Global Warming; both oil and time are running out.

In an address to members of the European parliament a while ago in Brussels, HRH Charles, Prince of Wales stated that "climate change presented such a threat that, uniquely in history, it will surely require the effort of every nation and every person to find and implement a solution before it is too late."

On an earlier occasion He said, "The evidence on climate change is both frightening and alarming. Doing nothing is simply not an option, it can't be any more, because of the urgency of the situation. This is not about saving the planet. Actually, it's about saving us. That is where each and every one of us has a responsibility to do what we can."

In July this year HRH said that if the world failed to heed His warnings then we all faced the "nightmare that for so many of us now looms on the horizon".

Others such as Al Gore and Gorden Brown have also commented similarly. Gordon Brown warned that there were only 50 days to save the planet from global warming - 50 days, that is, before more UN talks, Mr Brown said that countries were not making progress quickly enough to reach agreement and warned of the economic, human and ecological impact of a failure to cut the emissions.

Nearly four years ago former Vice President Al Gore said we only have 10 years left.

The consensus seems to be that not only is oil running out, but due to carbon emissions and global warming, also time.

HRH's reputation as a passionate environmentalist is unassailable, I must therefore ask why it is that a technology which has been known about for almost 300 years and through which many of his concerns can be assuaged is completely ignored, derided, and scorned. I know the answer of course and the fault lies not with HRH but with our scientists. The assumption that because gravity is a conservative force it cannot be used to drive machinery is inaccurate and can be proved wrong.

I refer to a machine once known as a perpetual motion machine, but latterly referred to as a gravity-converter. It was invented in 1712 by Johann Bessler, also known by the curious pseudonym, Orffyreus. The documentary evidence that it was genuine is compelling.

I also note with a certain amount of amusement that "in a bold move to lessen our dependence on traditional fuels and decrease carbon missions, Congress voted to repeal an old Republican ban on perpetual motion machines, clearing the way for the development of self-propelled water wheels, self-flowing flasks, float belts, zeromotors, and other environmentally-friendly industrial equipment." [courtesy of thepeoplescube.com]

How wonderful it would be if this single act were to open the flood gates of invention and lead to a kind of perpetual motion machine! But back to reality.

The implication of HRH's comments is that no stone should be left unturned in our search for a solution to global warming. If a potential source of free, clean energy can be identified then surely it behoves us to examine the claims put forth and develop such technology? To quote HRH's own words "That is where each and every one of us has a responsibility to do what we can." I have been doing "what I can" since I self-published a book about the machine in 1997. I have a number of web sites each offering additional information about the machine, but so far I have the attention of just one accredited scientist.

Surely the time is right for the resurrection of Bessler's wheel? He announced in 1712, yes that was almost 300 years ago, that he had invented a gravity-driven machine. It was examined by numerous people, amongst them, Gottfried Leibniz, and believed to be genuine. Unfortunately the inventor died without revealing the secret, and although the machine underwent twelve years of intense scrutiny it has been ignored, discarded and dismissed as a scam.

To me it seems quite extraordinary that, given the strong circumstantial evidence that the machine was genuine, no notice has been taken of it, other than by gifted amateur engineers and others around the world who also find the evidence absolutely convincing.

What use would such a device be? The obvious and most simple use would be to generate electricity for innumerable uses. How can such an invention be left unused and disregarded? Imagine how dramatically carbon emissions would be cut once the world was using it where ever possible to eliminate the need for fossil fuel and bio fuels.

It might be thought that such technology has been lost and that it is too late to start researching the possibilities in this area of what is generally referred to as pseudoscience, but actually there is reason for optimism. Bessler admitted that he would probably fail to get recognition for his achievenment during his lifetime and would in that case settle for post humous success and accordingly, left behind him a number of clues that were intended to guide a particularly perspicacious person to a successful conclusion and build a working model of the original machine. I am not suggesting that I am that perspicacious person, nevertheless even I have made some significant advances leading to a fuller understanding of the machine and why it does not conflict with the established laws of physics.

I just wish that there were more people who would study the evidence without prejudice, because I'm sure that anyone with an open mind and no preconceptions, would come to the conclusions that here was a machine that would solve many of the problems that we face in trying to reversae the effects of carbon emissions.

Are there others out there willing to take a step outside their comfort zone and examine the evidence? If so please pay a meaningful visit to my web site at http://www.free-energy.co.uk/ and the others listed on my LINKS page. Maybe you will be persuaded to seek an investigation of this machine and encourage proper funding of its development. You could contribute to the rescue of the whole planet and its inhabitant, slowing the advance of global warming more speedily than any other technology even under consideration.

JC

Back from Spain, refreshed and reinvigorated

Well I'm back! I was forced to take a week away in Spain with my children and grandchildren. Of course I was reluctant to go, imagining the warm blue seas and azure skies that were sure to greet me, not to mention beer, wine and food at roughly half the price, or less, that it is here in the UK, but I generously submitted to the entreaties of my family. There was thick fog and rain and it was cold when we took off, something I knew I was going to miss, desperately, but one has to consider the needs of others, so I bravely soldiered on. No internet where we went! How on earth was I going to manage without my daily dose of the besslerwheel forum? Well I managed!

Seriously, it was a wonderful break and strangely, not having the wheel project right under my nose, benefitted me because I was able to comtemplate everything mentally and I discovered some additional clues that had been staring me in the face but which I was too close to see. No changes are necessary but confirmation of the actual sizes of the various parts has been made possible.

I cannot believe how clever Bessler was, not just in building the wheel but in hiding all sorts of clues in full view of everyone for so long. Maybe he was too clever, otherwise the clues would have been found years ago and not almost 300 years later.

On a completely different subject, one of the odd things I have noticed is that there is much talk about the rate of exchange between the Euro and the Pound and how bad it is for British people holidaying abroad, because of the fall of the Pound against the Euro. We are encouraged, nay exhorted, to spend our holidays in here in England, because the countries of the Eurozone are now too expensive. Well that may be true of some countries, such as France or Germany, but Spain is nothing short of brilliant! Excellent food and wine at prices that make us green with envy; wonderful people; dramatic scenery; amazing historic buildings; beautiful beaches, heart-stirring music. What more could you wish for? Who cares if the Pound is almost at parity with the Euro? It's still the best place to go and still the best value.

OK travelogue over.

JC

The 20/20 vision of hindsight

It has been pointed out to me that my posts both here and on http://www.besslerwheel.com/, over the last few months, about my self-proclaimed progress in building a working Bessler-wheel, have been somewhat overly optimistic. Having read through a summary of them, kindly provided by a member of said website, I have to agree that it certainly looks that way. But I never fail to be amazed at the efforts some people will go to prove a point, in this instance, trawling through pages and pages of text to harvest choice comments made by me with little consideration at the time, to support their apparent belief that I am either a dreamer or a scam artist - or completely deluded.

In fact I'm none of these as will be shown in due course. But I am embarrassed at how almost effusively I have predicted success within a short time and how cruelly the truth emerges that I am not quite there yet. It is easy to point the finger of scorn at predictions, using the 20/20 vision of hindsight, but how many would put their reputations on the line by predicting success, no matter how convinced they might be, in an area so thoroughly derided, even within a community of like-minded individuals such as we perpetual motionists? Only someone having complete conviction as I do, that time will prove them right. Optimism reigns strongly here because, as has been the case for several years, I find that each failure teaches me something new and is a step forward towards success.

I have good reason to be optimistic about solving this puzzle but I cannot share it yet. All I can say is that I have solved a large number of clues both textual and graphic and when added to my knowledge of the principle behind the wheel, leads me to believe with absolute certainty that I will succeed in replicating Bessler's wheel. I have a detailed drawing which shows every part of the mechanism and even some areas which had, only weeks ago, remained slightly hazy have become clear. I am building it according to my drawing. As I have said before, if I cannot build it then I shall have to get someone else to do it for me. Either way publication of the details will follow.

This does not rule out the possibility of someone else succeeding before me and it might be that they get there by a different route, but I can say with sure and certain knowledge that mine is derived wholly from Bessler's wheel. Once it is built I shall be able to say that I could not have succeeded if I had not had his clues to help me. Even though I might have tried for a lifetime, without the clues I don't think I would ever have succeeded. But some other researcher might arrive at the same objective because they have better skills, both intellectual and dexterous, and in that case they would be far cleverer than I who simply followed a trail of clues to the treasure.

JC

Brief delay; amazing health & defence statistics

Apologies to those who are waiting for the results of my Bessler wheel project but I have not finished it yet. Time is against me again and I am struggling to set aside a few minutes on any day for my wheelwork, so I must ask for my reader's indulgence and patience. I have 'til the end of the forthcoming week to find the odd moment to work on it, then other commitments mean that I shall be unable to spare any time at all for a further week. After that I am determined to finish this wheel and publish a video of it working - or disclose the design and concept behind it -come what may.

