Bessler's secret

[axel]

Hello all. Breaking in after a long absence.
Remember, he said the weights "come together".

[Grimer]

[jim_mich]

Hello all. Breaking in after a long absence.
Remember, he said the weights "come together".

Bessler never actually wrote weights "come together". He wrote of weights "against-each-other coordinate" as I've emboldened below...

Pages 19, 20, 21 of DT as translated into English by Jim_Mich...

Pg 19 of DT
The inner structure this drum or wheel is of such a nature, according to several the laws mechanical perpetual motion, from the former, that is, scientific (begin Pg 20) demonstrable arranged weights, same after received once rotation, or after once impressed force the momentum, unceasingly drive, and its revolution must continue, so long namely the whole structure her construction keeps, without some outside contribution and to-do external movement-force, which a restitution would need: like as turned by other automatic machines, as clockwork springs, and attached/pendent or pulling weights perhaps found. Then this my preponderance/unbalance is not so hung-on, nor extra mechanism, or only to consider, how external movers, which by means of her heaviness/gravity/weight, the motion or rotation must continue so long as the cords or chains, by which they hang permits: but it is these weights themselves the Perpetuum Mobile, or parts essential & constitute the same, which from their Movement together receive force & effort, progression in themselves have, and unending-like exercise must (so long they namely out of the Center gravity stay) after they in such housing (begin Pg 21) or frameworks enclosed, and against-each-other coordinate been, that they not only against themselves never an equilibrium or point rest (Punctum Quietis) reach, but the same unceasingly seek, and herewith in its admirable worthy fast flight, according to proportion both own as their housing size, still other of exterior to the shaft or axis their vortex vertically applied loads, by motion and drive must.

Notes:
The violet text describes other mobiles that are wound-up and not perpetual.
The red text describes the externally applied load lifted by way of the rope.
It is my opinion that the phrase "out of the Center gravity stay" refers to weights staying away from the positions which they are seeking but fail to find, as described in the text following said phrase in question.

Ref: und gegeneinander coordiniret worden |and against_each_other coordinate been/were

Hope this helps.

[cloud camper]

Here we go again with JM's unqualified and biased translations.

One more time JM does not speak German, let alone Old German, does not understand contax, syntax or usage of sentence structure and of course is
biased towards a CF powered interpretation.

We have unbiased and degreed professionals trained specifically in Old German right here on the forum that are qualified to do translations. This is complete nonsense.

Please stick to what you're best at - spinning tall tales about your imaginary "runners".

[jim_mich]

CC attacks me again.

[Fcdriver]

I see nothing wrong with what Jim wrote,it's closer to what I'm doing on my project. Experts be wrong? Oh never!

[cloud camper]

JM has yet to apologize for years of overt lying about various "runners" and
now feels authorized to "correct" standard translations because of a pathetic
Google translation?

Well of course! In his pet CF theory (which he has already proven false with
his own wheel test) the weights do not "come together".

If JM feels the official translations are in error, he should request a new one
from Stewart. A 10 second Google translation proves nothing.

[eccentrically1]

I don't think the translation makes any difference. the result is the same, the weight, whether it comes together (then separates), or whether it coordinates. if the weight coordinates, then their movements imply some amount of separation and joining; it's just a different way to say the same thing. coordinate implies a specific movement between the weight, if that's what you're going after. but again, i don't think that would make a difference, we can debate that if you'd like.
just trying to read between your lines. hope it helps.

[Grimer]

What I like about the above diagram is that it illustrates a couple arising not from difference in weight on either side (the blue and red weights have the same mass) - not from difference in the Newtonian Gravitation (NG) swing of those masses (d is the same for both) - not from differences in lever arm but purely from the difference in angular momentum - in Ersatz Gravity (EG) in other words, a difference that arises from the different way that NG and EG interact with pendulums of different lengths/periods.

I believe there must be a simple way of harnessing that difference for a working wheel.

