This is just an idea that has been hanging around in the back of my mind, for ever, it seems. Everyone is well aware of Bessler’s apparent obsession with the number 5 (and mine!). There are numerous pointers indicating to its importance in Bessler’s mind. I won’t repeat the many indicators but….what if it has nothing to do with the number of mechanisms inside the wheel?
Recent comments on this blog brought to my mind this question and a possible connection with the frequency of the number five. The Fibonacci numbers are well known and their relationship to the golden ratio.
We know that Bessler was familiar with the golden ratio and the Fibonacci numbers because he demonstrates it with MT137. See my blogs dated 25th October last year and 7th September 2024.
And https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2025/10/a-brief-reminder-about-besslers.html
https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/2024/09/johann-besslers-aka-orffyreus-maschinen.html
He knew the maths, 360/1.618 = 222.5 or 360-222.5=137.5 Curiously 1/137.5 = 00727272727 etc. and 5x72=360, the basic numbers of the pentagram again.
He needed to fill the gap between MT136 and the first number in the Toys page, 138. He did this with MT137, which seems to be an of odd inclusion considering the MT was a collection of machinery drawings. MT137 has no apparent mechanical properties usable in a Bessler wheel. It does, however show it’s connection with the golden ratio.
He demonstrated his requirement to achieve certain totals by using a collection of related numbers to get the final total to some significant number. He used this technique in all the drawings in GB and DT.
So the Toys page had the four numbers pencilled on the bottom left corner of the page, 138,139,140 and 141.
There are 141 bible references in Chapter 55 of his Apologia Poetica, and 55 four line stanzas. We know that this number 55 is constantly shown as well as 5. In the Fibonacci serine’s of numbers 5 and 55 are present, why would he push the importance of a those two numbers? Perhaps he was actually pushing the golden ratio.
141 has only two factors, 3 and 47. MT47 has three number 47s. Euclid’s instruction 47 shows how to construct a pentagram. He also describes construction of a line representing the golden ration, although he doesn’t give it that name.
The Toys page numbers total 558. The 55 seems a popular number for Bessler, but what of the 8? Well the three numbers in 558 total 18 and that is the basic number in the pentagram, all the angles are multiples of 18.
The number connected with then Golden ratio is 1.618, but 0.618 is its conjugate and is close to SoS’s Bessler’s favourite number 0.777…
I wondered if the actual measurement ratio which was thought to be 0.777 might actually be 0.618?
I don’t know because I never knew how SoS found the 0.777. However given Bessler apparent obsession with the number 5 and 55, and the pentagon, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to connect the golden ratio with SoS’s favourite Bessler number 0.777.
JC
John, you may be 100% right about this. However, I have always been curious/ skeptical about your focus on numbers and lines drawn on images. I think we are in agreement that JB left behind clues for the sole purpose arguing "first to invent" in case someone else figured it out before he could get paid. That being the case, I do not think he would leave clues so easily subject to different interpretations. Imagine him arguing in a court about Fibonacci numbers or a line that could be drawn between two points on a picture. No, I think those clues that are definitive in character are where the secret can be found. Example: 1 pound raising 4 pounds, weights trading places, etc.
ReplyDeleteOn a related note...PLEASE answer this,: in the passage where he says as long as the "SUPERIOR" weight remains out of the center of gravity, it will turn. Could the German word that was translated have meant LARGER instead of higher?
I'm not JC, but I think the words translated as "superior weight" could have been better translated as "preponderate weight". It does not refer to a single one of a wheel's weights, but rather to the total mass of a wheel's active weights which can, for mechanical purposes, be considered to be concentrated into a single point and then located at a certain location in space and is then referred to as the "center of mass" or CoM of all of the weights. When Bessler says that the superior weight in his wheels remains out of the "center of gravity", I think he's just saying that, in order for a wheel the have torque and turn, its weights' CoM must not be located at the center of a wheel's axle, but rather to one or the other side of it. Actually, it cannot be located anywhere on an imaginary vertical line that passes through the center of the wheel's axle or no torque will be produced. He's basically describing a simple overbalanced type pm wheel...without, of course, telling us HOW he managed to keep the CoM of his pm wheels' active weights on the descending side of their drums despite their rotation.