On a completely different subject, I came across these amazing statistics the other day and I thought I'd share them with you.

In 2009 England has become a country of healthcare workers, with one in every twenty-three of the working population being employed by the NHS (National Health Service). Almost 1.3 million people work for the NHS, which is the largest employer in Europe and world’s third biggest employer. That is 2 per cent of the 30 million people of working age.

According to the latest workforce census, the NHS employs 386,400 nurses,109,000 doctors and 122,100 scientists and other therapists.

Incredibly for this small nation, only the Chinese Army and the Indian State Railways are believed to employ more people — with 2.3 million and 1.5 million staff respectively — but both workforces represent a far smaller proportion of the national populations.

One more thing; as if we here in the UK, were not spending enough tax already, in another article I found this remarkable comment - "the UK defence budget is currently the 2nd largest in the world, after the US!" I think we are punching way above our weight - But isn't it splendid!

JC

Final few days and the Virgin Challenge

After assembling and correcting various items on the reconstruction I am at last approaching completion. I just hope that my engineering skills, puny as they are, have accomplished the required quality of build which will allow the various bits to react as planned. My main fear is that if one or more of the mechanisms fails to operate, it will bring the wheel to a halt, or worse, stop the wheel from turning at all. I understand the basic principle behind the wheel's actions and the design fulfills the principle, but there are still one or two variables which may or may not affect the running of the wheel.

If this model fails it won't be because the design is wrong, it will be entirely due to my poor workmanship. This is going to be a hard thing to prove and if I can't build it myself then I am going to have to find someone to help me. I have already had several offers but I am going to await the results of the first test run which should happen in the next two or three days or so, before deciding on the best course of action.

What action that might be is open to question. I am still being urged to forward details of how the wheel works to an American professor who has been encouraging me for some years. I am willing to go that route provided there is some assurance that I won't be side-stepped and my ideas buried. I had thought of trying to get the Virgin Challenge interested but apparently they are after something far more exotic, i.e. "Does your technology sequester greenhouse gases from the atmosphere?"

It seems to me that they are reaching for something that will be beyond the power of human intervention for many years to come - on the other hand a device which generates electricity at no cost and completely cleanly is something to be greatly desired. I realize, of course why they will ignore me - until I produce the goods, gravitywheels fly in the face of science as we understand it - or so they believe.

JC

Construction, composition and update

This is a brief update, because I have so many things going on at the moment.

I have been unable to do much work on my reconstruction recently, although things are looking more promising next week. Hopefully I can get some way towards finishing it. I have had numerous emails asking for clues about the principle behind my wheel and I have not revealed anything yet, however some people may be interested in having some of the details about the construction itself, now that it is nearing completion.

It is built with 40 moving parts, plus several swivel posts and stops all mounted on an MDF backplate or disk, which is only two feet in diameter. The axle is a threaded rod, held in place by two heavy nuts and washers and the whole thing rests in two plastic cup-shaped bearings which were originally designed to hold central-heating pipes to the walls. There is a little friction but not enough to stop the wheel turnng easily, and anyway the wheel is designed to do work so a little friction should not be a problem for the proof-of-principle demo. I've used two kinds of material for the parts, mostly mild steel but some GRP.

I acquired an old set of meccano parts but I have found that they are proving awkward to accomodate in the design, partly because this model is so small (my fault!) and partly because they are old, bent and buckled, (sounds like me) and the fiddly nuts and bolts are too small for my large and arthritic fingers! I am using alternatives that seem to be ok.

40 moving parts may seem like a lot but when you consider the number of parts composing a number of mechanisms and weights it's not so much. The basic principle which, I believe, lies behind the successful operation of the wheel is simple but it is something I have never heard or seen described. The only clue about its operation which I can give is to quote Bessler himself who said something along the lines of, 'I found it where everyone else had looked'.

I have a deadline of three weeks for completion.

JC

Bessler's wheel the solution to global warming?

It might be thought that I am only concerned with building a copy of Bessler's wheel and not with what might happen with it afterwards. Nothing could be further from the truth. I see this device as offering the best solution to global warming and saving the planet. How might this be done?

I was reading an article about maritime emissions - it seems that the world's shipping is emitting double the amount of CO2 the aviation industry emits and yet they are not covered by the Kyoto accord, so there's no cap on how much they can emit..

Separate studies suggest that maritime carbon dioxide emissions are not only higher than previously thought, but could rise by as much as 75% in the next 15 to 20 years if world trade continues to grow and no action is taken. The figures from the oil giant BP, which owns 50 tankers, and researchers at the Institute for Physics and Atmosphere in Wessling, Germany reveal that annual emissions from shipping range between 600 and 800m tonnes of carbon dioxide, or up to 5% of the global total. This is nearly double Britain's total emissions (we are the 7th worst polluter in the world) and more than all African countries combined. And yet we are warned about the effects of such carbon emissions from aircraft and the virtues of carbon credits are extolled. How come shipping has escaped censure?

It has always seemed to me to be a remote possibility that Besslers wheel might somehow be encapsulated within an automobile to provide free, clean transportation - it is much more likely to be used to charge the batteries of an all electric car. But a complete impossibility, I think, to place such a device in an aircraft, but what about ships?

These enormous container ships and of course the mighty supertankers, have huge amounts of space within their hulls to place giant besslerwheels. Could they be engineered to provide sufficient power to drive these leviathans of the deep?

Motor vehicles are one of the biggest source of atmospheric pollution, contributing an estimated 14% of the world's carbon dioxide emissions, a proportion that is steadily rising, but electricity generation is responsible for 40 percent of all CO2 emissions.

So, we could, in theory, cut almost 60% of global CO2 emissions by simply using Bessler's wheel to drive ships and charge up electric autos and to generate domestic electricity. A pipe dream? Maybe, maybe not.

Bessler's wheel is real; it does not conflict with the laws of physics; it will be a major contribution to saving the planet from the excesses of global warming.

I am continuing to work at the reconstruction and I hope to have it finished soon. Recent calls on my time have prevented me from finishing the prototype but it should be ready soon - I hesitate to predict a finishing date since things have a habit of spoiling one's plans but I do recall placing a bet that it would be ready before 2009 is out. It should be much sooner than that, but in any case I know there are others in this race who are as confident as I, so all being well, one or more of us will cross the finishing line in the very near future so we shall have Bessler's wheel within weeks.

JC

Proof of principle device almost finished

It has been suggested that as I am nearing completion of the reconstruction of Bessler's wheel that I should write something every day, detailing my progress, however I think I would bore my readers to death with the minutiae of my daily construction efforts. Having said that perhaps it might help some of you to understand why it is taking so long to finish what seems, on the face of it, a relatively simple thing to complete, if I describe my latest problems which have led to this delay.

I have made a new set of mechanisms in new material and when moved by hand they perform as designed, but it's still difficult to get the actions perfect and I have to keep altering the way things are arranged, not because the design doesn't work, but to get the various pieces to work together without either missing each other entirely, or getting entangled and locking together. It is surprisingly difficult to transfer a design which is both in one's mind and on paper into a practical reality. Everything works as it should do when moved by hand, but then you find that under its own steam, so-to-speak, or rather gravity, the levers are either too close and bump into each other, or too far apart so that an engagement designed to occur, misses! There is some flexibility in the levers giving rise to too much lateral movement. But if I tighten them down to limit the lateral motion, they become stiff and don't move easily. I may have to add some kind of lateral bracing to support them unless I can produce a proof of principle (POP) wheel without further delay.

I have found that by altering the order of the pieces I have eventually achieved the best arrangement. The order can be changed throughout the depth of the mechanism, by that I mean, not the plan view, but the sideways elevation. It doesn't alter the way the mechanism works but it does improve and free-up the action.

I had fitted five mechanisms to the backplate but as they were unable to move properly and freely, due to entanglement, I have rearranged them and three are now fitted and working as designed. The remaining two will be done as soon as I can get into the workshop again. On some days I only get ten or fifteen minutes in my workshop and sometimes none at all.

I am doing this on a shoestring, as I always have done, just to make a POP machine, but I have seen estimates of money spent on prototypes, posted on various forums, and I am surprised at how much people spend, because I have spent no more than about £100 (about $160) in the last ten or maybe even fifteen years of modelmaking! I have to admit that some of the models shown are amazingly well engineered, rugged-looking and most impressive, but I suspect I could have built half a dozen rough and ready models in the time it takes to build just one high quality one. In the end we only require a working model to prove the principle, however roughly constructed. Once that has been achieved then a high quality product based on the original design can be built.

And another thing; people often describe the high quality bearings they use to reduce friction but I worry little about friction, as long as there is enough energy to turn the wheel continuously against any friction that is all that is needed. My axle is a threaded rod and it rests in a couple of plastic copper plumbing pipe wall supports screwed to two upright pieces of wood. Cost was less than a pound for a pack of five.