[MrVibrating]

It's a good diagram, however i've played with these types of systems and in this scenario, if the system was lossless it'd continue indefinitely with no gain. With normal losses in play, it'd settle soon enough. Either way its motion is chaotic. The beam rotates in small random increments, a few degrees CW then CCW, with no preference for either, and never a full smooth cycle of its own accord. If external torque is applied to force it CW, the bobs' motions become ever more chaotic, and if it rotated fast enough it'd end up with one bob stuck in and the other permanently flung outwards.

If Bessler was using swinging weights then it's safe to say they were somehow more judiciously coordinated..

[Grimer]

"If Bessler was using swinging weights then it's safe to say they were somehow more judiciously coordinated."

Absolutely.

[jim_mich]

I believe there must be a simple way of harnessing that difference for a working wheel.

Also Wagner hears (where he yet dwells),
How a pound more than one hefts. NB.
He scribed: You'd until this hour
No such mechanical apparatus found,
That for the craft sufficient. x.

He's right, I also, who it understand?
How but, when I will teach,
So much apparatus application?
Shall say: Now understand we that.
Was Wagner not a silly rabbit.

Here again Bessler clearly writes concerning his wheel, that Wagner was right, there is no mechanical apparatus sufficient whereby a pound can heft more than one pound.

Bessler then adds that he himself is also right when he claims a perpetual motion, and that if he were to teach how, then people would say, Now we understand.

[Grimer]

Thinking again about the diagram attached below, I think that when Bessler talked about having to know how to lift 4 pounds with 1 pound he must have been referring to the Ersatz Gravity (EG) component of a swinging weight.

If the weight is swung through the angle shown in the diagram then at the nadir (the 6 o'clock position) you will have a force of the order of four times the Newtonian Gravity (NG) of the mass. This will lift a weight, albeit momentarily four times the weight (the Newtonian gravitational force) of the swinging mass.

[jim_mich]

Hey Grimer,

Now that I'm done puking after reading EG... might I suggest you take a look in this thread...
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... =7926#7926
from about 10 years ago, where I made the connection between CF always producing a force of four times the weight of the weight when it falls 180°. At first Michael disputed this observation. But his thinking was confused and he soon agreed with me.

Of course back then we all thought that Bessler's solution was one pound lifting four. It was only after I started doing my own translations of Bessler's writings did I realize that Bessler's words in this regard were a sarcastic reply to Wagner.

Bessler wrote that sure, you would be a great inventor if with Wagner's wheel he could make one pound lift four pounds. And thus you can speculate that such a wheel would surely perpetuate its rotation. But if you are such a dummkopf to think that such a wheel would work, then all your seeking after PM is uselessness.

In other words, when you read between the lines, Bessler wrote that a gravity-rotated wheel was impossible. Bessler wrote that Wagner was right. And what was Wagner right about? You can't make one pound lift more than one pound. Then Bessler added that he himself was also right. And what was Bessler right about. He had made and displayed a perpetual motion wheel. Wagner was claiming a PM wheel to be impossible BECAUSE it would require one pound to lift more than one pound. And in this respect Wagner was right. A gravity-wheel would indeed require one pound to lift more than one pound. So logic says the Bessler's wheel was not a gravity-wheel. So what was it? Bessler revealed that answer when he wrote that the weights of his wheel gain their motive force from their "Schwunges", which translates to swing/motion/momentum/impetus. In other words, Bessler's wheel was rotated by the motions of its weights. It was a motion-driven wheel. It was a perpetual motion-wheel. It turned per se, by itself, without the help of gravity.

[Allen_T]

Grimer,
With a pendulum clock, when the pendulum swings to one side and makes contact with an escarpment, it lets the weight lower. The ratio with a pendulum clock can be as high as 1500:1.
While it might be possible to use a ring gear which Asa Jackson of Tennessee used, I think Bessler used water.
If you consider how much torque your pendulum could generate if it rotated in a clockwise fashion, as rlortie how much water it could draw from a well.
Jim

http://www.murfreesboropost.com/perpetu ... -cms-33949