Gravity Wheel -or- Motion Wheel - Part 3

[rlortie]

Fletcher,

We over-lapped posts while you were double posting, maybe because I was editing.

Ralph

[cloud camper]

This whole situation is patently ludicrous.

We have a fiver claiming/promising PM for a concept he doesn't even plan to authenticate, but now we're testing Ralph's credibility?

JM has now done more damage to the forum trying to pass off his phony, twisted and biased Bessler interpretations and driving away Stewart than all the supposedly dangerous trolls that Jim has focused on over the years combined.

JM is not qualified to do translations from old German, neither is he qualified to pass off his comic book high school physics as anything to do with reality.

In any mainline science or physics forum, one would have been banned instantly for EITHER of these egregious offenses.

We need Stewart to return to the forum, we don't need biased translations and crackpot physics. Stewart was an amazing scientific asset we can't afford to lose.

Without Stewart, we have no one that can do completely UNBIASED translations. This is an absolutely critical scientific requirement for any translation.

JM must be punished severely for this terrible loss to the forum.

[daxwc]

Cloud:

JM must be punished severely for this terrible loss to the forum.

Cloud give it up already. I refuse to punish Jim, but keep up your antics and members will start asking to push your red button due to your behaviour. Stop; get on with your build and ideas and stay on your thread or control yourself, the latest discussion was Fletcher and Ralph clearing the air.



Stewart left on his terms and he will not be coming back just because Jim gets punished. The older members or people farther along in the quest for perpetual motion know something that might not be apparent to new members. That is you can outgrow the forum, meaning you come to a level of knowledge where the forum discussion no longer provides you with information that seems to push ahead your knowledge. The door has to be left open for people like Stewart and others to come back to on their terms to update new findings or speculation.

[rasselasss]

Well said..daxwc...

[jim_mich]

JM is not qualified to do translations from old German, neither is he qualified to pass off his comic book high school physics as anything to do with reality.

It is not my fault that Stewart has an ego problem and thinks only he is able to do translations.

You are claiming that the three little short lines of text that I translated were translated biased and wrong. I disagree.

Everyone, including Stewart claims Bessler was speaking about the wheel being heavy on one side and light on the other.

Stewart translates "wies sol" to mean "as it should".

Numerous online translation engines say it mean "showed such" or "pointed such". Bessler never said "as it should be". He says, in the parenthesis, "such as I showed" or "such as I pointed out", implying that he had showed or pointed out, during the lifting demonstration, that his wheel worked equally well both when loaded heavy and full as when it was empty and light.

It's plain that Bessler was speaking about the demonstration and not about the insides of his wheel.

But because I dare to go against Stewart and against the grain here on the forum by suggesting that Bessler's wheels were powered by motion rather than by gravity, you keep flaming me. I'm simply seeking the truth about Bessler's wheels. It seem everyone sticks their fingers in their ears and says, No, no, no!

In the most fluid English possible, translating as accurately as possible, the three lines read as follows:

So long, by self itself around goes.
up either Since it's heavy and full,
Up that empty and light (pointed such)

Translating a German poem, word for word, into English, makes it sound like broken English, and make it a little difficult to understand. But when you look at it closely, the meaning is clear. Bessler was discussing the demonstration. He was not describing the interior of his wheel.

For reference, here are the original three Germans lines:

So lang’ es von sich selbst rum fähret.
Auf einer Seit’ ist’s schwer und voll,
Auf jener leer und leicht (wies sol.)

Prove me wrong in this translation!

[daxwc]

You know Jim it would go a long way if you could say you’re sorry for your part in letting your anger, stubbornness and intolerance get the best of you. It takes two to tango, the forum is more forgiving then it looks; let’s get on with the work needed towards everybody’s goal here.

P.S. take your bomb down… let start anew.

Oh…. Happy Fathers Day to all those dads out there.





.

[jim_mich]

PS to my above post.

I wanted to discuss these translations with Stewart, since he obviously has a much better grasp of German. I wanted to ask him to point out why he thinks he is right and why he thinks I am wrong. But he ignored me on his forum. And when I attempted to go it alone, he flamed me on this thread in this forum. With my first posting in Stewart's forum about looking into Bessler's writings, he immediately got in a huff over something that he assumed I said. He was reading between the lines of what I wrote. I had to hustle to smooth out his ruffled feather, explaining that I meant no disrespect, and had to explain why I said what I did. The man has a serious ego problem. He is also a great translator, but no translator or translation is ever perfect. This one specific instance of Bessler's words have been misunderstood for a long time, and it needs to be made clear.