JC

A hiccup, but I'm back on track

I have just realised it has been over a week since my last post, but the reason for the lack of communication is down to my problems with over-used, cannibalised material in my prototype. No progress means I had nothing to report.

It was held up for a while because I have been using parts from previous constructions and the result was a mess with some parts catching on others and locking the whole structure. But not only do I now have a new back plate but I bit the bullet and bought new material for the various parts.

The mechanism looks simpler now without the fabricted joins, bent and restraightened levers and the numerous drilled holes from previous incarnations of Bessler's wheel, and I aim to finish it as soon as possible.

In my opinion, knowing why it works, I think that Karl might not have fully understood the concept behind it and his comment about it being simple was the result of not having had it fully explained to him. I can imagine Bessler keeping his explanation brief in order to allow the misapprehension of the concept thus avoiding an explanation of the finer points of the device. The design is more sophisticated than might be apparent to an observer and an assumption made about its method of converting the force of gravity to rotary motion, innaccurate. Having said that, it is not a complicated idea and once explained, easily understood.

I hope to have it finished within a week. Then what? That is the multi-million dollar question. I have some ideas but nothing is set in stone.

JC

The solution is under your nose.

It was mentioned here very recently that we had been searching for some 300 years for a solution to Bessler's wheel and had found nothing but fraud upon fraud - and of course endless failure . We continue to search for that elusive design which will provide a continuous sequence of accelerating turns of the wheel, without success. One must conclude that the basic design concept we are using to achieve our aim must be wrong.

Throughout the history of the search for perpetual motion, (for gravity-wheels) the aim has been to get weights to overbalance a wheel by getting them to move, under the force of gravity, into a position from where they can apply their overbalancing effect. And yet we know, because physics tells us so, that such configurations cannot work. Gravity can react to an overbalanced configuration and make the wheel turn, but it cannot make the weight also return to its starting point. So as long as we continue to design wheels which rely on the same old concept we shall continue to fail.

It is apparent from posts by some members of http://www.besslerwheel.com/ that they believe that a separate additional force is required to engineer the movement of the weights into their overbalancing position. Such forces as CF and CP, magnetism, electrostatics and changes in ambient temperature have all been suggested. No-one to my knowledge has come up with a working hypothesis.

It seems to me that what we are all searching for exists but we are not looking in the right place - or rather we are looking but not seeing. Bessler said he found the answer where everyone else had looked. In other words the answer is right there under our noses.

JC

Tilting at windmills

According to my local paper, The UK government has assigned a large tract of open countryside, to the south of where I live in England, to be used for developing several large windfarms. Naturally the protesters are out in force, claiming that these vast machines will desecrate some of the most beautiful countryside we have, spoiling the view and scaring the wild life.

Some people argue that the sight of these majestic windmills is beautiful and almost other-worldly and well might that be, if there was just one, but a phalanx of them, marching across to the horizon is another matter altogether.

From my own perspective, what I wonder, will become of them once the solution to Bessler's wheel has been found? It seems crazy to be building these behemoths ( I always wanted an excuse to use that word!) when a much better alternative is so close. It isn't until the prospect of having one of these things in your own backyard that the implications of such devices hits you. I can imagine vast acreages of these monstrous windmills standing motionless for years and years, no longer required and too expensive to take down and recycle. I fear that once they're here they'll be here for a long time.

I have been away with my family for the last few days and have been somewhat frustrated to be enjoying the sunshine, food and wine in Spain when I could have been working to finish my Bessler wheel reconstruction - is that stupid or what? Any way, back to work today and I must admit that a few days away has crystallised my thinking and I am clear in my mind about what to do if and when it works. Somehow I always have to include that little word 'if'. It's the same as touching wood for luck except that if I didn't include it I would think I was tempting fate - pride before a fall?

JC

A secured record, just in case...

While discussing certain matters with a friend, the other day, he raised a point of concern. He said that if I was so certain that I understood the basics of why Bessler's wheel worked and why it did not challenge the laws of physics, then I should get it written down and placed in some secure place so that, should something happen to me, it could be found, opened and shared. Otherwise it might be lost and would have to await someone else's discovery, which could be next week, next year or never.

I'm not one to worry about what might happen to me and I don't fear MIBs or any of their clones, but it did make sense to make sure my own research didn't get buried, just in case I wasn't looking while crossing the road or had my attention distracted from driving... So what was I to do?

The first thing I did was to write down everything about the basic principles that underlie a successful working Bessler wheel. It's not that complicated and it is, as Bessler said, to be found where everyone else has looked. The second thing is to encrypt it so that it can only be opened either when I have disappeared off the face of the planet or when I am ready to open it myself. PGP is the obvious choice and the only other thing is to find somewhere to post it. I could post it here and might well do so. Another idea is to copy it on to a CD and post copies to various people around the world and at the appropriate moment post the pass word key here there and everywhere. A posting on to another web site forum is a possibility but not without the agreement of the site owner.

Readers of this post may be thinking I am deluding myself if I really think I know the secret of Bessler's wheel, but the truth is that once you know it, it is obvious and leaves no room for doubt. The only problem left once you know the principle behind it, is to design a mechanism which incorporates the principle - and that is slightly more complicated!

I was hoping to finish my own proof-of-principle model before jetting off to Spain again, but alas the hours have overtaken me again so it will have to await my return in a few days. I am leaving to celebrate my older daughter's 40th birthday (she won't thank me for broadcasting that!) in the sunshine of the Costa Blanca.

NB in response to anonymous's comment, yes sorry. I should have said that steps have been taken to ensure that a public key is available. And yes you're absolutely right, I am trying to prove I came up with something first, in case I don't get to finish my own project before I go. So there are two things; one is to prove my priority and two is to ensure it is saved and not lost.

JC

A simple mechanism? I don't think so.

I have been working on my attempted reconstruction of Bessler's wheel for several weeks, on and off, and I'm finding that the mechanism is more complex than Karls' comment about the wheel being so simple a carpenter's boy could make one, might seem to imply. I think seeing a mechanism operating as a finished item is understandable and you can copy it easily enough so you could say it was simple - but making it up as you go along with only the barest outline of how it works, coupled with an understanding of the basic principe is much harder.

Firstly I found that making and fitting the mechanisms was not too difficult. Secondly, during this process I checked and rechecked their range of movement to make sure they operated as I intended - and they did. But (you knew there was going to be a 'but'!) once you raise the wheel to the vertical position in which it will run and allow the mechanisms to take up their natural position under the influence of gravity, it's then you discover you haven't got it quite right!

The mechanism has to do a certain thing at a certain time and getting that right is the hard part - I understand why Bessler complained about his own difficulty in setting the mechanisms correctly in his two-directional wheel but that was more complex than the single-direction ones. It tells me that he was a much more highly skilled engineer than I am.

Part of the problem lies in the way the various parts of the mechanism interact with each other. In my case I have a two foot diameter backplate on which to attach the mechanisms, but they take up approximately two inches of depth - I mean that they stand out from the backplate about two inches. I have redesigned them or rather rearranged them so that one lever is now operating under another one instead of over it and this has meant that I have had to increase the height (depth) above the backplate of the weight. This does seem to have improved the action of the mechanism so I continue.

I know this is difficult to comprehend without a drawing but I think you get the picture - it's proving difficult but not impossible to complete this project and definitely taking longer than I thought it would.

One point occurred to me; Karl's reference to a carpenter's boy suggests that the mechanism was made entirely of wood other than the weights? So the levers etc would be wooden rods I presume. I always imagined that it would have steel or rather iron levers.

PS Sorry, I forgot to say why it was giving me problems. In the first place the weights were taking longer to react to their changed position than I had anticipated so they did not create the reaction soon enough. That is not hard to fix, but the other problem was that the weights were catching one of the levers as I crossed its path and that required a change of the arrangement of the mechanism as I described above. This is not a situation where the design does not work because it is wrong but because the design does not allow clean uninterrupted range of movement .

JC

Priorities, patents and publishing

The realisation hit me yesterday that I had got my priorities all wrong. How could I be sitting on the biggest discovery of my life and wasting time on other persuits, some related to Bessler's wheel and others not? Time passes at an alarming rate and it seems scarcely credible to me that I have understood the basic principle that lies behind Bessler's wheel for over a year and yet I have not yet completed a wheel that actually runs incorporating this principle.

The time has not been entirely wasted as new insights have come to me through building what I thought was what Bessler intended, however time is now the most important factor to me and I am going ahead with finishing what I started. All five mechanisms are finished and three are attached to the backplate but I ruined two of them by drilling holes in the wrong place and I am having to rebuild them because the cannibalisation of old parts which I have habitually used over the years has made some of the material I use - unusable!

