I'm back! Welcome one and all.

I must apologise for my absence this last few weeks, but thank goodness my house move is completed!  There are still a few boxes waiting to be opened and the contents made to disappear but we're in at last.  I haven't got my workshop yet but I'm confident I will be back at work on wheel building very soon.

I was about 15 years of age when I first encountered the legend of Bessler's wheel and although I immediately suspected the maid's account of how Bessler fooled everyone who came to see his wheel, I never suspected that I would spend the next 56 years years (the rest of my life so far!) trying to discover how he did it.

I think I know now, at last, but as my wife reminded me, I once told a man I was sitting next on a plan to Florida back in 1996, I was on the verge of a breakthrough even then!  But I wasn't, and it is part of my routine to remind myself to keep my enthusiasn/self-confidence under conrol.

My first wheel took the form of a hollow three dimensional swastika made of balsa wood.  It had one large ballbearing in each leg and remained absolutely motionless unless you nudged it a little when it would turn about a quarter of a revolution and then stop again.

There have been so many different versions since then that I have lost count but it must be well over a hundred and possibly two hundred.  Not a single one has shown any inclination to turn more than five or six turns before stopping.  Am I ever tempted to chuck the whole research after so many failures?  No, because I know that that Bessler's wheel was genuine and I have broken so many pieces of code that I think I have the solution.  I was writing up my conclusions until I started to move house and I shall return to it as soon as I can and I will publish it, but I want if possible, to build it first to test my hypothesis.

I believe that the clues I've found clearly show evidence of Bessler's intention to hide information which would help to understand the workings of his wheel, but the best evidence remains hidden in chaper 55 of the Apologia Poetica.  See my website at http://www.orffyreus.net/ for information about the clues I've found in Apologia Poetica.

Discussions have surfaced again on the besslerwheel forum about the drawings in Apologia Poetica and in Das Triumphans and the inclusion of pentagrams, see my own interpretations at my website at http://www.theorffyreuscode.com./html/apologia_wheel.html

These interpretations were made a few years ago, and I have found and solved many more since then, but as they refer directly to the wheel I am working on (soon!) I prefer to keep  my findings to myself until I have had at least one attemt to translate them into a physical reality.

One thing I do know and that is this, should my own efforts fail I am certan that the information I pass on will lead to a successful working wheel by someone with a more skilled engineering talent.

It's good to be back!

JC

The Legend of Bessler's Wheel.

I have replaced my usual blog with a brief account of the legend of Bessler's wheel.  I'm currently unable to maintain the frequency of my blog due to commitments which are keeping me exceedingly busy!  

Once I have completed my house purchase, and have set up a new workshop so that I can finish my wheel tests, I shall return to the blog - plus I shall have published my interpretation of a large number of Bessler's clues, none of which relate to Bessler's portraits. So there should ample reason for discussion.

23rd May 2016

JC

The legend of Bessler’s Wheel began on 6th June 1712, when Johann Bessler announced that he had invented a perpetual motion machine and he would be exhibiting it in the town square in Gera, Germany, on that day.  Everyone was free to come and see the machine running.  It took the form of a wheel mounted between two pillars and ran continuously until it was stopped or its parts wore out. The machine attracted huge crowds.  Although they were allowed to examine its external appearance thoroughly, they could not view the interior, because the inventor wished to sell the secret of its construction for the sum of 10,000 pounds – a sum equal to several millions today.

News of the invention reached the ears of high ranking men, scientists, politicians and members of the aristocracy.  They came and examined the machine, subjected it to numerous tests and concluded that it was genuine. Only one other man, Karl, the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel, was allowed to view the interior and he testified that the machine was genuine. He is a man well-known in history as someone of the greatest integrity, and  the negotiations between Bessler and Karl took place against a background in which Karl acted as honest broker between the warring nations of Europe; a situation which required his absolute rectitude both in appearance and in action.

There were several attempts to buy the wheel, but negotiations always failed when they reached an impasse – the buyer wished to examine the interior before parting with the money, and the inventor fearing that once the secret was known the buyer would simply leave without paying and make his own perpetual motion machine, would not permit it.  Sadly, after some thirty years or more, the machine was lost to us when the inventor fell to his death during construction of another of his inventions, a vertical axle windmill.

However, the discovery of a series of encoded clues has led many to the opinion that the inventor left instructions for reconstructing his wheel, long after his death.  The clues were discovered during the process of investigating the official reports of the time which seemed to rule out any chance of fraud, hence the  interest in discovering the truth about the legend of Bessler’s wheel.

My own curiosity was sparked by the realisation that an earlier highly critical account by Bessler's maid-servant, which explained how the wheel was fraudulently driven, was so obviously flawed and a lie, that I was immediately attracted to do further research. In time I learned that there was no fraud involved, so the wheel was genuine and the claims of the inventor had to be taken seriously.

The tests which the wheel was subjected to involved lifting heavy weights from the castle yard to the roof, driving an Archimedes water pump and an endurance test lasting 56 days under lock and key and armed guard.  Bessler also organised demonstrations involving running the wheel on one set of bearings opened for inspection – and then transferring the device to a second set of open bearings, both sets having been examined to everyone’s satisfaction, both before, after and during the examination.

