When and if you finally find your runner neither will you need them. You will just take a long look at it and say "Yep...this is it!" and when you release it, it will turn and turn and keep on turning...just like Bessler's wheel did that he built after his invigorating dream that God gave him. Trust you instincts. After years of failures they will be very sharp and will let you know when you have arrived.
except Brad's fix for the Leupold lever weight wheel didn't make it a runner
Delete@anon05:09...How do you know that? Did you sim or build it? You have NO idea of what Brad's fix for that 12 lever wheel will do so stop pretending like you do!
DeleteWe WILL know if a successful wheel is the same design as Bessler’s wheel. It will be obvious once the design is known - and don’t forget it will need 5 mechanisms.
DeleteJC
Well , i guess everyone has something they consider as being important , whether it is clues/quotes or diagrams or some interpretation of them , i have never seen anyone bow down to someone else's version of clues/quotes/interpretations , but that's typical human behavior and to be honest why would anyone really want everyone to agree and believe the same things , being diverse covers large area of research and it helps everyone focus on their own work .
DeleteQuite right JB. But from now on I will try to refrain from pushing my own beliefs until I come up with an improved design suitable for simming.
DeleteJC
You know what JC , i have learned a long time ago , you cannot successfully persuade anyone to believe anything that's different from their own believes ...
DeleteIt wont change whether one wishes to refrain from it or not , i think if a working model was put up in front of anyone , they would simply ignore anything the inventor says and stick with their own opinions anyway .
🤷♂️
I can’t argue with that JB, so I might as well continue to post my findings.
DeleteJC
JC it's not your job to please everyone else , please yourself it's your life and time and finding and opinions and believes , no one else is going to change their perspectives for you - so why should you change yours 👍
Delete👍
DeleteI've found that when we ask others for their opinions, we really want to hear OUR opinions coming out of THEIR mouths! Most conflicts get started when that does not happen. We consider their failure to agree with us as a personal insult and then we try to figure out some way to get even with them like the next time they want to hear their opinions coming out of our mouths. We refuse to do it even if we do happen to agree with their opinions. I think this unfortunate tendency has caused all of the wars in human history!
DeleteDisciple of SoS
JC wrote: "But from now on I will try to refrain from pushing my own beliefs until I come up with an improved design suitable for simming."
DeleteEgads!!! Just as "The Sage" predicted, we are now seeing the first use of JC's brand new "bright shiny object" as he tells us that he can't possibly reveal his latest wheel design to us yet because it needs to first be "improved"! Time for us to all start begging him for more details over the next few years as he drinks in the ego inflating attention that provides him with (he can only get it that way because he knows he will never get it by making an actual runner!). So keep following this blog for those random future "progress" updates from him. Meanwhile, everyone keep your eyes fixed on JC's nice new bright shiny object! Lol!
https://i.giphy.com/14xFsgRiCff4C4.webp
Now I KNOW why anon 00:17 calls himself "The Sage"! 😮
Hi SoS, I’m not insulted by differences of opinion. I’m frustrated by having my arguments dismissed without considering the facts. I’m sure you feel same about my comments but for me there is no argument you can offer in support of your beliefs. You can experience your beliefs but I can’t, but I can offer facts which still need interpreting to try and understand why they are important. Thank you for your reasonable comments,
DeleteJC
Here's another FACT that surfaced years ago that JC is hoping no one remembers or has never seen:
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/RFj8ZWkF/Kassal-drum-octagons.jpg
Many consider it ultimate PROOF that Bessler ONLY ever used EIGHT levers in his wheels which I also believe. 😮
Damn! No wonder John does not want us seeing that one! I don;t know how anyone could think Bessler was only using five levers after seeing that amazing clue. It's repeated exactly in two drawings which, IIRC, was Bessler's way of telling us a clue we found was genuine. Maybe John never saw it when it was first posted?
DeleteYou can believe that if you wish, but I have shown far more convincingly that the message in the picture is that there are five mechanisms needed. Both of the rope lines are ignored. The nips bees used 1 - 10 total 55, a key ingredients. There is so much more which I think I’ll post, and I don’t have to draw it I’ll just copy and paste it.
DeleteJC
"The nips bees used..."? What the heck are "nips bees"?