Assuming that the wheel works, what then? Advice from a good and knowledgeable friend has made me rethink my decision not to patent. His argument being that I can still give the design away if I wish but at least I would retain some potential for future financial independence. That seems like sound advice but also raises its own concerns. Suppose this model works - do I announce it? Or do I say nothing and get the patent applied for? If I say nothing I will be chased by those many others also researching this subject and working on their own projects who are expecting me to say whether this model worked or did not.

If I announce it and also apply for the patent will I withstand the pressure to say nothing further until the patent process has made it safe for me to share what I know? Actually I think I have the answer now but I need to think carefully about it.

But then again, just like a hundred times before, maybe I'm fooling myself and it won't work - again!

In order to concentrate on the project I have removed much of the information I had published about the so-called code. The reaction to the publication of my speculations about Bessler's encoded information disappointed me and I realised that I have been too close to it to see it objectively. I may publish it again at a later date but I think it is best left safely filed away until I can reassess what I have written in the light of another day.

JC

www.theorffyreuscode.com

Following discussion about the pentagram which is hidden in some of Bessler's drawings, I have finally posted a web site (http://www.theorffyreuscode.com/) which details some of the pieces of code I believe I have deciphered. I'm sure that I have missed some elements of some of the pieces of code that Johann Bessler buried in his books and equally, I'm sure that other pieces will be discovered by other researchers - and some may be able to point to where I may have erred in some cases. I simply don't know at this point, so I welcome the new openess as I have been keeping to myself much that I had discovered over the last few years and wondering if others have also found stuff which they have held close to their chest as I have. Now I think that new minds brough to bear on the problem will help to increase the amount of knowledge we have about the codes.

It is plain to me that Bessler hid a large piece of information in text and that the number 55 (or 5 and 5) is the key to deciphering what he wrote. Discovering how to decipher this will, in my opinion, reveal the full details of his wheel, and allow us to reconstruct it - if I or some others who appear to be close to success, don't do it first!

As for my own reconstruction, it progresses with painful slowness because I have so many other calls on my time. I try to do something towards reconstruction each day, even if it is only for two or three minutes.

JC

There is a Pentagram in Bessler's wheel

Finally it happened! Yesterday someone published information about the presence of a pentagram on the besslerwheel forum. I had originally discovered this geometric feature some years ago and kept the information to myself, deciding to work at it slowly over the years in the hope of extracting the practical meaning of its presence in Bessler's drawing. I believe that I fully understand why it was placed there and have also discovered more information since then.

Strangely, the publishing of this information closely coincided with a decision I had already taken, to publish the same information myself - possibly as soon as this week, once I had completed my own final attempt to reconstruct Bessler's wheel. Sometimes chance seems to be guided; it must be six or seven years since I discovered the pentagram and yet yesterday the same information was published just days before I intended to publish it.

Anyway I'm glad the news is out and what other people may make of it, I don't know, but I do know that it took me years to make complete sense of it, but results may happen more quickly now that many are thinking about the meaning of it.

I really think that now a successful machine will be created, if not by me then by another member of the forum within a few months, maybe before the end of this year. They will discover that the concept which forms the basis of the operation of Bessler's wheel is closely connected with the pentagram.

JC

Reconstruction almost finished

I have made and assembled all the mechanisms required for my reconstruction and three of them are fitted and working as I intended they should. I only have to fit the remainder and see if it works.....?

I should be excited but I have been at this point so many times in the last thirty years that a working wheel would be something of a shock. Yet I have never been more certain that I have it right, so I shall approach the moment with at least some anticipation and some nervousness, but if it should fail... well that's that. I cannot spend any more time on reconstruction myself but must spread the information I have, as widely as possible and rely on my book to bring in some funds for my ensuing years.

JC

'Et In Arcadia Ego' and Bessler's wheel

OFF TOPIC

Going off at a tangent here; many who have studied the life of Johann Bessler will be aware of his portrait and its inclusion of certain objects. The vase, skull and book are usually representive, in works of art, of Memento Mori, to show the mortality of man. I was researching the history of this subject with a view to getting a feel for the times that Bessler lived in when I serendipitously made a small discovery unconnected with Bessler. It has to do with the phrase 'Et In Arcadia Ego'.

A subject that has attracted my curiosity from time to time but which had dropped from my field of focus, so-to-speak, has suddenly re-emerged. Several months ago I posted an extremely speculative theory relating to the books, 'Holy Blood, Holy Grail', 'The Da Vinci Code' and the legend of Rennes-le-Chateau and all that that entails, on an obscure web site which I use from time to time, to post ideas not necessarily related to Bessler. Imagine my surprise therefore, after several months of hearing nothing, to receive a commission from a magazine to enlarge on
the subject matter. Unfortunately I simply do not have the time nor it must be admitted, the inclination, to do further research, however if anyone is interested, they can read up on the small amount of information I have published at http://www.247website.co.uk/ and perhaps follow it up with some further research themselves. If you then wish to get in contact with the magazine in order to offer them an article on your research, you can email me at my usual address, and I will pass on your details.

The subject matter concerns the true meaning of the phrase 'Et In Arcadia Ego' used variously as a memento mori in some famous paintings. Even ignoring the dubious claims presented in many books concerning the history of the Priory Sion, the phrase itself seems to have no real provenance. I know this has nothing to do with Bessler but I originally posted the information to those forums which indulge in gossip about the legend of Rennes Le Chateau in the vague hope that it might attract additional attention to Bessler by leading them to my site. No such luck!

WHEEL RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Now, back to the workshop where I'm pleased to say the mechanism is finally right and working as it was intended to do. I have to make several copies, assemble them, and fit them to the backplate.

JC

Was the mechanism really so simple?

I was working on the mechanism I believe was used in Bessler's wheel, yesterday and it occurred to me that this construction was not as simple as we all believe.

The problem lies in the fact that when you see machinery working it is not always too difficult to understand how it works. You might see an animated schematic of a combustion engine working and understand how it works but few of us would even consider trying to make one. A skilled engineer with all the right equipment might be able to, though. In the same way I think that Karl, the Landgrave of Hesse, the only man allowed to see the interior of the wheel, described the wheel as being so simple a carpenter's boy could make one after studying it for a few minutes. A carpenter's apprentice would have access to all the right equipment and be able to copy what he had seen, but that does not mean it is easy to make; just easy to understand.

This is how I was justifying to myself that what I am building appears to be more difficult to construct than Karl's statement would imply. Bessler himself expressed concern that once seen, his wheel would appear to be too simple to justify the large sum of money he was asking for its secret.

I have concluded that the design is simple to understand once you see it in motion and it looks easy to make but perhaps not so easy to design well without the detail required to make it in the best way possible.

Bessler says he had a dream which revealed to him the answer; I suspect that knowing the principle and making a machine which follows the principle were two different things. Construction of the working wheel time took him many more weeks of laboured improvisation before he succeeded. I know the principle but I didn't think of it unaided and I am not as skillful as Bessler was and neither am I working as intensively as he did so things are unfolding at a much slower rate than they did with him.

In operation my design does indeed look simple, but it has not been simple to construct. Is it the right design? I don't know and I won't until I've got all of the mechanisms attached and tested. The only thing I know is that they do work according to the principle of the wheel's operation, as I understand it.

JC

Spontaneous Rotation? Yes!

Work on the mechanism proceeds with more adjustments necessary. The drawings marked 'A' and 'B' on the 'toys' page have suddenly assumed added significance to me, as I understand them as a pair of informative designs. The horizontal on 'A' and the two lines on 'B' are to be taken together, and supply information you could only get, in my opinion, if you have the right mechansism on the work bench in front of you.

Even though it was reported that Bessler's first wheels were able to begin to spin spontaneously, it seems that most people don't think this was likely and that there was some kind of subterfuge in place to give that impression. The truth is that they were able to spin spontaneously, with no prior careful placement of the wheel at the stop position. I don't know why it is so hard to believe this as a fact and I see absolutely no reason for thinking that this feature of the wheel was artificially induced.

This seems to me to be such an obvious result of the design of a gravitywheel that I have ensured that I have incorporated the idea or requirement into the design I'm working on at present. Consider the following;

1. You have a wheel which spins through the overbalancing of some weights which are able to move within the confines of the wheel.
2. 
   Those weights respond to the rotation of the wheel and are designed so that they 'drop'into a position which must unbalance the wheel, which then rotates in search of balance again. The cycle is then repeated.
3. This, it is said, leads to continous rotation, which has to be forcibly stopped and locked in position once the demonstration is over.

From the above, it is obvious to anyone, I should have thought, that the wheel must be permanently unbalanced and capable of spontaneously beginning to spin from any position in its rotation.

JC

300 year old code contains solution to global warming and an alternative energy source.

In my previous post I mentioned the likelyhood that Bessler left some kind of instruction or clue on his headstone that would provide help in discovering the secret his wheel. I'm certain that that instruction would lead to the decipherment of the Bessler code. My own research has confirmed that the code holds the information for reconstructing his gravitywheel. I have deciphered much of it but the main text continues to defeat my best attempts.

