A Chained Dog Is A Harnessed Horse.

[Michael]

Hi Trev.,

This spoils a little bit what I was going to post up but no matter. I think the idea that the banging noise was to be heard on the middle descending side is a wives tail. It's been a big debate on here at times and from what I remember John has said there was no indication where exactly the noise came from. I've never seen it in print but I have seen the comments that a weight was to be heard falling inside, so that maybe where the idea came from. There is a banging noise of course but it is where Bessler has indicated it came from.

The children play with loud heavy clubs between the broken pillars.

The pillars are the columns the wheels axel sits on of course. The childrens clubs (short swinging levers as opposed to a long pole) swing and come to rest (bang) at the bottom of the wheel, like I've drawn. This is exactly between the columns, as the quote says. It is also where other M.T. drawings signify the swing takes place. You'll see these drawings as a man swinging on a swing.

Mike

[John Collins]

from what I remember John has said there was no indication where exactly the noise came from.

Mike you're right, the description of the sound of the weights comes from a letter written by Fischer von Erlach who examined the wheel. In his letter he wrote the following words tp Desaguliers, assistant to Sir Isaac Newton :

'I do myself the hour of writing the present letter to mark my esteem for you, and also to give you news of the Perpetual Motion at Kassel, which has so much been recommended to me since I was in London. Although I am very incredulous about things which I do not understand, yet I must assure you that I am quite persuaded that there exists no reason why this machine should not have the name of Perpetual Motion given to it; and I have good reasons to believe that it is one, according to the experiments which I have been allowed to make by permission of His Serene Highness, (Karl the Landgrave of Hesse) who is one of the most amiable and gracious princes that I have known in my life; and who had the patience to be present at the trials which I made over a period of two hours. It is a wheel which is twelve feet in diameter, covered with an oilcloth. At every turn of the wheel can be heard the sound of about eight weights, which fall gently on the side towards which the wheel turns. This wheel turns with astonishing rapidity, making twenty-six turns in a minute, when the axle works unrestricted. Having tied a cord to the axle, to turn an archimedean screw for raising water, the wheel then made twenty turns a minute. This I noted several times by my watch, and I always found the same regularity. I then stopped the wheel with much difficulty, holding on to the circumference with both hands. An attempt to stop it suddenly would raise a man from the ground.

'Having stopped it in this manner, it remained stationary (and this Sir, is the greatest proof of it being a Perpetual Motion), I commenced the movement very gently to see if it would of itself regain its former rapidity, which I doubted, believing as they said in London, that it only preserved for a long time the impetus of the impulse first communicated. But to my astonishment I observed that the rapidity of the wheel augmented little by little until it had made two turns, and then it regained its former speed, until I observed by my watch that it made the same twenty-six turns a minute as before, when acting freely; and twenty turns when it was attached to the screw to raise water.

'This experiment, Sir, showing the rapidity of the wheel augmenting from the very slow movement I gave it, to an extraordinary rapid one, convinces me more than if I had seen the wheel moving for a whole year, which would not have persuaded me that it was perpetual motion, because it might have diminished little by little until it ceased altogether; but to gain speed instead of losing it, and to increase that speed to a certain degree in spite of the resistance of air and the friction of the axles, I do not see how any one can doubt the truth of this action. I then turned it in the opposite direction, and the wheel produced the same effect. I examined the bearings of this wheel to see if there was any hidden artifice; but was unable to see anything more than the two small bearings on which the wheel is suspended at its centre.'

This excerpt is taken from my book.

John Collins

[Vic Hays]

[quote="Michael"
The children play with loud heavy clubs between the broken pillars.
Mike[/quote]

The letter says there was the " sound of about eight weights, which fall gently on the side towards which the wheel turns." This is not a loud noise and probably did little if anything to drive the wheel. " Loud heavy clubs" may refer more to the mass of the clubs than the sound of them.

I agree that weights, springs, connections and levers as most probable. These were what Bessler had to work with at the time. I myself have recently had a new idea and perhaps I do now understand.

[rlortie]

The term FALL GENTLY Gives me the impression that maybe they did not fall but rolled or slid out against the rim, some where around two to three o'clock and were retained there by the warped boards until after 6 o'clock.

Question regarding the math, at 26 RPM 8 hits per revolution figures out to 208 impacts which is an even number. 26 divided by 8 = 3.25. at 20 RPM this changes to 2.5 Not being a math person this confuses me. Could this 3.25 no load and 2.5 loaded constant be related to the off balance that kept the wheel turning. Is not 8 a prime number while the fractions are not. Has this fact ever been discussed and is there an explanation in simple terms that dummy's like me can understand.

Ralph

[Fletcher]

Hi Ralph,

Not sure what you are trying to identify here so I'll just put up some numbers.

26 RPM => (implies) each revolution took 60 secs / 26 rpm = 2.30 secs/revolution => 2.30 / 8 = 0.2875 secs interval between sounds

20 RPM => 60 secs / 20 rpm = 3.0 secs/revolution => 3.0 / 8 = 0.375 secs sound intervals

That's enough time for the human ear to distinguish separate discreet sounds & not have them run together.

[Trev]

At every turn of the wheel can be heard the sound of about eight weights, which fall gently on the side towards which the wheel turns.

Hi Michael, Sorry, don't mean to spoil anything, just trying to see how this all fits together.
If you were to view a 12 FOOT wheel in motion, I'm sure you would be able to tell which part of the wheel the sound was coming from.
If you imagine a large X over the whole wheel, dividing it into 4 quarters, I would describe where your suggesting the impacts would be as the bottom, the area to the right < (if the wheel was going clockwise) I would call the descending side.

Trev.