DeleteAnon 00:26. The quote you gave me looked very familiar so I did a search for ‘superior’ in that quote in all my publications but I can’t find any, other than some which are not relevant in this case. I’m sure I’ve read it somewhere, but the only words I could find were preponderance.
DeleteIn AP “ Whoever seeks another method is deceiving himself, for my device does not need winding; it runs according to "preponderance", and turns everything else along with it; so long as its material shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord.”
But I’m sure I’ve read the quote somewhere, but where I don’t know. If you can show me where is says that quote and find the German and get translations.
It might have come from a website somewhere, but I can’t find out which.
JC
He is mixing his quotes. Wagner mentions superior force about 15 dozen times in his critiques.
Delete"On a related note...PLEASE answer this,: in the passage where he says as long as the "SUPERIOR" weight remains out of the center of gravity, it will turn. Could the German word that was translated have meant LARGER instead (of = OR) higher?
Thank you anon 10:09. I forgot about Wagner’s critique. Unfortunately I don’t have a copy of the original German so I can’t answer your question.
DeleteJC
@anon 10:09
DeleteI think when Wagner mentions "superior force", he's describing a wheel's torque. When Bessler mentions "superior weight", he's describing the center of gravity of his weights (which is the same as anon 04:29's center of mass) being located on a wheel's descending side or what will become the descending side when it is released and starts to rotate. The two terms do not have the same meaning.
I also think many in Bessler's time and even today are confused about the power outputs of Bessler's wheels. Their actual constant power output was quite low because they had low torque despite the larger ones having an imbalance created by hundreds of pounds of lead weights. Bessler was adept at setting up demonstrations that made his wheels look like they had much more constant power than they actually did. Yes, one of his wheels could quickly hoist a load of stones with a weight of a hundred pounds up tens of feet, but it could only do that after the wheel took minutes to build its speed up to its maximum amount and the rope to the weight was only then suddenly attached to the wheel's axle pin. If one just attached the same rope to the axle pin when the wheel was stationary and gave the drum a push, then nothing would have happened because the wheel's startup torque would not be able to directly lift the load.
JC wrote "I don’t know because I never knew how SoS found the 0.777."
ReplyDeleteIIRC, SoS originally found that clue back around 2019 or 2020 and it did somehow involve MT137, but I don't remember the details. I tried to find it using ChatGPT, but it could not find it. Maybe it got deleted along with the dozens of other comments you deleted back then in an effort to keep everyone from seeing that new clue? That wouldn't surprise me because it seems to refute your pentagonal wheel hypothesis.
Anyway, there have been numerous confirmations of Bessler's lucky ratio since then. I think Bessler got the idea for it from those New Testament quotes of Jesus that use the number 7 multiple times. Someone also showed how Bessler hid that special ratio in the only wheel drawing in AP. I kept a copy of the drawing showing how the lucky ratio is hidden in that wheel which you can see here:
https://i.postimg.cc/PqGVfSM1/ap-wheel-sevens.jpg
When you study the AP wheel, the first thing you notice is that giant letter Y that fills its interior. It represents one of the Y shaped levers that Bessler used in his wheels. The circle in the center represents the steel pivot of the Y shaped lever. But, where does one place that pivot and the Y shaped lever that turns about inside the drum of a wheel? Simple...you place it at the distance from the center of a wheel's axle that is equal to 0.777 x the radius of the wheel's drum.
How to get that lucky ratio of 0.777 from the AP drawing? You use the outer greenish colored circumference of the AP wheel as a zero. The smaller red colored circle at the center of the wheel becomes a decimal point. Finally, you can draw three yellow colored number 7's onto the sides of those three lighter wedge shaped things between the smaller red colored central circle and the wheel's outer greenish colored circumference. That gives you the lucky ratio of 0.777. (Note to any newbies reading this...those colors were added, they are not in the original drawing.)