This is an extraordinary situation, given the state of the oil industry; the increase in global warming and the pollution caused by carbon emissions. It continues to amaze me that this potential solution to these problems is right before our eyes as it has been for almost 300 years and yet the evidence, such as it is, is determinedly ignored by the rest of the world who continue to believe that gravitywheels are impossible.

I could describe the reason why they are possible right here and right now and even those who have refused to reconsider the evidence would be forced to admit that there is no longer any reason to think that such machines would violate the laws of physics. The answer is simple and once understood I think that there would be found many other ways of building gravity wheels that differ from Bessler's.

In anticipation of the questions I will probably receive, such as 'if I'm so certain why don't I publish this explanation here and now', I will explain, again, that I will publish this information as soon as I have completed this final attempt to use my amateur engineering skills to reconstruct the gravity wheel. If I fail then that does not mean my understanding of why such devices do not break the physical laws that bind us is incorrect - it just means that my expertise is not up to the task. In that case I shall share what I know.

The story of Bessler's wheel and the existence of the code reads like a Dan Brown novel, only in this case the truth is stranger than the fiction. The code once deciphered will reveal a new source of energy which can help alleviate many of the problems that we face today. Bessler's wheel will not require the consumption of any fossil fuels, other than, possibly, in its construction; it won't produce any CO2 nor any other toxic substances; its proliferation will reduce the need for the traditional form of electricity generation thus accelerating the decrease in CO2 emissions and helping to counter the increase in global warming.

The technology is so simple that vast numbers of people will be able to build or buy home-based electricity generators producing sufficient for their domestic needs - free. The poorer nations of the world will benefit the most but of course their voice is the least heard; on the other hand, given the growing clamour from the wealthy nations to find an alternative form of producing electricity which doesn't require us to burn fossil fuels nor produce nuclear fuels which cannot be neutralised, you might think that someone somewhere with the necessary contacts and funds might just reconsider the evidence that Bessler's wheel was genuine and realize that here was a potential solution.

What fame and fortune might accrue to such a person! I don't need the fame nor the fortune - just the solution. Where are the entrepreneurs who see opportunities where the rest of us see problems?

JC

Heatwaves, patents and codes

This last week has seen unusually warm, humid weather here in England. The temperature in my workshop hit 93 degrees fahrenheit several days in a row and it has proved to be too hot and way too humid to stay in there, even with the doors at either end open, so I have had to postpone work on reconstructing Bessler's wheel. Thankfully things have eased and the temperature has fallen to a more reasonable 82F and I can now return to work. The backplate is finished and one of the mechanisms is also finished but not perfect yet. It has been more difficult than I thought to get the mechanism to operate as I 'saw' it working, but I'm getting there and this weekend should see it functioning correctly. Once that is done its simply a case of copying it a number of times and fitting the rest of them to the backplate.

I've received a couple of emails suggesting that I should reconsider my belief that, should it be successful, this reconstruction should not be patented. Their arguments were strongly made but in the end patented or not, someone somewhere will improve it, apply for that improvement patent and mine will be just a record of who first patented the original, which is nice but if I want it I can get that recognition without the hassle of a patent application.

Again I have received numerous questions regarding Bessler's code and I have done my best to answer them without actually giving away anything prematurely. The sketches of the mechanisms I referred to in an earlier blog are available for all to see, you just need to know how to decode the information you're seeing. Bessler himself referred the reader to some 'drawings' and that is what I am doing. But the codes are in all of his works - without exception - and they are not always in the form of drawings!

You need to read his 'Grundlicher Bericht', 'Apologia Poetica', Das Triuphirende...' and of course 'Maschinen Tractate' in order to view all of his encoded material. The best clue I can give you is that the codes are partially alphanumeric and partially alphabetical substitution - and that isn't really new information because as everyone knows he encoded his name 'Bessler' by transposing the letters of the first half of the alphabet with those of the second in order to get his pseudonym 'Orffyreus'. Just because we are familiar with that fact should not be a reason to ignore it - it was a deliberate clue just as the one at the beginning and the end of the Apologia was an example of alphanumeric substitution.

One more thing; it has been suggested that the codes are vague and were there simply to enable Bessler to be able to point to the clues should someone else claim to have been the first to invent the gravitywheel. I can emphatically dismiss this point of view because it is as clear as daylight that Bessler anticipated a post humous acceptance that he had discovered the secret and that his claims would be vindicated shortly after his death. For this reason it is safe to assume that there was a significant clue left behind him, in addition to the more obscure ones I have discovered. I must assume that it was either in the windmill from which he fell, or (more likely) it was included somehow in the tomb which he was permitted to construct in his garden.

I shall continue this theme in another post.

JC

A new backplate for my PoP wheel

Because I'm now committed to building what I believe will be the (finally!) successful reconstruction of Bessler's wheel, I have retired my current backplate. That is the wooden disc upon which I have mounted numerous mechanisms over the last year or so. I have about fifteen retired backplates of assorted sizes and I should throw them out but they represent such a lot of time and effort that they seem like old friends and I'm loath to part with them. The one I've been using has so many holes in it that it looks like it will fall apart. Now, when I drill a new hole
there is every chance I'm going to drop part way into an existing one and produce an odd-shaped over-size hole. So a new backplate for my proof of principle wheel is a must. The old ones vary in size but the new one I made yesterday is only two foot in diameter, which is smaller than I usually use.

Normally I make the backplate much bigger to allow for alterations to the size of the mechanisms and the number of them and their range of movement but in this new one I don't need such a large backplate. The material I use for the mechanism is mild steel and I am able to use and reuse this over time. Obviously the parts get altered and reduced in size in some cases, but because the new design is so similar to the one I last used I don't need to alter it much, so some parts are exactly the same. Because of this I know exactly how big to make the backplate because I have the existing arms and I can plot their range of movement precisely and fit them into an area whose size is also known exactly. This can be one of the difficulties in designing and building something from scratch, you have to use a certain amount trial and error, in part, to discover how big to make it so that it will not come into conflict with other parts and at the same time, keep the range of movement within the confines of its selected area.

So today I was hoping to mark out on the backplate the positions of the various holes needed to support the mechanisms, drill and fit the supporting posts and try to make one working mechanism which performs at just the right moment and in the right way. Because once I have one of them acting in the desired manner, its just a case of copying the same for the other ones.
That was in theory! In fact I had other calls on my time so I didn't quite get that far today.

JC

No news is good news, on holiday or not!

I've enjoyed my break away from the news, the internet and all input about Bessler, but now I'm back and raring to go!

I spent several hours a day going over and over, in my mind and on paper,the best way to proceed and I believe I've covered every aspect of the reconstruction. It's not so much that it was wrong and needed redesigning but more a case of re-examining how else I might get the existing mechanism to operate at the right time. In the process I have altered it slightly and have made it simpler and there is less chance of any of the constituent parts coming into conflict with each other.

What is really interesting is that I think I've discovered (or re-discovered) an interesting leverage design which certainly complies with everything on the 'toys' page and which I, at least, have never come across before. It ties in neatly with parts A, B, both C's and D's and the E on the toys page. It is as far from what I originally thought the parts on the toys page meant as it could possibly be and yet it looks and feels right. I know that this is neither a suitably scientific approach nor a desirable engineering attitude but sometimes you have to go with your gut feeling.

For those who have no idea what the 'toys' page is about I can only ask you to read my biography of Bessler. It would take up too much space here!

I've written out a detailed sequence for the build and have drawn numerous sketches of each part to try to obviate any more errors due to haste and carelessness. So.....this time?

I've got to do a few things to do first and then I will get on with the reconstruction. I feel that time is slipping by and if I don't get this right soon then I have to make the decision about publishing everything. It is tempting to continue to worry at this problem in the hope of success, but I have to admit that the past thirty odd years have not seen success, as many people keep reminding me, yet I don't believe I have ever been nearer to victory.

JC

Spanish break.

Because I'm away to Spain for some R & R, and may have limited access to the internet I probably won't post anything on my blog for a couple of weeks. I have a plan written up for my return as I have worked out precisely what needs to be altered in the design of the mechanisms, but I shall mull over the design during my break. With luck I shall be back on course for reconstructing Bessler's wheel on my return.

It surprises me that, given everything I know about the mechanism, I should have made such a simple error as not ensuring that the mechanism operated at the correct time in the rotation of the wheel. I wonder how many other trials by other would-be inventors failed because of something similar, something that maybe went through unnoticed. How many near-misses have their been?

Lastly, thank you for the many messages of encouragement. I had no idea so many people were following this blog.