DeleteYes, I do believe that unusual clue that anon 18:30 showed us is definite proof of Bessler having used eight levers in his wheel drums. If someone is going to build a pm wheel's drum containing weight carrying levers, he's going to want to mount them in the strongest places in the drum so that the cf they experience during rotation will not tear them loose and destroy his wheel. Those strongest places are going to be between the parallel pairs of spokes that form and support the shape of the drum. I think that DT drawing actually shows us the two opposite sides of the Kassal wheel's drum and the sixteen spokes it shows would have formed eight parallel pairs of spokes inside of the drum. That obviously means that this wheel's drum must have been holding eight levers (and maybe sixteen in a bidirectional type wheel which would have two side by side one directional wheels that each had eight levers). It's as simple as that. Why would Bessler put five levers into a drum having eight parallel pairs of spokes? He wouldn't. If he had used five levers, he would have only used five parallel pairs of spokes for his drums, but this clue clearly indicates that he did not do that.
If you want to keep promoting your five lever approach, then you certainly have that right. But, I think that you will eventually regret having wasted so much time with it. From the various comments I'm seeing on this blog, it looks like you are the only one who actually thinks Bessler used five levers.
Anon 00:18 wrote: "I think that DT drawing actually shows us the two opposite sides of the Kassal wheel's drum..."
DeleteIt's an interesting theory you have which I don't think anyone else ever though of. But there's no way to tell if that second drawing on the right side is actually the opposite side of the Kassal wheel's drum. If it was, then the two octagons would not have been as parallel as they appear to be. I think it makes more sense to think of the right side drawing as showing the same side of the drum as shown in the left side drawing where the rope from the axle is lifting the load of stones outside of the window. That way we have two parallel octagons whose sixteen spokes symbolize eight parallel PAIRS of spokes. Like you I agree that strongly implies Bessler was using eight weighted levers in his one way wheels. But for a two way wheel like the Kassal wheel, that also required that he use another eight weighted levers held by another eight parallel pairs of spoke inside of its wider drum. To keep the drum as thin as possible, the two one way wheels inside of the Kassal wheel's drum would have been side by side, as close together as possible, and probably even shared another eight spokes located right in the middle of the drum.
To sum it up, the Kassal wheel's drum would have contained a total of sixteen weighted levers whose pivots were held by twenty-four spokes attached to the axle. The idea that only Bessler and his younger brother could have constructed something the size and weight of the Kassal wheel by themselves is really mind boggling when you think about it!
Brad
GREAT NEWS, everyone...JC's NEW blog logo is finally ready!
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/43BZwys4/JC-s-New-Blog-Logo.jpg
Lol! I'm sure John will love it and start using it immediately! 🤣
DeleteOne of the unfortunate aspects of this blog is that anyone can pretend to be someone else and maybe two or three more. This could result in a small group of people, who appear to be several, when in fact there’s probably just one or two, each agreeing and carrying on the same ridiculous arguments.
DeleteI have just three choices - carry on and bite the bullet of reading stupid comments; close the comments feature and lose the chatty nature of this blog, or require a sign in.
I’ll think about it before I come to decision.
JC
"...carry on and bite the bullet of reading stupid comments"
DeleteKeep in mind that what you consider "stupid", others may find is interesting and makes sense...and, otoh, what you consider is interesting and makes sense, others may think is stupid. If you shut down comments here, everyone will take it as a form of censorship and also childish revenge for everyone rejecting your pentagon wheel theory. Imo, that rejection is not their fault...it is your fault due to you not providing enough evidence to support your theory. Shutting off comments here will seen as you punishing others for your own failings. I'm sure you will immediately protest that you did provide enough evidence over the years. But, apparently, others do not feel that you did. You need to either accept that or continue to try to find more evidence.
Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the word ‘stupid’ to describe some of the comments, but do you really believe that those comments I’ve referred to are serious , helpful, based on sound logic, intended to be treated as genuine attempts to solve Bessler’s wheel?
DeleteI’m aware of course that some of them are ironic, humerous or sarcastic, and I’m also a happy to read the sensible ones that either offer sincere advice or criticise my suggestions. I have noted that several people enjoy coming here if only to find somewhere they can talk about Bessler with others of a shared interest.
