I understand why those who dismiss my suggestions about Bessler’s wheel, such as the importance of the number five, do so. I have never filled in the blanks convincingly and without a working model incorporating all of those interpreted ‘clues’, no words of mine are ever going to persuade people that I’m right,
Recently I began working on yet another design but still based on my interpretation of those infamous clues that I’ve ‘obsessed’ over for many years. My experience with this particular design has proved quite difficult because getting the pivots in the right place is only part of the problem. Getting the length of the levers involved and placing each one’s connecting pivot correctly was difficult, also it was necessary to restrict a portion of the arc of each lever as .it moved, in order to stop it locking at either end of each action. This reduced the effectiveness of the actions, but this limiting factor can be overcome by adjusting the pivot position and the length of each lever. Another problem occurs when adjoining levers clash during their action because they’re too close to each other. Again this can be overcome by using longer pivots which raise the lever in contention, or just bending them upwards to clear the offending one. This can solve an immediate problem but ultimately requires an improved layout to maintain actions.
So it’s a trial and error process, or rather a case of comparing several variations to discover which obtains the best result. I also I have to ensure that I don’t overt-tighten the fixed pivots to avoid slowing or limiting the free movements of the whole assembly. So I always loosen each locknut by about three-quarters of a turn from fully tightened. This tends to lead to some looseness of all parts but it’s better than having everything too tight.
In this particular case I have come to the conclusion that when Bessler said he awoke from an inspiring dream, but still had to work on it for a long time before he got it right, I can fully appreciate those difficulties. I still think it will prove almost impossible to build a successful working Besslerwheel without a fully hands-on approach, but I would be delighted if someone were to prove me wrong.
I work with a sketch pad, drawing ideas that I think Bessler is describing and trying to fit them into a coherent combination that might contain an overbalancing advantage but include a natural reversal mechanism, operated by the same parts which caused the initial action.
I know I always think I’ve finally got the answer, but that is an important part of the research. The optimism generated by the idea that I know the secret is a vital ingredient in wanting to carry on. The knowledge that Bessler succeeded and was determined to leave information about his wheel and my own certainty about the clues he left, is enough to maintainer my appetite for building new designs and keep my enthusiasm continuing.
When I moved house about four years ago, I threw so much stuff away, thinking it was of no use because it was all failed mechanisms. There were more than 20 assorted round wood blanks with hundreds of small perforations drilled for insertion of various pivots; a huge 8tangle of discarded levers of all shapes and sizes. Now I wish I’d kept some but they’re gone now, and of course I have a few new ones to modify.
One day my interpretations will lead to a successful wheel and I believe that, if not by me then by someone else using my interpretations of the clues. There are so many clues I have never mentioned because detailing them all would be too tedious and time consuming, and they need to be taken as whole, not little bits here and there.
JC
.
"Recently I began working on yet another design..."
ReplyDeleteEgads! Now you're up to BWA 3.0 (which stands for "Bessler Workaround 3.0"). Well, good luck with it, but it sounds like you're having the same basic problems you've had with the earlier versions.
Actually, I wasn't expecting to hear much from you here about any continuing pm wheel improvements for a good while after your mentioning in the last blog about all of the painting, scraping, and cleaning you were going to do to sell your current dwelling. I'd just move out and sell it "as is" and let the new owner worry about repairing and redecorating it. Did anyone repair and redecorate your current home before you moved in to it? No one did it for me and after I moved into my current residence I had to paint all of the rooms and their ceilings as well as replace most of the plumbing and electrical wiring myself which actually took over a year. On the bright side though, I learned a lot of new skills which have helped me in my pursuit of pm.
Fair comment anon 09:09. But four years ago we downsized to a bungalow, but we don’t like it. So we are going to buy a house again. This will probably happen next year so plenty of time to get this house ready and continue to complete my wheel/wheels, Deciding to move north coincides with other things.
ReplyDeleteJC
A single story shallow roof bungalow with outdoor veranda is what everyone wants when they "downsize" as they age. No more regular climbing and descending staircases to a second or third story common in a villa house or semi-detached which gets harder as we age. My hips and knees can vouch for the sanity and quality of life for making that decision. Painting and giving it a birthday may make it more attractive to a larger pool of potential buyers so that it sells quicker than the average days taken, but in a flat market may not get a substantial lift in sale price achieved for the cost and your time. Better to pay yourself for a full building report done by a qualified building surveyor available to all potential purchasers to give them some confidence that it has no major faults and is consented etc. - Phil & Kirsty
ReplyDeleteJC: "I threw so much stuff away...There were more than 20 assorted round wood blanks with hundreds of small perforations drilled for insertion of various pivots; a huge tangle of discarded levers of all shapes and sizes..."
ReplyDeleteOne would think that alone should have been more than sufficient to convince you that your pentagonal approach is not correct. If I was you, I would take another long look at those "...so many clues [you] have never mentioned..." and see if there is some alternative interpretation you can find for them. Wasn't it the great Einstein who gave the definition of insanity as "repeating the same thing over and over again expecting to get different results"? You may be doing exactly that and not even realizing it!
Indizio su MT 83 avete notato che il numero 8 é il simbolo dell'infinito, mentre in MT 86 il numero é normale .
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, “ A clue regarding MT 83: have you noticed that the number 8 is the infinity symbol, whereas in MT 86 the number is normal?”