That's basically it and hopefully, as Jesus and Bessler might have said, you are not "yet without understanding" of the true meaning of that AP wheel and the "Lucky Ratio" hidden in it...in plain sight.
Thank you anon 13:39. Ingenious.
ReplyDeleteJC
The thing about 5 or 7 or any other number that is emphasized in the drawings or writings is he didn't say what significance they may have in relation to a solution. The only noteworthy thing about them is the speculation they lead you to. Fawk, they are distractions from any actual clue. The only thing that I'm aware of that could be interpreted as an actual clue is where he said "a discerning mind can find a movement in them" referring to the MT. Mt 1 has 8 weights; 2 has 12; 3 has 24; 4 has 12; 5 has 32. 18 only has 4. 28 has none. 55 has no commentary. 56 introduces "a pair of bellows" (but no other direction). 57 (5 and 7 if that means something) is bellows. Where in the mt drawings is the significance of any number emphasized?
ReplyDeleteSoS found the number 25 showing up in a lot of the mt drawings and that number is supposed to refer to the 25th letter of the alphabet which is Y. From that SoS concluded that letter's shape was also the shape of the levers Bessler used inside of his pm wheels which is why the number appears so often. Here's a typical example from my collection of SoS clues:
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/vHVDfrjY/MT-85-Y-Clues.jpg
@anon 16:21...don't forget one of Bessler's most important and often overlooked clues!
Deletehttps://i.postimg.cc/7h4b3kP7/The-Bessler-W-Clue.jpg
Yes as I’ve shown several times here, W is one of the most important clues.
DeleteJC
Nice clue, anon 21:01. Here's a somewhat similar one from my collection which IINM was made last year by SoS. Note how he gets the number 25 from the letters "V" and "T" hidden in the parts that make up the Kassal wheel pendulum. That was Bessler's way of telling us that the levers in his wheels were symbolized by that giant pendulum and they were "Y" shaped.
Deletehttps://postimg.cc/Z0Tj0n9R
IIRC, SoS also pointed out that the Kassal wheel drawing shows the two ball weights at the ends of the pendulum's top cross piece being able to smack up against the ceiling! That would never have been allowed to happen for the actual Kassal wheel because it could have damaged the pendulum or the axle crank and rod connected to the cross piece, not to mention the ceiling which would definitely not have amused Karl (note that Bessler's drawing only shows one pendulum, but there would have been another identical one on the other side of the drum which we don't see because the drum hides it). Bessler must have intentionally put this error into his drawing in order to bring attention to that letter "W" that is right above the spot in the ceiling where the left ball weight is shown hitting. As in your clue, the letter "W" could have been alphanumerically decoded at any time to give the number 25 and Bessler would have used that to claim he had priority to the unique "Y" shaped levers that his pm wheels used just in case some rival inventor came up with a design identical to Bessler's which also used that unusual lever shape..
I remain convinced that all of the "hidden in plain sight" clues Bessler put into his few drawings had to be simple and immediately obvious to the average person after Bessler pointed them out and explained them a little. I'm wary of any clues that are too complicated or which require one to be a mathematician to understand. Unfortunately, I've found most of JC's clues fall into that category of being too complicated for the average person to understand. Maybe he's been "over thinking" Bessler's clues all along?
Why oh Wai oh Y do you persist with pushing your nonsense. where's YOUR sim using Y levers?
DeleteIf you want to find the letter y or w or the number 25 or 5 or 7 or whatever, you can use your imagination and find them in just about any drawing you care to cherry-pick to support your opinion of what the clues are. The way the Y’s are shown in anonymous Ken’s image of MT 85 is a perfect example. Just outline any two crossing lines until you get your letter.
DeleteThe W clue is a good example for how you can use it to support your opinion he not only used stork bills but a specific number of stork bills! He used 5 stork bills because his W font says so!
It’s amusing to me that everyone has a completely unique interpretation of the evidence.
But no cigars.
anon 4:24 wrote:
Delete"The way the Y’s are shown in anonymous Ken’s image of MT 85 is a perfect example."
