
A blog about Johann Bessler and the Orffyreus Code and my efforts to decipher it. I'll comment on things connected with it and anything I think might be of interest to anyone else.
The ‘Bessler’s Books’ button at the top of the right side panel, will take you to a page giving access to all Bessler’s books. Simply click ‘home’ to come back to my blog.
Note the copyright notice.
Friday, 26 September 2025
Latest News about Bessler’s Wheel Reconstruction.
My version of Johann Bessler’s perpetual motion machine, his “wheel” as many people refer to it, proceeds at a snail’s pace, seemingly! But in fact it still proceeds. The main problem, apart from my procrastination, is constantly having to revise the five completed mechanisms. Yes I’m confident that there has to be five mechanisms.
I’ve said before that the mechanisms needed to be rearranged in order to stop them interacting with each other, or more often sticking during their action. There is a small amount of lateral motion which causes two pieces to bump into each other. I’ve tried bending the levers a small amount to force them away from their nearest part but that is not effective. But this lateral motion can be reduced by tightening the locking or stiff nuts holding the parts together. But tightening them reduces the ease with which they rotate about their pivots. However, including thin, rigid but wider washers has improved things.
To explain how and why this happens is difficult to do without picture, but at this point so close to the finish, I’m unwilling to use a picture, at least not until either I’ve finished or run out of options. One way to imagine it is to think of each of the assembled mechanisms as being in two or three layers, sometimes one layer operating above or below another. What I’ve been doing is swapping some layers so that, for instance the top layer has been placed below the others and this seems to have improved things.
So once again I am back at my previous point, and I have to install the ten pulleys or screw eyes, to feed the cord through so that as one weighted lever falls it lifts the another fallen weighted lever. All cords are under tension which is a vital feature to provide continuous motion.
JC
Thursday, 25 September 2025
Overunity or Perpetual Motion or…..Underunity?
People sometimes suggest that Perpetual Motion (PM) is an example of Over-Unity and it seems implied that there is a difference. But what does it mean? Obviously the two terms are meant to refer to Bessler’s wheel, but when I google it I’m given this.
“Over-unity refers to a hypothetical device or system that produces more energy output than its energy input, a concept that contradicts the fundamental law of conservation of energy, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. Claims of over-unity devices often involve hidden energy sources, misinterpretations of efficiency, or pseudoscientific explanations, leading to their widespread rejection by the scientific community. While true over-unity is considered impossible, the underlying concept reflects a desire to find new energy sources beyond conventional ones.”
So it’s obviously impossible.
Here’s another definition, “ From over- + unity (the number "1”, referring to the fact that an over-unity device should produce more kinetic energy than whatever potential it receives as input. Coined to avoid patent rules that prevent impossible technologies such as perpetual motion machines being patented.”
Cunning, but it’s still wrong. The idea that a “device should produce more kinetic energy than what ever potential it receives as input”, is obviously wrong because it still violates the conservation of energy principle. Let’s reconsider this idea.
If Bessler’s wheel was, as he claimed it to be, a perpetual motion device and the weights it apparently contained, were enabled to fall by gravity. I note that Bessler referred to his machine, using the expression “per se”. There are several nuanced definitions of this phrase but the meaning my original translator opined was “like or similar to, a perpetual motion machine”; or even “as if it it were a PM”. It seems to me to imply that Bessler understood the reluctance in the scientific world to accept the possibility of a PM machine and hinted at its similarity if not the actuality. In other words it could run continuously with no input of energy other than that supplied by gravity to the weights.
Another impossibility? Not necessarily, because all potential configurations have not been discovered, other than by Bessler.
I asked myself two questions. Was the falling weight the initiator of the beginning of rotation? Or was it the built-in imbalance already present in the wheel? It doesn’t matter actually, because we know the wheel would begin to rotate as soon as the brake was released. Could the wheel begin to rotate, even before a single weight fell, if so then the wheel must have been out-of-balance, regardless of where it stopped? But that would not rule out the action of a falling weight contributing to the start of rotation even after it had been brought to a halt. Where it landed must have created an imbalance and the start or continuation of rotation.
Maybe we should reverse the over-unity idea?
Consider this. The only energy available is that produced by either imbalanced or falling weights. That’s all there is. Configure the device to spend less of the kinetic energy that it received as potential energy and yet still be able sustain rotation. Therefore it would need to generate enough potential energy from the kinetic energy it receives to rotate the wheel and yet still have some left to raise one weight sufficiently to rotate the wheel a little, to reset the wheel
Bessler told us this, “ a great craftsman would be he who, as one pound falls a quarter, causes four pounds to shoot upwards four quarters.” This is one Bessler’s more devious clues. What Bessler sought to do was to tell us what to do but disguise it from the casual reader; however it has turned out more difficult than perhaps he anticipated.
Tuesday, 23 September 2025
The Return of the Mysterious Xs in Johann Bessler's Apologia Poetica!