JC
I notice that you are rather vague when it comes to specifying exactly what comments you consider "stupid". Was that on purpose? Why do I get the feeling that ANY comments that support an 8 lever design and not a 5 lever design are automatically branded as "stupid" by you? But, I think the major reason most here will continue to reject your 5 lever theory is because of that one witness describing how he heard about 8 knocks per drum rotation on the descending side of the Kassal wheel's drum. That is a very difficult clue to explain away and I don't recall you ever successfully doing it. There's also that DT drawing that anon 18:30 just linked to above for us showing how you can get two perfect octagons using various points in the drawing. It is next to impossible that they are the product of random chance. The locations of those points had to be very carefully planned by Bessler to produce those two octagons. I also don't think he put them there to distract everyone into thinking he used 8 levers when he actually used only 5.
DeleteYet you continue to ignore any evidence that points toward the use of 8 levers. Imo, you are engaging in what is known as "selection bias" in scientific research. This means you only pay attention to anything that you think supports the use of 5 levers while conveniently ignoring all of the evidence that points to the use of 8 levers. I've seen this method used in various other cult-like groups. There are "Flat Earther's" out there that truly believe out planet is flat despite the abundant evidence that it is not. When presented with such evidence they immediately say it's wrong or has been misinterpreted or comes from some sinister secret government group that wants to keep humanity from knowing "the truth". They will only use their own "evidence" which they always distort in some way to support their particular belief system.
If you want to shut this blog down for a while, then that is an option you can consider. It would relieve you of the pressure of coming up with new blog topics every week and free you to continue to try and get your "second simple" 5 lever Bessler wheel working. It could also let the serious clue hunters here focus on what they seem to do the best which is to find new clues for us. Of course the risk of any prolonged shutdown is that it could become permanent even if efforts are later made to start it up again. It's much easier to keep an engine running than to try to start it up after it's been cold and nonrunning for a long period.
John wrote: "Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the word ‘stupid’ to describe some of the comments, but do you really believe that those comments I’ve referred to are serious , helpful, based on sound logic, intended to be treated as genuine attempts to solve Bessler’s wheel?"
DeleteI'm also confused about what comments you "referred to" since I can't find any that you did refer to. There was the comment with the new octagon logo which I thought was well done and maybe intended to get you to finally get on the eight lever train with the rest of us? There was the link to the double octagon clue in the DT drawing which was certainly interesting (I had never seen it before). There was some earlier babbling by that sage guy, but he looked like he was blowing off his frustration with your past disappointments here. I think he was just trying to be sarcastic to irritate you and most here dismissed him as a troll (even though they may have agreed with some of his complaints!). I viewed him as like a medieval king's fool that would entertain at a royal banquet. Such fools would often ridicule their king to the delight of the nobility and were probably the only ones allowed to do it and still keep their heads attached to their bodies. The king laughing along with everyone else then showed them all that he had a good sense of humor and also some humility.
So maybe the question is how much of a sense of humor and humility do you still have left? Maybe you're losing them with age? Seeing your pet five scissor mechanism wheel crash and burn last February must have been stressful for you, but you shouldn't take it out on others. You should know that failure is the rule in the pm chasing game and not some exception. Maybe you got so emotionally invested in your design that you forgot about that unpleasant reality? If so, lesson learned...the hard way. 🥹
I'm still trying to figure out what "nips bees" are! 😕
DeleteMaybe it's how he spells "numbers" when he's cockeyed?
DeleteThe portable wagon size model probably was simpler without any improvements that were in K. But the solution had to be the same even though he said he had machines that worked other ways. That always sounded like bs to me since there was never evidence of them that we know of.
ReplyDeleteWho cares how many mechanisms it had? 5 or 8 or pick another, bitches. Lol
Jeff
I would have thought that the comments I referred to as stupid were obvious but that’s just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteNo I’m not talking about those which favour the eight weight wheel. But on that subject, you say I’ve never explained them away, I have given my explanation on that many times and it’s not a case of “explaining it away”. I have always maintained the Bessler’s wheel used five mechanisms, and seven nine, or eleven. Read my web site at www.theorffyreuscode.com for evidence shown in MT.