I think you need to take another look at that MT85 clue. Bessler put a nice big + sign right in the middle of its turbine wheel. Numerologists would immediately recognize that as an instruction to add some numbers together. Notice that the arms of the + sign form the spokes of the turbine wheel and they go out to the four visible sections of the wheel. The only thing to count in those sections are the vanes and when you do that between the head and toe of the man on the swing, you will get exactly 25 vanes. Not 23, 24, 26, or 27, but exactly 25. After one sees enough clues like this it becomes obvious that the number 25 was an important number Bessler wanted to preserve in his drawings. I go along with those who claim it represents the 25th letter of the alphabet or Y and that was the shape of the levers he used. My guess is that particular shape was made necessary when Bessler started to experiment with his Connectedness Principle in an effort to get an earlier wheel he made work which, imo, was MT 13. Maybe he discovered that without the use of Y shaped levers, an overbalanced type pm wheel with eight levers cannot be made to work.
Once again Ken B raises his ugly head. You give yourself away in so many ways! I’ve asked you so many times to go away, but you ignore me, you just use this blog to promote your idiotic theories and your ridiculous book. No publisher will ever take your book on, it’s far too long, full of completely unbelievable and unacceptable conclusions, and full of the text equivalent of verbal diarrhea
DeleteHere are two clues that you are indeed Ken B. You always exhibit excessive wordage and you can’t spell Kassel!
JC
https://i.postimg.cc/mDRR4WwK/KB-Ascension.jpg
Delete@JC
DeleteI think a lot of people here, including myself, have spelled "Kassal" as "Kassel". That is not something that just Ken B might do. While you displayed your well known Ken B paranoia (which IIRC showed up shortly AFTER his 2019 Bessler book came out that provided a sim verified solution to the Bessler wheel mystery) to distract everyone with your insulting comment, I noticed that you carefully avoided commenting on anon 04:55's well written analysis of the MT 85 drawing. He showed exactly how cleverly Bessler hid the number 25 in that drawing which is the alphanumeric value for the letter Y. Maybe you purposely avoided discussing his analysis of that drawing because you really cannot explain away what he points out which you know provides even more evidence of how ridiculous and idiotic your own pentagonal wheel clues are? So far, they have led to nothing useful and that is exactly what they will continue to do into the future. I think that you know that already, but are trying the best you can to pretend that won't happen. Other than your handful of fans here, I think that the vast majority of the followers of this blog (the ones who actually know something about mechanics) also know it. Maybe it's time you faced the reality that you are not destined to solve the Bessler wheel mystery? It's really nothing to be too ashamed of. You will just be joining the millions of others who eventually became failed Bessler wheel chasers.
No wonder you got thrown off BesslerWheel.com. You need to get some help mate. As John says, just do one!
Delete@anon 09:17
DeleteI've seen that Ken B cartoon before. He also made another one showing his "Second Coming" where he floats down from the "Realm of Total Bessler Awareness Where the Successful Mobilist Dwells" holding a copy of his Bessler book like he was Moses returning from Mount Sinai with a tablet having the words of God on it! Lol!
Well, if he has found the secret of Bessler's wheels, then maybe he did ascend to that sublime realm!
I wrote a brief comment in response to the above and deleted it. What’s the point?
DeleteJC
sigh whats the point indeed. the guy is a nut job. i can show you many more clues of l (L) & i (I) levers lol.
DeleteHis book is so bad for plagiarism that it’s sold at £0 on the net!
Delete@JC
DeleteYou wrote "I wrote a brief comment in response to the above and deleted it. What’s the point?'
The point is that anon 17:29 suggested that you seem to incapable of engaging in any kind of rational discussion about any of the MANY new clues emerging in the B drawings which you are usually unaware of and show no inclination to learn about. If such a clue does not contain any sort of pentagon or 18 degree angle of mention of Euclid, then it passes right through your brain like water going through a sieve. You have, quite sadly, become the ultimate practitioner of selection bias which IIRC someone else noted several blogs ago. Maybe you think that by ignoring all of these newly discovered clues, you can make them magically go away? That's not going to happen and the more of them that emerge, the more doubtful your pentagon theory will look. You need to be studying all of the new clues that appear. If you don't, you and your pentagon approach will be like a man desperately trying to sell his old lame horse while everyone around them is speeding by in an automobile! I think your pentagon approach might have sounded plausible years ago, but that status is rapidly changing with each newly found clue.