"Una cerveza, por favor!" - Make that "Una grande cerveza, por favor!" Just practising you know ;-)

Sadly for us Brits, we seem to be a country that is fast developing a binge-drinking culture with the predictable side affects of under age drinking. In Spain you see hardly any drunks and yet they appear to indulge for several hours a day. It must be the drip drip approach that allows them to maintain their dignity despite being several sheets to the wind. In the UK we seem to hit the ground running and attempt to get as many jars of the strongest nectar available down our necks in the shortest possible time - with predictable results.

What's that saying? Oh yes - Alcohol, the cause of, and the solution to all of life's problems.

See you when I get back.

Ciao.

JC

Reconstruction analysed

I have spent time testing the reconstruction I created and following analysis of the wheel's action I am certain that the problem lies in timing. In the paper I have written in which I described the design and principle which underlies Bessler's wheel I made specific comment about the necessity to get the timing correct. It is therefore somewhat embarrasing to admit that I had forgotten to ensure that the weights, when moved, did so, not one moment before a particular point during each revolution. In fact they are acting too soon and having an effect which is
tending to counter the advantage they give towards rotation.

There are a couple of ways I can correct this and one of them is to lengthen the operating arm which moves the weight so that it is further on in the cycle when the action begins; and another is to try to delay the initiating action of the operating arm. I realise that this means nothing to anyone who hasn't seen the design, which is everyone, but I still want to keep people updated as to the state of play regarding my project.

The paper I referred to above is still being kept confidential for now.

JC

Bessler's wheel still stationary!

Well I said I'd report back, so here it is - unfortunately the latest design doesn't work. Despite this setback I remain confident because the information I have acquired from Bessler indicates that I'm on the right track. There are variables to this design and maybe others that I'm not aware of at this point so I need to go away and think about the alternatives. I'm unable to work on the reconstruction for now, anyway, as I have other plans for the next two weeks.

This news of my failure to finish with a working model will hearten many and disappoint others, but for me it is a case of keeping going. Because, as I have said before, I understand the concept which underlies the Bessler wheel and I have also managed to find some sketches of the actual mechanism, which will doubtless provoke a great deal of interest. It may be that I have misread the sketches and need to review them in a calmer state of mind.

The concept or principle upon which the Bessler wheel relies is simple and obvious once you know and, in response to more emails received, I can assure anyone reading this that there are no physical laws which will need revising to accomodate it. There is no doubt about this and I have no fears of anyone disagreeing with me once they understand the principle.

Of course there will be some who will say, 'share it - now!' But my mind is made up not to patent it (if I'm sufficiently lucky to succeed in this self-imposed task) and that could leave me potentially penniless for all my hard work, so once I give it away I have only the book to provide for me and my family. That's when I'll share everything.

JC

MIB, conspiracies and wacky wagers.

I have received two emails which have prompted me to comment on them here. The first one arrived a couple of weeks ago and suggested that by publicly recording my attempt to reconstruct Bessler's wheel, I might attract the attention of certain gentlemen-in-black (MIB). They, it seems, have only the best interests of the oil industry in mind and would take exception to my project. I was warned that they would visit me and takes steps to make me wish to stop my project.

I have always tried to keep an open mind about most things and I've tried to arrive at a satisfactory opinion by applying logic. It seems to me that the MIB, if they exist anywhere outside the vivid imagination of Hollywood, would not be against my project at all and might actually be inclined to support it. The whole world knows oil is short and likely to get shorter, so, from their own perspective, anything which helps to extend the life of the reserves of oil has to be seen as a bonus and therefore ought to be encouraged. The internet seems to be a breeding
ground for conspiracy theories, and if I believed most of the conspiracies I read about I would become totally paranoid (instead of only mildly). I incline to fatalism and if I'm to be a target for the MIB then there's nothing I can do about it.

The other email asked whether, seeing as I had not posted anything much this week, I had failed in my attempt to reconstruct Bessler's wheel, implying, perhaps, that I did not wish to admit it? Of course not, I have been diverted from my intended course by the usual mundane requirements of everyday living and although I try to get into my workshop daily, I can't always. I shall report success and failure equally with alacrity and honesty.

As for my reconstruction of Bessler's wheel, I have two mechanisms fitted and working and the rest assembled but not yet fitted to the backplate. I shall continue to work on it and hope that soon I will finish it.

It is strange world that I inhabit where the prospect of finishing this project and securing the future of my family takes second place to the necessary but trivial-seeming tasks of every day living, but then I can't really blame the family. I have after all, claimed to be on the verge of success for at least the last twenty years! They can't see inside my mind and know, as I do, that it really is nigh.

And finally, as they say on the news, the thought of offering odds against my producing a gravity-driven perpetual motion machine at any time in the future seems to have scared away the betting firm which had expressed an interest, so no dice! They were dithering over the exact definition of what constitutes perpetual motion and in the end decided not to offer odds.

JC

The wacky wager update

Well, two comments, one pro and one con and several emails, mostly for. I understand your point Lucius but there are needs which are not personal but which I would like to be able to satisfy if it were possible. My family has needs and there are others I could wish to help if I had the means, so for that reason as well as the others I mentioned before, I shall stick with my proposal to obtain odds against the creation of a gravity-driven wheel within the next year - and that has raised another issue.

I have been corresponding with one of the best known names in the gambling industry and it has become clear that they wish to use the term 'perpetual motion machine' and have the resulting device verified by the famous Science Museum. That seems very reasonable but I am concerned that when the time comes for verification the Science Museum's definition of perpetual motion might exclude my machine.

I have discussed this definition many many times and the whole thing seems to come down to the fact that a perpetual motion machine is defined as one which is excluded from all external sources of energy. I have always maintained that a gravitywheel obtains its energy for rotation from the force of gravity and since gravity is both external and internal to the gravitywheel it is not technically a perpetual motion machine although that is what they would have called it in Bessler's time.

I have compromised by suggesting that they could call it a 'gravity-powered perpetual motion machine'. I await their response.

JC

Blog colour change and mechanism update

Sorry for changing the look of my blog, but I'm trying to get to grips with it and increase the size of the blog posting window.

I have been working on redesigning the mechanism inside the wheel, because it sometimes locks in a half-way position. This is due to the close proximity of another part of the mechanism. I have changed one of the levers for a longer version and then I took up the extra length by creating a hump or bridge in part of its length. This enables it to pass over the offending obstacle in its path.

The mechanism moves freely now and does what I want it to do, so my next task is to assemble the remaining mechanisms in the same way as the first. This design won't suffice for a finished product but it will certainly do for a proof of principle model which is all I want.

In attempting to make this machine I have, over the years, used and reused various parts, and the part which has suffered the most is the backplate which is what I call the wooden supporting structure to which all the parts are attached. It is in the form of a three foot wide circular disc of MDF (medium density fibreboard). The current backplate is nearing the end of its useful life and will have to be pensioned off soon. The disc is so full of drilled holes from previous attempts at making a working model that now when I drill I often drill into an adjoining hole and when held up to the light the backplate looks like a representation of the sky at night!

I'd put up a picture but it has a number design features drawn on the backplate which might give someone a clue to the direction I'm taking.

JC

Should I bet on a certainty?

I wonder if it is possible to place a wager on the likelihood of the appearance, in the next twelve months, say, of a gravitywheel? If I am really convinced that I shall succeed in this venture then I suppose I should put my money where my mouth is and wager that I, or some other misguided fool, will indeed produce such a machine and one that works?

Certainly the rewards would be exceptional. I have yet to receive the exact odds available (I have applied for them) but suppose odds of 5000/1 against such a thing happening in the next year were offered; it might persuade me to part with say £50 or even £100 for the promise of upto half a £million!

The history of betting is full of off-the-wall wagers and this is almost respectable by comparison. At least I'm not betting that the earth will be governed by aliens by 2010 or that the Elvis will resurrect next year, which some have bet heavily on!

This wager has a certain attractiveness to it for me because it simplifies the actions under consideration should I succeed in my venture. I could just show the working wheel on youtube and then pocket the winnings from the wager.

No patents to worry about; no contracts to sign to sell the device ; instant availability for anyone with internet access - and of course the publishers would contact me for permission to publish my book instead of the other way around where I have currently papered the walls of my office with rejection letters.

Some may say that giving it away is foolish and I could earn tens of millions but the truth is I don't need millions, (just a couple!)


JC

Google Video and wheel update

I posted my video about Bessler and his code on youtube a while ago and I see that it is been downloaded 446 times - not as much as I'd hoped but perhaps word will get around and it will get more attention. I'm loading it here to put it on google video too in the hope of spreading the message that there is a solution to the energy crisis and global warming - and it is Bessler's wheel.

My work to replicate Bessler's wheel proceeds well! Yesterday I spent some time refining the movement of one of the mechanisms and discovered, in the process, the meaning of another of Bessler's clues, something I had puzzled over for a long time. It relates to the two angles that one of the levers must adopt in order to drive the wheel onward to the next stage. This new knowledge confirmed to me that I am on the right track and later today I hope to continue with my work. This just illustrates again the need to build these things and not just design them in a simulater or on paper alone - and I would not have discovered the meaning of Bessler's clue if I hadn't been building the mechanism.