So in order to produce a much slower turning wheel with similar power to the Merseburg wheel for the long endurance test, Bessler produced one with nine mechanisms. He freely admits he used felt to deaden the sound of weights landing, so I suggest he felted one weight to disguise the fact that he needed nine, hence the sound of “about eight weights….
That I published in 2009 - why don’t you catch up before you criticise me.
BTW, from the length and style of some of your comments, I’m certain that it’s Ken B up to his old tricks, pushing his Y shaped levers and all the rest of his garbage.
JC
The KB wheel is a flop! The lever could have been a t or an F, and it doesn’t turn.
Delete@JC
DeleteIf one uses enough sound deadening felt or fake noise making rim weights, he can make any number of weights inside a pm wheel's turning drum sound like just eight. If B was so obsessed with guarding the secret of his pm wheel mechanics why did he not use enough felt to make the Kassal wheel totally silent? To me it sounds like you are desperate to keep the number of weights in B's wheels at an odd number to justify your five lever approach. Yet, the sim of your five weight/scissor design last February showed everyone that such designs are unworkable. I think you will find as the years pass that they will continue to remain unworkable. And, no, I'm not KB!
@anon 12:34
AIUI, the KB analysis of the B pm wheel showed it must use those Y levers to maintain its overbalance during rotation. I found it interesting that the fork angle of the Y levers is 45° and the angle between two adjacent levers in an eight lever wheel is also 45°. I've also seen more than enough clues on this blog over the years to convince me that B did use such levers and that they were critical to making his wheels work. I think that anon 20:23 was right. Anyone who ignores all of B's Y lever clues is just doing selection bias which will only lead him to false conclusions about how B's wheels actually worked.
Well bully for you Ken. Unfortunately the Y levers are a figment of your imagination. Thet don’t exist outside your mind.
DeleteJC
No one has a working wheel with any number of levers of any shape or connections between or extra mechanisms such as storkbills or springs, etc.
DeleteYou’re all wrong, that much is obvious I would hope…
Jeff
true but at least ken b has a working sim which is far more than john was able to achieve with his five scissor wheel. i continue to believe in the ken b version of the bessler wheel and those odd y levers he or should i say bessler used in them.
DeleteIf those Y shaped levers are just a figment of Ken B's imagination, then how do you explain away this last wheel clue that Bessler left the world?
Deletehttps://postimg.cc/jw80YsFj
The lower left corner shows the Y shape lever used in Ken's youtube video of a working sim he made of Bessler's 3 foot diameter Gera prototype wheel. The main background drawing is taken from the top of a poetry card Bessler made for Karl in 1719. What Y shape lever Bessler hid in that drawing is identical angle for angle and point for point with what Ken claims is "the" lever that Bessler used based on Ken's analysis of many other clues he found in Bessler's drawings years earlier. This was enough to convince me that Bessler did in fact use those levers. Also, much thanks to DoSoS for finding that amazing clue for us.
John, otoh, can provide us with no exact lever shape or other specifications. All he can do is continue to prattle on about pentagons which, unfortunately, will never lead him to a runner. Occasionally, however, he will distract everyone by rehashing his past "clues" and "codes" that, aside from him, there seems to be little interest in on this blog. That I think is mainly because they don't describe any kind of a wheel that can be built. Ken B, otoh, does describe wheels that can be built. That makes a huge and obvious difference between those two Bessler pm wheel chasers, imo.
That is indeed an impressive clue anon 20:27...the same lever shape being arrived at using different clues at different times by different people. Can't just be chance, imo. I can accept it as valid. Those scissor type levers that John showed us back in February looked way too complicated to me and I doubt if anyone, especially Count Karl, would have referred to them as being simple. But, a Y shaped lever? I think he could have called it simple but only if, as Brad suggested earlier, Bessler had made a small demo wheel to show the count that used simple one piece levers and reduced the number of cords and springs attached to them. Above Brad supplied a link to his version of a simplified Bessler wheel that may have been shown to the count:
Deletehttps://postimg.cc/yk6rmTH9
anon 21:33 see how it sims out
Deletehttps://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=218078#p218078
@anon 22:59...What that Shadow's BW forum image upload is NOT an accurate sim of the Ken B wheel. Shadow's "sim" does not show the stretched springs counterbalancing the levers and which cords are tight and doing the lifting. Even the levers in it don't have the correct orientations that they have in the actual Ken B wheel sim.