Anyone, please explain why you think it talks about the inside of Bessler's wheel. Explain why Bessler is not talking about the demonstration where the wheel worked either when lifting heavy weights as when empty.

And yes I'm angry. And yes I'm stubborn, always have been. And my tolerance has been pushed beyond its limit. But I've not accused people of lying when they did not lie. Cloud camper has wrongly accused me of many things that are simply not true. In plain language, cloud camper keeps posting lies about me. And that I cannot forgive.

[daxwc]

I was talking about saying sorry for the Stewart conflict. It is done, we all know your stance. Forget all the transgressions you think Stewart did and reflect on yourself, is that really who you want to be.

This one specific instance of Bessler's words have been misunderstood for a long time, and it needs to be made clear.

No really it doesn't, you have stated your position.




Let the Cloud issue go Jim, you can't control peoples actions. Pretend your a politician; your ego can't be eggshell thin. The members will decide for themselves in black, white or shades of grey.


.

[bluesgtr44]

Here's a bit of the discussion about the back and forth of Bessler/Wagner from GB to Wagners critiques to Besslers response to these in AP. These need to be taken together as a conversation of sorts because it is, in essence a back and forth direct response. Trying to take some of this as a stand alone description of sorts will be very misleading as Jim is trying to point out. This one post is pointing out the squaring of the force.....

First off....a very merry Christmas to all. Hope the new year brings all the best to all of you and your families.

I am going to try and put this together like I did earlier. I have Wagners script and GB and AP to chronicle this a bit....I do not, however have the article from the Liepzig newspaper that this references and in Besslers reply, he does not mention this as you will see.....



Quote:
On page 21, line 4 seq., the defender indicates the proportion by which the force would be multiplied if the diameter of the wheel were increased.

Quote:
(From GB....pg. 63, J. Collins pub. "For if one considers the above-mentioned sizes and proportions of the three machines constructed by Monsieur Orffyreus (At Gera, Draschwitz and Mersburg respectively), we can see that the first could only lift a few pounds, the second 40 or so, but the third could lift between 70 and 80 lbs.)


He obtains this proportion from the three different wheels which Orffyreus has made, namely, the first wheel, in Gera, which measured two and a half Leipzig ells in diameter and raised several pounds; the second, in Draschwitz which measured 5 Leipzig ells in diameter and drew 40 pounds; at the last, in Merseburg, which measured 6 Leipzig ells and drove 70 to 80 pounds into the air. From these it is concluded that if the diameter of the wheel is increased by approximately one ell, the force of the wheel increases by 40 pounds, and thus the difference increases by 40 in an arithmetic proportion. If the diameter of the current Merseburg wheel were made twice its size namely 12 ells, then the wheel could not raise more than 320 pounds according to this rule. Nevertheless, in the Leipzig newspaper of 3 November 1714 it is expressly stated that if the diameter of the wheel were thus increased, the force would square itself, according to which rule the said 12-ell wheel would raise 6400 pounds, a frightful blunder of about 6080 pounds which should rightly humiliate Orffyreus, who lets himself be called a famous and experienced mathematician and mechanic.



From AP...pg. 352-353, J. Collins pub.

Quote:
"At this point Wagner seeks to correct a point made by my patron.

The point concerns the power of my machines. Wagner calculates the total power of these three wheels, and says that the figure given should be reduced considerably - so much so, in fact, that good Master Orffyreus, the great mathematician, should be thoroughly ashamed of himself! Ashamed also that I, Orffyreus, did not force my patron to write the correct figure. Listen, Wagner, I'm not you slave! Who is right? You're the one who calculates badly! So I'm to be excused, having done nothing wrong that reflects on my patron. Please note carefully these facts:-

If I were to place, next to a 12-Ell wheel, one of 6-Ells, then if I wanted to, I could cause the smaller one to revolve with more force and useful power than the large on. I can, in fact, make 2, or 3, or even more, wheels all revolving on the same axis. Further, I make my machines in such a way that, big or small, I can make the resulting power small or big as I choose.I can get even as much as fourfold. If I arrange to have just one cross-bar in the machine, it revolves very slowly, just as if it can hardly turn itself at all, but, on the contrary, when I arrange several bars, pulleys and weights, the machine can revolve much faster, and throw Wagners calculations clean out of the window!"