The wise man knows when it's time to abandon a sinking ship and find a new ship. 🌊⛵🏊♂️🚢
But they are not clues. They are twaddle and mind candyfloss. Where's an independent sim or build of the great redeemers sim that can be checked. That's right there isn't any.
DeleteJohn wrote: "Here are two clues that you are indeed Ken B. You always exhibit excessive wordage and you can’t spell Kassel!"
DeleteI don't know where John is getting his (mis)information from, but I have the Ken B book, have actually read it, and I don't recall ever seeing him spell "Kassal" as "Kassel" anywhere in it. I would also caution people to ignore any troll noise in these comments. None of them has ever read or even seen the Ken B book and their opinions of it are irrelevant. They would actually be incapable of understanding it if they did try to read it because their low IQ's would not permit that. It was an unexpected and monumental work intended for serious Bessler wheel researchers. It is not meant for anyone who does not take the subject seriously. Trolls have no serious interest in the subject and you never see any of them contribute anything of any value on this blog or any other blog or forum.
There's only 1 troll on JOHN's Blog and that is you. Set up your own blog with advertising revenue, to support your habit and supplement your book sales douche bag.
DeleteYou obviously don’t read this blog, you just troll. I recently mentioned that some years ago that Ken asked me to review his book. I agreed to review it. It wasn’t a fully supportive review but I think it was fair.
DeleteAs for the misspelling of Kassel, it was in an earlier comments in the same blog, presumably by Ken?
My advertising revenue is minimal and doesn’t even get near my costs. Why do I do it? To try, despite the attempts to spoil the blog by trolls such as yourself, to gather more people interested in seeking the answer to Bessler’s wheel.
JC
Actually, if you’re reading this Ken, why don’t you post a copy of.my review here, so people can judge if I was fair.
DeleteJC
Caution! High troll activity detected on this blog! 🧌🧌🧌🧌🧌
Deletehttps://i.giphy.com/13Wlh2o9yCiMTu.webp
John wrote "Why do I do it? To try...to gather more people interested in seeking the answer to Bessler’s wheel."
DeleteThat is your publicly stated intention. But, from reading through the comments on many blogs here it becomes obvious that your real purpose is to "gather more people" to accept YOUR beliefs about Bessler's wheels...book sales are nice, but really secondary. When that acceptance does not happen, then we get to see your inner rage come out as you start accusing others of being trolls or having "idiotic theories" and suffering from "verbal diarrhea". Your frustration level is so evident to everyone especially the trolls that will try to convince you that they do actually support your approach. They are not your friends although they pretend to be. Who are your real friends? Those who are trying to get you to stop wasting time pursuing and promoting an unworkable design for Bessler's wheels. They are not trying to sabotage your efforts. After watching you achieve nothing after decades of struggling, they just want you to consider different approaches that might finally allow you to make some real progress for a long overdue change. You may think that an "old dog cannot learn new tricks", but you are wrong about that. Change is always possible especially when one's frustration level finally gets great enough to make him ready for a change... 🙏🙂
🤪 JC
DeleteLearn Newtonian Physics and give yourself a shot at not ending up in the near to bursting PM bone-yard with the others who relied on gut feelings and lady luck smiling down on them.
DeleteJC don't need none of that fancy Newton Phyics crap. He already knows all the real physiccs he needs to know. ..it's JC Physics! The best yous can get. You all will see. He will show you all he's right about that pentgaon stuff of his. Jist gives him some more time to does it.
DeleteWho is me? I'm "Mr. Bone Yard Dweller" thats who! 🦴🦴🦴💀💀💀 🦴🦴🦴
We PM Chasers (good term!) also need a sense of humour and the skin of a rhinoceros to ignore the slings and arrows of our critics. I’ve developed both over the years but occasionally one of the barbs gets through and I probably overreact.
DeleteJC