DeleteBeware of people making "sims" that they claim are identical to and disprove the Ken B version of the Bessler prototype wheel. They are not the same as his wheel unless they use the same weight masses, same lever masses, same cord to lever attachment point distances from a lever's pivot, springs with the same tension constants stretched the same amount, and cords with the same lengths between their end attachment points.
In his book Ken B warns that unless one adheres as closely to the specifications he found from Bessler's hidden clues, then one will either get a wheel that runs very poorly or not at all. In fact, I wouldn't trust any "sims" made by anybody who has not actually read and studied the Ken B book on Bessler and his wheels. They are just guessing about how to make a sim of it and the results they claim should be considered to be unreliable.
Anon 23:22 where is your sim?
DeleteI think anon 23:22 was referring to the sim in this video:
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnHy7qZnpI4
Ken B had another version of that video years ago on youtube, but that one disappeared and was then replaced by this one with lower resolution for some reason.
Btw...Ken B also had his own website that was a subdomain of tripod called "The Cosmic Vault". That website also suddenly disappeared!
It used to be here: www.cosmicvault.tripod.com
Looks like someone is trying to suppress his research. I'm wondering how long it will be before this blog meets the same fate...here one day and gone the next with no explanation!
Deletethe original yt video was replaced by that one to wash out & start the comments section over with a clean slate . it is the original video shortened & with less resolution . it still has the exact same faults documented in the original video comments section which is now dissappeared . at the start of the video follow the lever in the 11 o'clock position . as it gets to 3 o'clock it overlaps well beyond allowable tolerances into its stop block , the objects colliding feature not turned on for the lever & its stop . this is a novice error which should see the sim noticeably speed up and slow down a little which it did not as people who did frame by frame analysis pointed out . watch the placement of the attachment points for all the ropes and the springs on their levers . the positions migrate from one side of the lever to the other and back again in a revolution & this pattern repeats . at the time he said that this migration visual was an artifact of his old sim software . this was called out as a complete nonsense excuse because at that scale no one else had ever experienced the same obvious migration or any migration of attachment points , & that no other attachment points other than the these lever connections were migrating back & forth in the same sim . they were apparently lever specific to his sim . he was also asked to show a video of his sim starting from stationary & then accelerating as the one directional wheels could do to prove a surplus of torque as he claimed . he never addressed that request which you would have thought he would be happy to supply as proof of concept & supercharge his book sales . he was asked to repeat the collisions corrected sim & video with it starting from a stationary position to show an acceleration , and a wheel RPM graph plot . this was never acknowledged by him & today he still presents the same tired sim video whitewashed sans years of previous insightful comments . I know what my conclusions were & are .
DeleteAnonymous 02:13 said "...this is a novice error"
DeleteAfter making thousands of sims, I wouldn't refer to Ken B as a "novice" simmer. Yes, he did forget to set the collision for that one stop, but considering that his sim has many parts in motion, I consider it forgivable. I've made the same mistake myself on many of my own sims. In his original video, he acknowledged the mistake, but then when he corrected it on his original sim, he did not notice it made much difference in the operation of the sim so he decided not to make another video to upload.
"...watch the placement of the attachment points for all the ropes and the springs on their levers . the positions migrate from one side of the lever to the other and back again in a revolution & this pattern repeats . at the time he said that this migration visual was an artifact of his old sim software..."
It is in fact an artifact that others have notice on the older versions of wm2d. Apparently, on those versions the orientations of the symbols for the various attachment icons keep a fixed orientation despite the rotation of whatever body they are attached to.
"...he was also asked to show a video of his sim starting from stationary & then accelerating as the one directional wheels could do to prove a surplus of torque as he claimed . he never addressed that request which you would have thought he would be happy to supply as proof of concept & supercharge his book sales..."
I guess he could have done that, but maybe he didn't because the wheel's slow acceleration would have required more than about a half minute to show a complete rotation. I think he adjusted the speed down to what is shown so that we can see it moving at a slow constant speed to better observe the shifting of its levers. But, what he showed is enough for me.