When I first wrote my biography of Johann Bessler (Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?) I mentioned the existence of what I termed X's throughout Apologia Poetica (AP), at that time I had a suspicion that they weren't actually X's but something rather more mundane. - and it turned out that the character is actually a well-known abbreviation for Et Cetera. written not as we do etc, but as et - meaning, and the rest, or so on and so forth. Modern German also uses an alternative which is "und so weiter" abbreviated to use but in print in Bessler's day the fraktur type was used, and the abbreviation was et, which does not immediately resemble the two letters it represents.
If there had been just an occasional use of the abbreviation then nothing remarkable would be inferred, however in hisApologia Poetica it is used so many times that one can only conclude that either the author had no idea of its proper use - or he was attempting to transmit a secret message via the X's and hinted at by the over-abundance of this abbreviation. In total he uses 684 so-called X's, in some places he uses two X's at the end of a line. In others he has ten consecutive lines each with an X at the end; but then he can go for twenty pages without a single X. On the other hand his other publications both before and after AP use no more than ten X's or etc's.
There was much discussion a while back on the Besslerwheel forum about the possible meaning of the X's and how to decipher them and the consensus was that the reason for the presence of so many could not be other than some kind of code. Given the sheer numbers plus the use of two on a line at times, seems to imply the possibility that each X indicated a letter within the particular line. I had already ruled out the possibility of each X meaning a word, because I went through the whole book looking for any kind of word within or near to any of the X'd lines which might be applied to the description of a wheel part - such as weight, lever, rotate, etc. - but none appeared.
One potential path worthy of investigation, I feel, are the passages which contain X's at the ends of several consecutive lines. I have done some work in this area without any success, but the potential to discover a significant letter within the indicated line seems possible. Given that Bessler would not have included this code unless he anticipated someone trying to break it, there has to be some kind of clue to aid someone in beginning to decipher it. One way to look for such clues is to find the unusual occurances of the mysterious X. So there are the passages with consecutive X's; the lines bearing two X's, presumably indicating the same letter twice; there is the presence of the X's even at the ends of some of Bible references which might seem the oddest place to put them.
What message might Bessler have hidden within the X's? Given the numbers of X's is 684, and assuming an average number of letters per word, as being five (taking into account one or two letters as well as longer ones) leaves us with about 135 words, which is actually quite a short message - about half the Gettysburg Address.
Any suggestions what the message might say?
JC
Wednesday, 10 September 2025
The Legend of Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Machine.
On 6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) announced that after many years of failure, he had succeeded in designing and building a perpetual motion machine. For more than fourteen years he exhibited his machine and allowed people to thoroughly examine the outside of it, but it’s internal workings were kept hidden. This was because the inventor feared that his design would be copied and someone else might obtain credit for all his years of hard work looking for the solution. He followed the advice from the famous scientist, Gottfried Leibniz, who was able to examine the device, and recommended a number of demonstrations and tests designed to prove the validity of his machine without giving away the secret of its design.
Monday, 8 September 2025
Some background on my search for Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Machine.
I made the decision to try and build Bessler’s Perpetual Motion machine about 30 years ago. I had dabbled with the idea for many years but it was my experience gained from reading the translations of Bessler’s books and the many documents connected with my research, that finally convinced me of two things. I had already accepted his claims factually, but it was also the pain he endured at the public reaction by his so-called enemies that confirmed in my mind that he was absolutely genuine. It also lent credence to his implication that he left behind some clues as to the design of his wheel. In the end it turned out to be, not just vague clues but an unbelievable assortment of numerous clues, revealing in detail, all of the important features of the design.
Through many years I’ve searched and studied every clue and found countless more. I’ve worked out the intention behind some of them but as an example I remember one simple clue I at first didn’t notice. But when I thought it was a clue I was unable decipher its meaning so eventually dismissed it as not important. I suspected that it was intended to convey information but I couldn’t understand what its purpose was, so I ignored it. I included it within my current design even though I didn’t know its purpose. A few weeks ago finally only recently I fully understood it and its ramifications. It was only because I included it in my own design, that it became obvious. It was a vital piece of information without which the mechanism wouldn’t operate correctly. It’s not always obvious why something was included and it takes trial and error to fully get the purpose.
At the beginning, some 30 years ago, I ordered a number of metal strips which I had designed with the purpose of building a wheel, configured on paper initially which I hoped might work. I had incorporated some pieces of evidence which I believed might lead to success. How wrong I was - and again and again, despite numerous reconfiguration, always the same result.. But gradually more information was revealed, but still not enough. I felt like an archaeologist scraping away layers of dirt, looking for a hidden treasure!
Below I have posted a picture of some of the mild steel and aluminium strips I ordered long ago and have used on every wheel I’ve built. It also shows some of the ones I have altered to fulfil some purpose. The aluminium ones are easier to drill and cut. Lastly my nuts, bolts and washers. Two kinds of nuts, one is a stiff nut, very useful to attach parts to other parts and either locked tight or left very slightly loose to allow for rotation if required. Also included is a pulley and a screw hook and two kinds of weight.
