I’m still working on some changes to the current design, AKA ‘the work-around wheel’. It is open to a number of variables and I hope it will prove to be a simpler version of my last one. The problem with interpreting Bessler’s clues correctly is the strong possibility that there are several options to consider some of which seem more suitable to producing the desired actions commensurate with the Bessler-Collins Gravity Enabled Continuous Rotation Hypothesis, and some less so.
This is not the so-called “bright shiny object” mentioned occasionally, it’s just part of a lifetime’s work in trying to replicate Bessler’s wheel. New versions are an ongoing process, each is a serious attempt to solve this puzzle and studying the actions of the mechanisms to see if there can be an alternative that could be an improvement is also a necessary feature of most research. If I post something along the lines of, “I know how it worked!” I’m sorry if I give the impression that I’ve proved something; because I haven’t, I’ve just got over excited at my latest model. I’m very sorry to mislead anyone, but I’m an excitable guy.
The problem is this tends to lead to people asking me to share it, but when I have shared something too speculative, it leads to general disappointment.
Each version is tried out on a previous wheel structure which leads to numerous holes and alterations to the various parts of the mechanisms visible on the test model. I’m sure this is a common feature of Bessler wheel research. The final PoP wheel won’t be a thing of beauty, nor a “ bright shiny object”, but as proof of the legitimacy of Bessler’s wheel, it will outshine more than 300 years of oblivity.
JC