No matter what anyone shows on the internet, there will always be those asking for "more" and, if they don't get it, will be using it as an excuse to claim what they did see was somehow a fake. Unfortunately, the only exercise a lot of people get is jumping to conclusions...false ones!
for 10 years before he was banned from BW.com he posted up thousands of pics of his wm2d sim experiments . many had intentionally hidden interiors and many other rotating experiments did not . he knew how to & regularly graphed wheel RPM to show the wheel speed change over many minutes & hours of run time which he would background in his discussion attachment pics . none of his sequenced sim pics had attachment points that drifted from one side of a lever and back again .
Delete@anon 21:33
DeleteWhat a LYING troll you really are! Ken B was not "banned" from bwf. He voluntary quit, iirc, sometime around 2006 after being there for less than about two years. At that time like others he was just beginning to make wm2d sims and hadn't posted thousands of images from them. I do not recall ever reading him claim then that he had any sims running for "many minutes and hours". There is also zero evidence that he ever hoaxed any of his sims and he never claimed to have a working wheel at any time back then. Like most pathetic trolls you are totally FOS! Also, if he did show any videos of sims or images from them back then that did not have those apparently "orbiting" attachment points in them, that is because the versions of wm2d back then did not produce that effect. It only appeared with versions that came out about a decade later. So, take your lies and peddle them somewhere else to those stupid enough to believe them. This blog is for serious Bessler pm wheel chasers and not creeps like YOU!
ha ha someone's hit a nerve lol
DeleteYeah, I think that troll did get his nerves hit hard. He was obvious unaware of how many fans Ken has around here. In general, however, it's good to follow this advice:
Deletehttps://cdn.quotesgram.com/img/75/76/1707191240-Trolls-3.gif
So Ken B builds thousands of sims and is vastly experienced at it. He says he gets only one sim to be a runner. In his excitement he forgets to check that all collisions are turned on although he must have sat and watched it for hours on end and made many versions and copies of it until he got one "just right". He posts it on You Tube and still does not notice that it has a faulty action. He chooses not to correct it and repost it to YouTube. He shows it turning at a slowed down but constant RPM like a motor would but does not graph it. Totally believable lol.
Deleteelephant in the room . he has no frictions on
DeleteAnon 03:15 wrote "He says he gets only one sim to be a runner."
DeleteNo I recall him saying that after he made sevreal thousand sims he began to get runners in the last ones. What he put in that vid of his was probably one of the better ones he cleaned up to show off even though he screwed up the setting for one of its stops. IIRC, he also claimed (in his book) that he had made successful sims showing how Bessler made his wheels bidirection. That required a special kind of latch that was placed near every lever. When a wheel rotated in one direction, the latch would do nothing. But when it rotated in the opposite direction, the latch would securely hold a lever against a wood piece in the drum. He claimed you can find several clues for the latches in one of Bessler's Dt drawings. The latches were delicate and a pain to adjust so they would all work when needed. When they did work right and a bidirectional wheel was turning in one direction, all of the latches on one of the drum's two inner one way wheels that was forced to turn opposite the direction it was supposed to turn would have all of its levers locked tight against their stops. That made the cog of those levers weights move to the center of the axle and that wheel could provide no torque to counter the torque of the other unlatcched one way wheel that actually drove the entire wheel. I tried to make latching mechs on some of my own sims in the past but could never get them to work reliably. Ken B however did or claims he did. I tend to believe him even though he never made a youtube video to show them. He does show how they are made and work in his book though.
this frame-by-frame simulation of the KB wheel does not pass the AI analysis!
ReplyDeleteIt’s a hoax.
So where is your AI analysis of the "frame by frame" simulation of the Ken B wheel? 😕❓
DeleteSince anon 17:18 never delivered any explanation of why the "KB wheel does not pass the AI analysis" I decided to let Musk's Grok AI take a crack at analyzing the Ken B video of what he claims is an accurate sim of Bessler's 36 inch Gera prototype wheel. That AI program gave a long rambling analysis, but here are some of the key things it pointed out:
Delete>>> Your video's simulated wheel has a really interesting “coupled governor” feel to it — much more sophisticated than the classic overbalanced-wheel sketches usually associated with Johann Bessler.