So the slow accumulation of information continues up to the present day, which is why I often promise to reveal everything and then discover I don’t know it all! I don’t see any point in showing failed designs, even though I have, because of mounting pressure to share my designs occasionally gets too much to resist! The desire to tell everything but decide not to, is hard to explain. My experience in showing something that’s not finished simply leads to a dismissal of all of the design.
My opinion that five mechanisms is an essential feature of a successful wheel, has attracted scornful dismissal and yet I believe it will prove to be correct. Time will tell, of that I’m confident. I will try to show why it is a necessary inclusion in the design.
Two recent revelations have spurred me on to return to building, having intended to stop. But I’m now trying to complete this last attempt. I will show what I’ve done, even if it fails, but this time, for the first time in my life I’m confident that I know the correct configuration. If my build fails I’ll publish the design.
Copyright ©️2025 John Collins
Tuesday, 26 August 2025
Is Gravity An Energy Source?
Wednesday, 20 August 2025
UPDATE. - How and Why I Spent 60 Years Reseaching Bessler
Many people have asked me how and why I ended up researching the life of Johann Bessler, given that he was believed to be a charlatan, a faker and what we might call a scam or con artist. I have been told numerous times that Bessler deceived others by presenting a fraudulent offer as legitimate - and of course I was taught in school that perpetual motion machines would break the conservation of energy law.
He offered for sale his self- proclaimed Perpetual Motion machine, for a figure of £20,000 - a sum worth more than £3.5 million today. He didn’t just pluck this figure out of the air - it was the same sum of money offered in 1712, by the British Board of Longitude, for the first person to devise a way to establish a ship’s position at sea.
Bessler did not intend to enter for that prize but he did think that his invention, the Perpetual Motion machine, was worth at least as much and so he set the purchase price for his machine at the same figure.
The reason I decided to find out as much as I could about Bessler and his machine was down to a small piece of information I found in a book about the inventor which initially raised a question in my mind.
In a document dated 28th November 1727, Orffyreus' maid makes the following statement.
"The posts had been hollowed out and contained a long thin piece of iron with a barb at the bottom which was attached to the shaft journal.
Turning was carried out from Orffyreus' bedroom which was close to the machine, on a shelf behind the bed."
Strangely, it was these particular sentences, which have been quoted as one of the most vital pieces of evidence of the inventor's duplicity that eventually led me to begin my research.
I had already read a full and accurate account of the inventor and knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that what ever other negative evidence was produced concerning Bessler’s honesty, that of the maid quoted above was a lie. Her description of how the machine was made to rotate was, frankly, impossible.
We have so much information about all of these machines that Bessler demonstrated; the huge size of some of them, their speed, their capacity for lifting very heavy weights, and their demonstrable endurance to run without stopping for 54 days; that we can dismiss the maid’s evidence without hesitation.
In which case we are left with only the inventors demonstrations in front of numerous members of the public, including princes, councillors, university lecturers and Doctors. But there was one other witness of impeccable integrity. Karl the Landgrave of Hesse Kassel, was a man who was universally acknowledged to have strong moral principles who consistently demonstrated honesty and ethical behaviour . He was asked to grant his patronage and help Bessler to promote his invention by providing space in his castle.
Karl was shrewd and had good practical knowledge and the ability to make good judgements. He had invited Denis Papin to his court in Kassel in 1695 and supported his research for several years. Before he would agree to offer help of any kind to Bessler he insisted that he must be allowed to see the interior to check the inventor’s claims were genuine. Bessler reluctantly agreed and after completing a thorough examination of the device, Karl published a document asserting the legitimacy of the inventor’s claims.
That is briefly why I undertook this life long search. How I did it, is harder to explain.
Bessler was German, I knew no German! How was I to find all the documents I needed and translate them into English. It was at this point I realised this was going take a very long time, most of my life!
After several years of fragmented research I wrote as complete an account of the inventor as I could manage. This book, “Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?”, is available - see below.
Wednesday, 13 August 2025
The Legend of Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Machine.
On 6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) announced that after many years of failure, he had succeeded in designing and building a perpetual motion machine. For more than fourteen years he exhibited his machine and allowed people to thoroughly examine the outside of it, but it’s internal workings were kept hidden. This was because the inventor feared that his design would be copied and someone else might obtain credit for all his years of hard work looking for the solution. He followed the advice from the famous scientist, Gottfried Leibniz, who was able to examine the device, and recommended a number of demonstrations and tests designed to prove the validity of his machine without giving away the secret of its design.
Wednesday, 16 July 2025
Update on Bessler’s Wheel PoP Model.
Johann Bessler’s Coded Secret Information is Ignored.
I expect everyone knows I believe Bessler’s wheel had five mechanisms. Before you move on and dismiss what I’m going to write, just hang on...
-
It's not that unlikely. In the 1870s, two inventors, Elisha Gray and Alexander Graham Bell, both independently designed devices that c...
-
On 6th June, 1712, in Germany, Johann Bessler (also known by his pseudonym, Orffyreus) announced that after many years of failure, he had s...
-
When someone finds the solution to Bessler’s wheel I don’t know how, or even if, it will affect the world we live in, but I do know that con...