DeleteSo, “ The infinity symbol (∞) was created in 1655 by the English mathematician John Wallis in his mathematical treatise De sectionibus conicis”.
I can’t see what you are seeing. It’s a nice idea but if Bessler wanted the infinity symbol visible he would need it on it side.
JC
John wrote "...if Bessler wanted the infinity symbol visible he would need it on it side."
DeleteNot necessarily. Bessler often hid numbers by rotating them in various ways as he did for the number 7 as was shown in John's July 17th blog. I do agree with anon 15:47 that the number 8 in MT83 could be an infinity symbol (after it was rotated into a vertical orientation to hide it) which fits in with the concept of perpetual motion that is supposed to be infinitely repeated motion. That number 8 can also be symbolic of Bessler's two direction wheels. The upper and lower parts of the number 8 are near perfect circles and they both touch an enlarged dot. The dot represents the cross section of the axle of a two way wheel and the circles each represent a cross section of one of its two inner one way wheels that were mounted next to each other and on the same axle which is symbolized by the two circles touching the dot between them. Brad even showed us how Bessler hid his lucky ratio value of 0.777 in the drawing number for MT83. I saved Brad's interesting drawing and here it is for those who haven't seen it yet or forgot about it:
https://i.postimg.cc/fb0kFDYy/bessler-s-mt-83-lucky-ratio-clue.jpg
Btw, I recommend that members and visitors to this blog download and save every drawing linked to here because you never know when you will have need of it like I just did. 🙂
I'm surprised that John didn't find that clue first with the two circles being two wheels on the same axle. It's so obvious...at least it is now that anon 21:24 explained it to us.
DeleteLol! If John didn't notice a pentagon shape or an eighteen degree angle somewhere in it, then he would have ignored it! 😆
Delete@anon 21:24
DeleteThanks for resurrecting that lucky ratio clue I found a while ago. I almost forgot I'd found it! I also agree with your interpretation about the infinity symbol and bidirectional wheel symbolism in MT 83.
Because of the many times that particular fraction of 0.777 shows up in Bessler's drawings, I have to assume that he deliberately wanted anyone trying to reverse engineer his invention to see it. It just could be some sort of "master clue" that one must take into account when trying to interpret Bessler's other hidden number clues. So far, SoS claims that lucky ratio is only the fraction formed by dividing the distance from an drum axle's center to one of its Y shaped lever's pivot by the radius of the drum. For both the Merseburg and Kassal wheels, that means that their lever pivots were all located exactly 56 inches from the center of their axles because 6 feet = 72 inches and 0.777 x 72 inches = 56 inches.
But, I think there could be much more to that ratio than just locating the lever pivots and I'm not just referring to the religious meaning of that string of 7's. It may be that you can get the lengths of the different coordinating ropes interconnecting the levers by multiplying other numbers Bessler hid in his drawings by 0.777.
This is a possibility that I continue to explore and will reveal what I find here when (if!) I get something that looks interesting.
Brad
Anon 21:24. I’ve studied the drawing and the interpretation is very clever, but if Bessler placed it in MT, for what purpose? It doesn’t help us to find the solution. MT was never published and as a learning aid for his potential apprentices, I suppose it could have provided a talking point?
DeleteThis drawing is more persuasive of the existence of the number 0.777 in Bessler’s documents than any of the others I’ve seen.
As far as I can tell neither Leibniz nor Newton ever used Wallis’s infinity symbol, although it was beginning to catch on the 17th century, so it’s possible that Bessler became aware of its potential as a infinity symbol.
Very interesting find guys.
JC
Brad your comment appeared after mine, but thank you for your inputs. I remain unconvinced of the relevance of the 0.777 number but I will try to keep an open mind.
DeleteMy apparent obsession with the pentagram does have a practical value which I’ll share with you one day soon, but the 0.777 number has only vague associations with angels etc and I cannot understand why some of you are latching onto the idea that it has any relevance to Bessler’s wheel.
JC
I’ve had another look at MT, and I’m just pointing out that every number 3 can be adapted easily to make the number 7. Also the number 8s vary a little and on balance I’d say it’s just a coincidence that the MT 83 could be an infinity symbol. I’m sure Bessler would have found a way to hint at rotating the image if he wanted to. In Wikipedia it described Wallis’s infinity symbol as taking ‘decades’ to come into popular use, so there’s no evidence that Bessler was even aware of it.
DeleteJC
I think that the serious Bessler pm wheel clue searcher would do well to read through that last May 8th blog because it is indeed loaded with new clues. For example we see there another clue that Brad found for us about that lucky 0.777 ratio in the Merseburg wheel drawing which you can see here:
Deletehttps://postimg.cc/HjNK5nMf
And that one even triggered SoS to find a similar "bonus" clue for us in the second drawing in DT of the Kassal wheel which is here:
https://i.postimg.cc/Z5ww4Ggr/the-bonus-clue.jpg
These two previously undiscovered clues show that there was something important about that ratio of 0.777 and that it clearly points to a particular location along the radius of one of his wheels. I go along with the belief that it's where Bessler placed his wheel's lever pivots. Exactly why there may however not be known for a while. But if we want to successfully duplicate Bessler's wheels then maybe we should follow his instructions? 🤔
I just can’t accept that ‘solution’ it’s too meaningless. I offered a better solution for the same picture, more detailed at https://johncollinsnews.blogspot.com/search?q=30+degree
DeleteJC