Currently I am trying to rearrange the mechanism so that as one part crosses another the two don't get entangled; something that it is prone to at the moment. Rearranging the mechanism without altering its effect is not particularly easy or quick but it is necessary for success. I'll post details of my progress (or not) in a day or two. JC

Optimism vs pessimism

I anticipated being able to publish good news this week but I can't yet. It's not because my efforts to replicate Bessler's wheel have failed (again!) no, other factors have prevented me for returning to my workshop, so success is still eagerly anticipated. I never fail to be amazed at the enormous optimism I continue to have that I shall win this thing - unless someone else gets there first!

And this is the key to success. It has always been a source of irritation to me that here in my home country, England, we seem to suffer an all-pervading atmosphere of negativity while across the water in the USA the opposite is true. There, optimism and patriotism vie with each other for supremacy. Here we see headlines such as 'pig flu stronger than we thought' and 'it hasn't gone away', while in America they say, 'the flu virus is milder than we thought'. And this is representative of the difference in attitudes that is so obvious. How can there be such a dichotomy of attitude coming from two countries reportedly using the same language and sharing a common heritage and so many ideals?

Given the above comments you might assume that the successful solution will come from someone living in the US, but for our size this country (Britain) has produced more innovative inventions than any other and I look forward to continuing that process.

JC

Bessler's Code will be revealed.

Over the last couple of years I have managed to decipher or decode some of Bessler's hidden information and while this has been useful in designing potential working gravity wheels, it hasn't so far, led to success. What it has done is allow me to rule out a number of potential designs because they don't fit the criteria I have extracted from Bessler's code. I am almost there and it has become something of a trial for me to read the various valiant and imaginative attemps to draw conclusions from what Bessler said, and yet say nothing.

My problem is that I am finding it hard to resist the urge to spill the beans - to reveal what I have discovered. Can you not imagine the satisfaction to be gained by explaining what Bessler meant and showing the proof? It would be a glorious and fitting end to my years of research, but I am determined to resist this temptation and go for the longer view. I am continuing to finalise my book which will reveal all anyway but if I can complete the wheel first then I can reveal the secret of Bessler's code then anyway.

As Karl, the Landgrave said, the mechanism is extremely simple - and I can add that the codes too, are extremely simple, at least those that I have managed to decipher are.

Don't forget, if you want to get a quick rundown on Bessler and the codes watch my video at:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BWVKtpuzn0

JC

A little further around the corner...

I finished my latest prototype wheel yesterday and it still didn't move continuously. But this is where the advantage of building each model wins over simulation. When I build the first mechanism I always fit it to the wheel and then check it out for timing and range of movement. Once it all looks perfect, I assume it will work, but in this instance it wasn't until all the mechanisms were fitted that I realised that the additional ones had the effect of retarding the timing of the movements of each mechanism.

Actually seeing this in action enabled me to understand why it was still not moving and I thought of a minor alteration to make which was, if I say so myself, pretty dammed ingenious! This variation also explained something that had still got me puzzled over something Bessler revealed in one of his encoded clues. So it's back to the workshop for a couple more days. There is no way a simulation would have thrown up this solution so I shall stick to making my wheels by hand.

JC

Success around the corner?

This week I hope to finish my latest version of Bessler's wheel. This is the most confident I have been to date, at this stage.

Usually I am quite calm, or even sceptical at the prospect of discovering that my design works because, as I'm making it, I don't get the right 'gut' feeling about it, but this time....

Confidence is high but we'll see. I have been close many, many times before.

I'll post something in a few days about what happened - or didn't.

JC

Perpetual Motion or Gravity wheel?

It seems to me that recently, in many forums, Bessler's wheel is being referred to as a perpetual motion machine (PMM or PM machine) more often than it used to be. I think that this is a mistake because using such names brings with it a lot of subjective cultural and emotive colouration in addition to the explicit meaning of term. The term 'perpetual motion' is often used in a perjoritive way in referring to the subject and those who support Bessler's claims are leaving themselves open to even more ridicule than we already suffer if they continue to use the term when, in my opinion, it is inaccurate, and should be replaced by some other term which describes it more succinctly. Perpetual Motion machines are defined as ones which don't have access to any external source of energy. They are isolated systems relying on their own intrinsic energy and are wholly independent of any other object, action or consequence. Such machines violate the law of conservation of energy.

Bessler's wheel relied on gravity for its energy. Now you can argue that gravity cannot be the sole source of energy for the wheel, but without it, it would not turn. Gravity pervades our world; it permeates all matter in and on the earth and the space around us, so it is in effect both internal and external to any machine which relies on it to work. As such it is not a perpetual motion machine, and not an isolated system,and it does not therefore, break the law of conservation of energy. It is, rather, a gravity wheel, or a gravity engine in the way that a petrol engine is called that because it runs on petrol; or a gravity mill in the same way that a windmill is referred to, thus, because it is driven by the wind.

Old examples of such machines are a windmill which drives a fan which pumps air at the windmill causing it to turn. A modern example would include a battery which drives an electricity generator which charges the battery. Both impossible because they derive no extra energy from outside their own little worlds and are thus isolated systems.

Bessler's wheel did, according to the inventor, use gravity to turn it, so it was a gravity wheel, regardless of whether you think it needed an additional source of energy to complete the cycle. So I must ask those who discuss such matters to please use a term other than PM when describing Bessler's wheel or we shall never get the serious attention of the scientific community we seek.

JC

To simulate or fabricate?

I answered an email recently concerning my belief that actually making models is preferable to using simulation software and more likely to end in success, and I think I should enlarge on it here.

When I said in an earlier blog, that this type of experimentation couldn't be done with any kind of modeling program, what I meant was that, yes, you can test an existing design with simulation software, but in the design process, you can't really rely on it to the exclusion of hands-on design. You may miss some simple alternative design or a small modification to the existing one that you can see in front of you when you have the actual components in your hands. When you can physically move a mechanism by hand and study its range of movement you may find that it becomes necessary to alter something to enable it to comply with your design. You may start the design on paper or in paint on the computer but at some stage it is better if you make the mechanism and see it in action.

Having said that, if I had the expertise and a sufficiently powerful computer to use a simulation programs, I'm sure I might decide to test out a particular design and see if it worked. But I don't so I must build it to see if it works and of course if I found that it did work in simulation then I'd have to build it then anyway. But I would still prefer to build it and study it in action.

One of the things that testing an actual physical mechanism shows is what I call 'tight spots' where at some point in its range of movement, usually at an extremity, the mechanism stiffens and becomes bound. This usually requires some loosening but that can have a negative effect in the part of the range where it isn't tight This looseness can cause lateral sway which may cause overlapping parts of the mechanism to interfere with the full range of movement, but in my experience this can be reduced to an acceptable level with the inclusion of spring washers or other springs. This kind of problem will not show up in simulations and yet it is quite likely to occur.

I suspect that it was this kind of use Bessler was referring to when he implied that he might use springs but not in the way people might think.

These kinds of problems and solutions do not show up in simulation software and for that reason I think it is better to make the parts from the beginning.

JC

Sjack Abeling's wheel

Sjack Abeling's wheel which has been so much discussed on various energy forums is a bit of a mystery to me. I have so many questions which seem to me to undermine his claims to have built a successful gravity wheel. The most trivial-seeming and yet pertinant one for me is why show a video of a non-working wheel (i.e. one with the weights removed) and why now, seemingly some long time after he made it? His patent is apparently fully under way and his
intellectual property rights secured so either show us the working version or, if he has been advised against it by his backers, why show us anything at all?

He claims that his machine works in a certain way, using descriptions so accurately matched to Bessler's own descriptions that one is immediately suspicious of them. I have considerable information about how Bessler's machine worked and I can state with some authority that Abeling's wheel bears little or no similarity to Bessler's.

The concept which he appears to be showing in his much-discussed diagram has no connection whatsoever with Bessler's. But having expressed my doubts I have to consider the possibility that he has managed to create a gravity wheel and one which might include certain similarities to the concept which lies behind Bessler's and I await developments with interest.

My own work to replicate Bessler's wheel continues and I am confident that a working version will be made within a few weeks if not sooner. If I fail I believe it will be due to my own clumsy engineering skills and at that point I will pass the job onto my American friends.

JC

Climate Change

With climate change on the political agenda the search is officially on for ways of reducing carbon emissions at the same time as finding new, clean sources of energy. There are several initiatives desirous of finding that new energy source but the one which I have been advocating for several years is still being ignored by the vast majority, and that is gravitational energy. Specifically, I refer to Bessler's wheel, of course.

My problem lies, not so much in getting people to consider the potential benefits of such a machine, but to consider whether it is even possible. We have been taught so convincingly that gravity wheels are impossible that no one is prepared to give the possibility a second glance, this, despite the convincing evidence that some have already been built.