>>> Overall Assessment
As a mechanical concept:
* imaginative
* nontrivial
* dynamically interesting
* potentially capable of complex motion
Compared to most “gravity wheel” proposals, this is definitely a more sophisticated attempt at solving the timing problem rather than just creating static overbalance.
>>> What Your Video's Wheel Simulation Suggests Mechanically
The simulated wheel seems designed so that:
* descending-side levers are forced outward,
* ascending-side levers are pulled inward,
* and the long cross-couplings prevent symmetric recovery.
If that timing genuinely survives through all 360° of rotation, then the center of gravity of the moving masses could theoretically trace a locus displaced from the axle.
So, it seems like Grok AI approves of Ken B's sim of the Bessler prototype wheel.
And I thought the difference between a working wheel and a sim was also obvious. No one’s sim is “working”. Sims only simulate. A simulation of perpetual motion is possible, but it’s an impossible machine to make. The software allows it but thermodynamics…
ReplyDeleteJeff
I think that most here will consider the "thermodynamics..." prohibition on pm wheels being possible as not being applicable to them. It's only applicable if you cannot find another source for the mechanical energy such a wheel would output. Bessler apparently found that other source, but from reading his books it's obvious to me that even he did not understand its true nature.
DeleteMost here do not understand if he found another source for the energy output then it wasn’t pm. PM requires his machine to not have any other source than itself. Even it was external, then it still wasn’t pm, that would be temporary motion until the external source was exhausted.
ReplyDeleteAnd before anyone says it, his wheels weren’t creating internal energy.
Jeff
Agreed...no external source...the source must be internal but apparently was not obvious to Bessler. What could it be? Ken B does have an explanation, though. He says that, as one of Bessler's wheels turned and its weighted levers swung around in different directions and at different speeds, they were actually able to extract very tiny amounts of energy from the masses of their lead weights' atoms and then pass it on to all of the parts of a wheel to increase their rotational kinetic energy around a wheel's axle. That then made the wheel accelerate. When some outside machine was attached to the wheel's axle, the wheel's slowly increasing rotational energy would actually "flow" from the axle into the machine to make its parts move. It's a controversial explanation because, if true, it implies that the rest masses of atoms are not fixed...they can be gradually reduced inside of a working pm wheel. Physicist types are not comfortable with a concept like that. But, if we ever do physically duplicate one of Bessler's wheels, then they may have to get comfortable with it in a hurry!
DeleteAll the atoms in planet earth, and the solar system, and our milky way galaxy, and our local galaxy cluster, and the universe, are in constant motion relative to each other, and the centre of the universe. Even a rock sitting on a moon landscape is moving and has Kinetic Energy relative to the earth. Or churning waves and circulating seas, or water spiraling down a power turbine, or weather patterns in constant movement. I must have missed the memo to tie everything down to conserve its rest mass LOL.
DeleteKB is right . i lose weight on the days when i run & not when i'm sitting on the couch so there's your proof of his theory . light bulb i know how to get more mileage & save money on gas for my pickup . drive long hard & fast & stand on the brakes . cause it will get lighter & i'll get greater mileage . don't no why they call me dumbass .
DeleteIIRC, the loss of mass in each weight in one of Bessler's wheels was according to Ken B something like only a fraction of a picogram per wheel rotation! At that extremely low rate it could take millions of years to reduce the mass of the weights in a Bessler wheel down to zero. No one is ever going to be able to test some process taking that long. However, with a wheel turning constantly at full speed for a few decades, maybe our most accurate equipment could detect the drop in the masses of its weights. When it comes to Bessler's wheels, we are all in an entirely new field of physics and there will no doubt be many surprises in store for us.
DeleteYou can count on wood worms and rust to reduce the mass over time!
DeleteOnly the masses of the weights need be monitored. If a test wheel used lead weights then their masses wouldn't be lowered by wood worms although even lead can oxidize over time with the thin oxide coating adding to the mass of the weights. To prevent that I'd recommend making the weights out of pure platinum despite the expense. Or, to keep costs down, one could use steel weights, but plate them with fairly thick coating of pure platinum.
Delete