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