My question is this - what more can I do, other than build the wheel? That is something I'm working on, but in the mean time ... if people would view my video it might help. I guess watching a video takes less effort than reading text. If you are reading this blog and wish to help please spread the word about the video. You can see it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BWVKtpuzn0

JC

Youtube video

I have posted a very short version of my video on youtube and have reluctantly removed my likeness from it. I sincerely hope that my legions of female fans (wife, two daughter and two grandaughters) won't be too dismayed at this almost sacriligious cut, but I have to think of the effect my walking, talking image might have on others of a more delicate disposition - and it was too long and boring. Even my speaking voice has been known to have an unusually soporiphic effect on those who are not prepared before hand, so be warned, kind viewer, take note of the message but not the messenger.

You can see it here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BWVKtpuzn0

JC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BWVKtpuzn0

Wheel, Video and paper update

The video I planned to put on youtube was finished and posted but then I withdrew it because it was way too long. I'm shortening it to the recommended maximum of four minutes, which is very difficult to do. How can I cram thirty years research into a four minute video? Well I have to do that or no-one will ever watch it - maybe they won't anyway - we'll see.

The prototype is almost finished. I'm using the same old backplate as I have for the last couple of years. This is the disc I use to fix everything on to. It has its own support frame and is balanced and spins easily. It's so full of holes it's getting quite fragile, but it's made of MDF (medium density fibreboard) which is useful as it's easy to drill and I have found it the most practical medium for the purpose. If this model works I'll produce a nicer looking version to display to the public. I have kept all the old backplates from several years ago, out of sentiment, but really they only tell of the number of failed attempts I have made and don't give away any clues as to the various designs I've tested over the years.

The mechanisms are finished and most of them are attached to the backplate so it won't be long before I'll know if this is a runner. There is one modification I reserve to test if this model doesn't work, and it is based on an ambiguous statement by Bessler, which can be read in three or four different ways. As far as I know I'm the only person who is aware that this comment by Bessler can be read in this particular way, although there is plenty of discussion about the ambiguity of it. This is because I'm aware of something I discovered from Bessler's codes and which I haven't discussed with anyone to date. My indecision about which method to use stems from my knowledge of the various possible interpretations of Bessler's ambiguous remark and in my opinion his comment is connected with this encoded information, but it might not be, in which case the second version I have reserved will be tested.

I picked this particular understanding of the comment in question because it seemed to me that to read it in the obvious way did not make any difference to the way the mechanisms worked, although without seeing the actual mechanisms working it isn't clear that this is so.

Sorry if that has totally confused you!

The paper I have written and intend to post to my friend the American scientist for peer review will be sent if these two models fail; and the book will be published as soon after as I can manage.

Finally thank you to Lucius Anneus for reminding about the purpose of this blog.

JC

Where are the girls?

It's a rare thing to find a girl who is interested in the subject of perpetual motion, gravity wheels and the search for an alternative form of energy - at least one that relies on a solution which includes successful revelations in these areas. In fact I'd say it's an impossibility. For example my dearly beloved wife and daughters hold me in their lowest esteem when considering my history of predicted success in this matter and who can blame them? Not I.

They fondly relate my many assumptions of success over the years while laughing amusingly at my catastrophic failure to succeed. I am, however determined to have the last laugh and have secured a staunch ally in the form of my eldest grandaughter who at 16 (nearly) should know better, bless her! She stoutly supports me against the slings and arrows fired from her nearest relatives and berates them for their lack of support in my honest endeavour. I have cunningly responded by promising her the lion's share of the ensuing fortune which will be mine once I have overcome the final niggle that prevents my wheel from flying around under the merest touch of gravity.

This has of course had the desired effect and both my son-in-laws have jumped ship with little or no thought of the moral consequences and have sided with me, proudly announcing that they were always on my side and only pretended to be averse to my ideas in order to test the metal of my resolution to finish successfully in this matter. I have generously (in my opinion) accepted their support and have promised them like riches just as soon as I have the means to hand - but have warned them about the dubious benefits of holding their breath in anticipation of an early payout.

Returning to the title of this blog it is a sad fact that few if any women do show any interest in this field and it is not for lack of female engineers and other suitably qualified members of the fairer sex, because they seem to flock to alternative energy subjects unrelated to this one with almost careless abandon. Now why should that be, I wonder?

I think that in this particular field, men do, unusually, have the more romantic disposition, imagining the benefits of such a device while successfully pushing the realities to the backmost recesses of their conscious minds. On the other hand women, it seems to me, who have always had the lead in supporting such things as mysticism, feng shui, psychic readings and of course green issues, treat this area of research, perpetual motion and gravity wheels that is, with scant regard for its potential. They assume that what they have been taught in this subject is the gospel truth, oddly, rejecting the same things that attracted the male of the species. This strange dichotomy might be explained by the fact that no classical scientist dares breath a word of support in this matter, whereas there are an abundance of 'qualified' chancers who are only too willing to subscribe to the possibilities of mind over matter, interpretation of dreams, fortune telling and psychokinesis. It is this 'clinically proven' attitude to 'spoon bending' and the like which gives the exponents of such beliefs a widespread sham authority which poor old Johann Bessler failed to get and still fails to get - despite my best efforts.
JC

Update

I received an email yesterday asking for any details of the wheel's construction, which I felt able to share with the writer. This is something that happens frequently and I can't blame people for asking, because I keep saying that I know a lot about how the wheel works. I am finding this a really difficult problem to handle because part of me wants to share what I know and the other part wants to be the first to succeed in reconstructing Bessler's wheel.

I know there are some among our fraternity who think I should share it regardless of my own wishes, because this invention could be so valuable to the planet right now. So I'm going to try to satisfy both sides of the arguement. My intention is to continue to finalise publication of my book (which will contain everything I know about the wheel) while at the same time I will continue to experiment with my prototype. Which ever I finish first will determine which action I then take. If the wheel works (please!) before the book is ready, then publication of the details of the wheel will follow; if the wheel doesn't work then publication of the book will follow. The book will be published later anyway, so either way I will share everything soon.

I read the many posts which are published daily on several different forums and I am constantly amazed that no-one else appears to have discovered what I have, about the concept of a gravity wheel. I first realised the truth about them a few months ago, last year in fact. Since then I have performed a number of very simple experiments which prove the principle. Knowing how it works has proved easier than devising a system that fulfills the concept, but with Bessler's help I believe I shall succeed soon. I'm hampered by my lack of skills and equipment but fortunately the design is very simple and should not prove too difficult for me to accomplish.

I know that there are kind souls out there who would jump at the chance to help out here but I am determined to finish this thing myself, if I can.

Rereading the paragraph above, about my surprise that no-one else appears to have reasoned out the concept as I have, I realise that there may well be people out there who have in fact worked it out too, and are currently engaged in the same process as I am, namely the reconstruction of Besssler's wheel. So may the best man win!

JC

Inspiration, perspiration and simulation

I find that during sleep, sometimes the unconscious goes to work on a problem which has exercised my mind during the day and occasionally presents the solution in the early hours of the morning. Last night was typical and I now understand one point about Bessler's descriptions that had lain in a corner of my mind as an inexplicable fact. Of course once I understood the reasons for it, it all made perfect sense.

These sleep induced revelations are a blessing in one way and a nuisance in another. I cannot usually get back to sleep afterwards, as I have become so excited at the prospect of applying my new found understanding to my prototype wheel. By the way I use the word 'revelation' not in a religious sense but as an enlightening or astonishing disclosure.

I am constantly amazed at the ability of the human mind to 'invent' new mechanical configurations over a period of time and yet I see it in operation with surprising frequency and I think that I don't always appreciate the subtleties and nuances of each design. I mean that, in my own case, often I can examine and test a particular configuration and finally put it aside as being of no practical use in my search for a working gravity wheel, only to discover at a later date a new and subtle variation which shows promise. I have now found myself rebuilding a mechanism which I thought I had thoroughly tested and rejected previously because it now forms the basis of a new theory which was recently revealed to me in the middle of the night.

It is for this reason that I discarded a popular method of searching for a solution, i.e. computer simulation software. I'm convinced that a solution will only be found by a 'hands-on' approach where someone actually builds each mechanism and tests it. It's only by seeing how the different pieces interact that you can vary designs by minute amounts that are not apparent in a simulation.

It has been said (Thomas Alva Edison, I think) that genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration, well I'm no genius but I'd say that if I do succeed in reconstructing Besslers wheel it will take similar percentages of effort.

'Confidence is high', as the Americans say. I am certain that I can explain everything about Bessler's wheel within the current laws of physics. I am satisfied that there is no other force or outside agency required for the wheel to work, other than gravity. This, I know, goes against the belief of many, however once it is explained it will become obvious to all.

JC