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