[ken_behrendt]

I am also fairly certain that the gentle impact noises inside of the largest wheel were not occuring at the bottom part of its rim. Most likely they occurred as the weights slapped against constraints inside of the rim on the descending side of the wheel. If the wheel was mounted to spin a few inches above the floor and there was some sort of platforms with steps immediately below the axle ends, then a man of about 5'5" in height could find his ears near about the 3 o'clock position of the wheel's side. The sounds there would be quite audible and there would be little doubt about their location.

ken

P.S. Just for the record...I do not believe that the motion of Bessler's wheels were producted by any sort of weight impact action against their rims...

[Jonathan]

I too don't understand your numbers Ralph. 26/8=3.25 rev^2/hit/min is true, but doesn't seem to have any physical significance. If I'm not mistaken, you were trying to compare the hit rates of the wheel at different speeds, as Fletcher has done. The different results for hit/min for each are expected, since the rpm is different but the hit/rev is the same.
Prime numbers are whole numbers whose only whole divisors are 1 and themselves. Eight is divisible by 1, 2, 4, and 8, and so is not prime.

[Michael]

Hi Trev.

There was a bang heard in the machine. Your right if you think its in the lower part of the wheel. Between the columns, as Bessler says. My point was its been taken for granted that the noise came from the middle descending side of the wheel. There is a quote, as John pointed out, that weights have been heard to fall gently on the descending side, though what this could actually be is anything since no one saw the weights form of motion, and there was heard to be other noises from inside. There were also quotes, quite a few of the banging noise. Sometimes it was loud, sometimes not so loud. Somewhere along the way someone put the quote of the falling weights together with the banging noise and made them one and the same, which is wrong.

Mike

[Michael]

Hi Fletcher,

>hat's enough time for the human ear to distinguish separate discreet sounds & not have them run together.



True unless there were other constant noises. I've seen writtings where it was said sliding wooden noises were heard inside. Is this true? I don't know.

Mike

[Michael]

Hi Ken,

>P.S. Just for the record...I do not believe that the motion of Bessler's wheels were producted by any sort of weight impact action against their rims...

Neither do I. There was an impact as I drew up ( my opinion, again based on many things) but the impact and movement of the weight did not drive the wheel.\

As for the bang, can't get much clearer than this;
Children play among the pillars
with loud heavy clubs.

Pillars; wheel support
Play; form of motion
Loud; noise
Heavy; weight
Clubs; short arc, pendula swing

[Fletcher]

Hi Fletcher,

>that's enough time for the human ear to distinguish separate discreet sounds & not have them run together.

True unless there were other constant noises. I've seen writtings where it was said sliding wooden noises were heard inside. Is this true? I don't know.

Gidday Mike,

IIRC poles or parts were heard to scratch or slide over one another. This could also be interpreted as rolling on boards or the action of chains over cogs or cables over pulleys though less likely.

[rlortie]

I too don't understand your numbers Ralph. 26/8=3.25 rev^2/hit/min is true, but doesn't seem to have any physical significance. If I'm not mistaken, you were trying to compare the hit rates of the wheel at different speeds, as Fletcher has done. The different results for hit/min for each are expected, since the rpm is different but the hit/rev is the same.
Prime numbers are whole numbers whose only whole divisors are 1 and themselves. Eight is divisible by 1, 2, 4, and 8, and so is not prime.

Jonathan and Fletcher,

First I thank you for your replies and assistance. If I did not feel obligated to respond I would drop this topic. I do not know why I referred to 8 as prime number, I know better.

My point is that knowing 26/8=3.25 It seems to me that if there are 8 bangs per revolution you should get 8 bangs for every revolution. there for in one minute you would have a total of 208 bangs. If the hit-rev is constant with dividable numbers of 26 and 8 how do you get 3.25 when 26 divided by 60 gives .433333

Jonathan you know about me and math, I am drowning here, but it just looks to me as there is some sort of phase shifting going on with the cumulative bangs per revolution over 60 seconds.

Ralph

I know there is an answer to my confused thinking and I am certainly in no position to debate this. I do not even know what I am saying.

Ralph

[ovyyus]

...but it just looks to me as there is some sort of phase shifting going on with the cumulative bangs per revolution over 60 seconds

Ralph, I've also wondered if this might have been the case. The report of "about 8 bangs per revolution" seems so uncertain. Was it uncertain because the report was only an around about guess (seems unlikely) or was it because a full wheel rotation did not coincide with exactly eight bangs (suggesting a phase difference between external wheel rotation and internal weight movements)? If there was a phase difference between wheel and weights then that would amount to a very important clue.

[Jonathan]

I don't understand what you're asking Ralph. I'll post this math and se if it clears this up for you:
26rpm/(8hpr)=3.25rrphpm
26rpm/(60spm)=13/30rps (=.43333rps)
13/30rps/(8hpr)=13/240rrphps
13/240rrphps*60spm=3.25rrphpm
where r=rev, p=per, h=hit, m=minute, s=second, and rr=rev^2. What pattern, or lack of an expected pattern, are you looking for as a clue to the construction? You originally were comparing 3.25 and 2.5, and sense they are not the same I get the feeling you think this indicates that the rate at which hits occurred changed with speed. I can say that their time rate did, but their rev rate didn't. It's not unlike the doppler effect: if you're in a truck, going a given speed toward me and blaring the horn, you'll hear one sound and I'll hear another. Then if you go toward me again at a different speed, you'll hear the same sound as before, but I won't hear the same sound I heard before. In this case, the sound you hear is like the hit/rev, probably constant. What I hear is like the hit/min, which depends on the previous and speed. And of course the speed of the truck is like the speed of the wheel.