So the only problem is that modern science denies that Bessler's wheel was possible, but my own research has shown that this conclusion is wrong.  There is no need for a change in the laws of physics, as some  have suggested, we simply haven't covered every possible scenario in the evaluating the number of possible configurations.

I have produced copies of all Bessler's publications, with English translations.  They can be obtained by clicking on the appropriate links on the right.

JC

Johann Bessler's use of Codes

Did Johann Bessler leave any clues?

Were any encrypted?

Was there more than one kind of clue?

Were they intended to help us reconstruct his wheel or was there some other reason??

Johann Bessler left numerous clues of such a diverse nature that although researchers have made some progress in interpreting some of the clues, in almost every case each researcher has discovered that a different method of encoding them has been used.

My own work on chaper 55 of Apologia Poetica can be seen at http://www.orffyreus.net/

It doesn't reveal any hidden information other than the fact that there definitely is a code and an extensive one.

I have also presented some other codes at my web site at http://www.theorffyreuscode.com./ Again these offer little other than the code and my interpretation of each one, and they appear to be indicating fiurther research is needed in order to understand what they mean.

Øystein has made signifiant advances in deciphering another range of codes totally unrelated to those I have mentioned above.  He has shared with myself some examples of his work and it cannot be denied that what he has found was intentional and therefore authored by Bessler himself.  There is also the work done by Ken B.  Unfortunately I have not had access to his findings so I am unable to verify it but he is planning to publish details shortly and then perhaps we can form an opinion

Where as Oystein's work is a combination of what I might call alphagraphical codes although it doesn't relate to QR bar codes, Ken's has found information in Bessler's portraits.  My own work involves yet another variation on the codes used, this time deducing the author's intention from clues within certain of Bessler's drawings.

Finally there are a number of textual hints which seem on the face of it either meaningless or too ambiguous to be of practical value, however when taken together with other clues, some sense can be made of them.

It is clear from the above and other areas of research that Bessler did indeed intend to leave enough practical informtion to allow us to reconstruct his wheel.  I know that there have been several statements both here and on the forum that we shall never know whether we have reconstructed Bessler's wheel or simply found another way to produce similar results, but in my opinion which comes from informed research, there are a number of pieces of useful information, which indicate why his wheel worked and how, so that the reconstruction of a wheel very similar to Bessler's will be achieved and in the near future.

I think that the detailed explanation in a textual format will be found in Chapter 55 of Apologia Poetica, but the graphic explanations which may be intended to supplement the text version will be found in Bessler's drawings.  Elsewhere there are the hints in the text which suggest the answer may be found in Apologia Poetica, and as I've said above, specifically in chapter 55.  There are also numerous tiny clues which seem to point to 5, 5 and 5 or 55; why the number 5? I think everyone knows my feelings on that, but using the number 5 may also have presented itself as the obvious choice for which chapter to include the extensive codes in, hence chaper 55.  

Also he initiated the whole encodement question by adopting the pseudonym Orffyreus, and you can see more about that on my web site at http://www.theorffyreuscode.com./

From all the hints and statements he made we can be sure that Bessler did intend for his wheel to be rediscovered should he unfortunately die before a buyer could be found - and he stated that he would be content with post humous acknowledgement - if that is not an unequivocal allusion to information being available after his death, then I don't know what it.

J

A Repudiation of Certain Statements made in Comments on this Blog.

It has been suggested here on this blog that "Bessler's wheel requires no energy to prime the weights even though they produce an imbalance providing torque to turn the wheel."

I disagree that the weights are "primed" as you put it, without requiring energy, they have to be lifted in the first place.  This requires energy. On the other hand I agree that the wheels turn according to "known physics".  So your suggestion that your wheel "uses the law of perpetual motion, which requires that no energy is needed to prime the weights ...", does not concur with what you refer to as "known physics"' which does require the consumption of energy.

So, assuming that Bessler did not lie, it is obviously possible to design a way to lift the weights so that they can fall repeatedly and this action must comply with "known physics" , so there is no need to invent a "law of perpetual motion". But the energy to lift the weights after each fall has to be included in the design, it's no use inventing new ways of enabling the weights to overbalance,  hoping that they will rise through the rotation of the wheel.

There is at least one way and possibly more than one, and it can be demonstrated that by incorporating some additional features that each weight can be lifted at the optimum moment in rotation.  This can be achieved with a simple design feature which I'm unwilling to discuss here because I'm writing it up, which easily causes each weight to shoot upwards, just as Bessler described.  I don't expect anyone to believe me without any supporting testimony just as I wouldn't believe anyone else who made such claims.

I will also take issue with the statement that, "you will not find anything in the MT drawings or the codes", not true and my document includes numerous illustrations along with full explanations of some of the clues from MT and some codes which will prove the error in the above quotation.