I hope I presented this in a way that is easy to comprehend. In his response he never mentions the article in the Liepzig newspaper...dagnabbit!


Steve

Here's the thread this was in. Still a good read IMHO.......


http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... er&start=0

Steve

P.S. Jim is not a fraud by any stretch of the imagination. He does have a strong perception of how Besslers wheel derived its power whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. He is, however a bit ornery and short on patience at times. So what......I know I can still count on him to give an honest assessment of anything I throw out there.

[jim_mich]

Concerning Stewart... It was not me that caused a problem, else tell me what I said.

As I see it Preoccupied said

On one side it is heavy and full; on the other empty and light, just as it should be.

I think that implies gravity being used to turn the wheel and the weights somehow all being on one side or most of them.

And so I looked into it a little more closely.

And I reported my findings in this posting number 111847

And out of the blue, Stewart is upset with me. And he flames me, says I don't "understand the language" and then attempts to correct me.

And Stewart does not seem to understand (or is too arrogant to even look into the possibility) that Bessler may have used the German word "Uberwucht" as a means to hide his real meaning, because everyone thinks "out-of-balance" pertains only to gravity, when it can very easily pertain to "out-of-balance" impetus force.

But I'm the bad guy for pushing the point. Also I did not know that Ed was Stewart's fill-in guy here on the forum.

But what if I'm right? We've been looking into gravity wheels on this forum for over ten years now. Don't you think it's time to look at alternate ideas?

I said before, the reason no one has found the solution to Bessler's wheel may be that we are looking in the wrong place. Everyone is searching for a gravity wheel. But I convinced the solution is a motion wheel. And as part of the searching, while I'm building my motion wheel, I thought maybe we could at least look into the actual words and writings of Bessler, and see is they support a gravity wheel or a motion wheel.

Falling back to saying it must be a gravity wheel because Bessler used the words "Uberwucht" just does not cut it, because "Uberwucht" very well might be a "red Herring" phrase used by Bessler to throw us off course, while technically not lying to us.

What other words and phrases are there, that push the debate one way or the other? Stewart wimped out in my opinion. "Uberwucht" was Stewart's only defense that Bessler was writing about a gravity wheel rather than a motion wheel. So what can I say. If you kick out the underpinnings of "Uberwucht", you are left with nothing supporting gravity wheel. So you must progress to other writings. And then you find Bessler saying the weights of his wheel gained force from moving.

Bessler talks of weights rising and falling, and also the mechanisms rising and falling along with the weights. He says EVERYTHING inside the wheel must rotate. Everything inside the wheel rises and falls. Duh! Saying that weights rise and fall does NOT say that they rise and fall because of gravity. It does not even indicate out-of-balance.

Am I incoherent? All I'm asking is look at Bessler's writings. But every time I attempt to direct the conversation towards Bessler's writings, some members (trolls?) attempt to direct the conversation towards my wheel concept. FORGET ABOUT my wheel concept. That is my concern, not yours. I can't talk much about my wheel. Keep the conversation all about Bessler's writings and if they lean towards gravity wheels or motion wheels.

I'll be more than glad to talk about Bessler's writings. But I'll not say another word about my wheel or the concept of how it works. Anyone who brings up that subject will simply be ignored. I will not respond to such talk.

OK. End of Rant. Let's move on...

I'll need to take a look at the thread that Steve just mentioned.

[jim_mich]

Steve's quote is from page five of the thread - link is below.
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 6058#46058

[Furcurequs]

Ever feel like this?

"duty calls.png"



"What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!"

http://xkcd.com/386/

Vaya con Dios, Stewart!

(Dios nos asista!)

Dwayne

[Ed]

Also I did not know that Ed was Stewart's fill-in guy here on the forum.

Yes, because poor wittle me can't make a valid argument without being connected to him. No matter. I grow wary of trying to converse with the Beardmeister.

さよなら




________________________________________
one ex-forum after nearly 9 years of registration

[Gill Simo]

For the record, I fully understand your stance/arguements Jim & fully agree.
Should be the exact opposite considering our unique circumstance but it's painful to attempt to give birth to an idea up against the brick wall that pushes back here.

[bluesgtr44]

Hey Ed.....is yours and Stewarts site open? I have lost my main computer and do not have the link anymore. If it is based on acceptance, I'd like to apply. I admit that I can't spend as much time as I would like to with this, but I'm still very intrigued by this puzzle. Send me the link if you would please. Lot's of respect for you two!


Steve