Finally let me deal with the statement that, "all of Bessler's wheels could theoretically start on their own, it just depends on what state they were left in when they were stopped."  This is demonstrably wrong.  The first two wheels were held stationary when not being demonstrated otherwise they started spontaneously.  Why assume Bessler lied?  It is safe to assume that the many witnesses who were allowed to screw the bolt in and out to slow the wheel down would soon have found the spot in rotation which would allow the wheel stop and remain stationary.  It is also entirely logical that to rotate continuously the wheel must have been in a state of continuous imbalance.  Therefore how could it not start spontaneously?

The latter two wheels could spin in either direction therefore they must have been in a state of continuous balance, as opposed to imbalance, and therefore how could they possibly start spontaneously?  The action of giving them a gentle push in the desired direction led to acceleration in that chosen direction, once one weight was heard to fall.  Once the wheel was stopped it remained stationary, and because a weight had to fall before it began to accelerate, it would not be possible to stop it in a position from whence it could spontaneously begin to rotate.

I have tried to argue logically without using any information I am privy to, which is unknown to readers of this blog, to try to balance some of the statements issuing from the hand of a certain commentator.  Much of this person's output is erroneous, self-opinionated and an example ofself-aggrandisement and should be taken with a large dose of scepticism, as should his claims to imminent success.

JC

Update for April 2016

While I await completion of the purchase of my house, I am unable to do any wheel building, so I'm working on the configuration of the mechanisms to try to improve and simplify the actions.  This can be a good task to undertake as it can lead to new ideas and also the discovery of potential problem areas.   Predictably I have found a weak spot in my design which is easily overcome and my enforced idleness has given me the opportunity to find this before I had continued with my build.  I tend to attack these new designs with too much enthusiasm and haste and then find I've got to go back a couple of steps to correct things.

My publishing intentions are still firm and at least I have the time now to work on the document and make any necessary alterations.

So my plan is to continue to finish and publish all the information I have acquired which I believe Bessler left for us in the hope that we would understand it and replicate his work.  At the same time l'm continuing to look at my design and once I'm back in my workshop, I will try to finish my proof of principle wheel or at least the mechanism, and publish a video of it with accompanying commentary.

For those who may think I'm prevaricating about my hypothesis document I must tell you that it is proving a complex composition.  It currently runs to more than 40 pages with more than 38 illustrations and there are more in the pipeline. If this seems a lot, be assured that it is necessary.  If I am to prove that Johann Bessler left enough instructions to permit the construction of his wheel, exactly in the form that he built his own, then I have to show the clues as he left them and how they reveal the solutions.  Each clue forms part of the whole, but it had to be obscure otherwise it would be too obvious and his secret revealed too soon.

Which ever comes first does not matter to me, I will publish both. In the mean time I will continue to write my blog when I feel that I have something worth saying.  I hope that you will stay with me at least to give me your reactions when publication happens.

JC

http://www.witt-energy.com/ harvesting Motion Energy

I have Andre to thank for informing me about this amazing invention -  the WITT motion energy harvester.  It has been invented by Martin Wickett, a British civil engineer, who has found a way to construct a device which uses motion in any direction to drive a rotating wheel.

Unlike a self-winding watch which uses linear motion to win a watch,, this device harvests all motion whether up, down, round sideways etc. Andre sent me this (now corrected) link to a youtube video:-


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RACH6bFhxKY&feature=youtu.be

Here is another link to the official website.  So many potential uses for this machine!

 http://www.witt-energy.com/

I put it on this blog because I think it is such a logical and useful discovery.

JC

You need a working wheel or enough of the mechanism to show how it works.

When Johann Bessler exhibited his wheel for the first time in Gera, Germany, 6th June 1712, he had worked out in his own mind that all he had to do was provide some evidence that his wheel was genuine and the rest would follow - money, fame etc.

The next few years proved his optimism was seriously undeserved.  No one was sufficiently persuaded of his claims to make an outright payment in full without seeing for himself that the wheel was genuine. 

Gottfired Leibniz tried to guide him by suggesting several tests which would add weight to his claims by being difficult if not impossible to fake.  They included translocation to a different set of wheel supports; lifting as high as possible a heavy load; driving an archimedes screw; a long endurance test under guard, lock and key and seal - and most importantly, if he could bring himself to allow it, the public confirmation by a well-respected person, of the genuiness of his wheel, by revealing the internal workings for his close inspection.

All these requirement were eventually carried out, but still no buyer could be found who was not prepared to pay up without first assuring himself that the device was real by looking inside it.

This sounds depressing and we may feel sorry for Bessler, but there is good reason to suspect that exactly the same response or lack of response would follow similar claims today.  You might think think that a patent would be proof enough, but consider how many hundreds of perpetual motion machine designs have been registered with various patent offices over the last few hundred years and you can see that a patent proves nothing even if it might offer some limited protection against competition.

The only answer, it seems to me, is to reveal the design within a video of a working model; a full explanation will need to accompany the video - or find that reputable person, like Karl the Landgrave, who will verify your wheel. But you still need that working model, I know, I'm in that situation now.

There is one more possibility to my mind and it is this.  There must be a configuration within your wheel which will demonstrate how the mechanism works, without having to complete a whole wheel.  The weights which fall have to be returned to where they started from at least once in each turn of the wheel, and your mechanism must be able to demonstrate how that can be achieved, and that is the route I intend taking once I get my workshop back.

JC