Moderator: scott
Not quite wasted Ralph; you know what not to build.It is my opinion that if you waste one decade attempting to build by Bessler's alleged clues, you will waste 10 years of your life as I readily admit exceeding.
Ralph I am surrprised that you have quite a low view of Besslers writings. I know he isnt as clear as we would like but there must be some worth in his writings. When Bessler says one side is full the other empty the side cannot mean the top and bottom unless you really twist it! Taken as it is that implies the left and right.I think you can take about 95% of what Bessler says and throw it out with the trash! I have after all these years of turmoil came to the conclusion, you are better off striking out on your own and forget Bessler.
One side is full the other empty: Ok, where is he standing when he points this out, is he looking at it from the rim, left or right or front to back? For that matter he could be referring to the top and bottom halves if you stretch it a wee bit.
I assume you mean Bob Kostoff? I/m aware of Bob's machine makes use of centrifugal force but it is not purely centrifugal force as far as I am aware. I thought he uses a cam to start the initial upward shift in the weight? I cant find any updates on Bob's work. Is a full explanation of the working of his device available for replication?As for centrifugal force, your well aware that Bob Koski has been trying to prove his machine can run on CF for how many years? He has added pneumatic pistons to untold number of builds and still cannot produce more power than his air compressor puts in.
Yeah I can see that but in part it does sounds like he is refering it to his own wheel unless as you say it is purely a play on words.As Jim_Mich points out; Bessler does not say that his machine can lift a heavy weight while a light one falls. He says it would take a great craftsman to acquire this feat.
Yes, I agree that you can have your own design and it can match Besslers words. Ive done that myself and probably most have. But I see a difference in matching Besslers words to your own design and matching your own design to Besslers words.You can take just about any design, and by using Bessler's play on words describe your machine. I am currently building one of my own design on an idea sparked by forum member "Erick". I can describe it as follows without lying.
It has weights that work in pairs, They move in and out, if it works then I can add; seeking but never finding. I can also say it is a balanced wheel, bi-directional and has a lever sticking through the axle not unlike the Merseburg drawing. Used for stopping, starting and changing direction of rotation.
None of the above is in any attempt to duplicate Bessler's wheels or his written text. It is in fact influenced more by the 1771 disquisitions of William Kendrick (1725-1779)... It is not recorded as to what his knowledge of Bessler was known, but he most certainly had something up his sleeve!
It is my opinion that if you waste one decade attempting to build by Bessler's alleged clues, you will waste 10 years of your life as I readily admit exceeding.
My wheel building is still in progress.Hey sequeen
Hope that you progress with your build. Are you close to finishing it?
I have question about this words. I ask to you because you are English man.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
Wagner's calculations clean out of the window
With one cross-bar, Bessler's wheel was able to turn. But just barely. Or weakly. Or almost doesn't turn.Bessler wrote:If I arrange to have just one cross-bar in the machine, it revolves very slowly, just as if it can hardly turn itself
I still do not clear.With one cross-bar, Bessler's wheel was able to turn. But just barely. Or weakly. Or almost doesn't turn.
Hello Ralphrlortie wrote:Alex,
You ask, what do I think:
I think you can take about 95% of what Bessler says and throw it out with the trash! I have after all these years of turmoil came to the conclusion, you are better off striking out on your own and forget Bessler.
One side is full the other empty: Ok, where is he standing when he points this out, is he looking at it from the rim, left or right or front to back? For that matter he could be referring to the top and bottom halves if you stretch it a wee bit.
As for centrifugal force, your well aware that Bob Koski has been trying to prove his machine can run on CF for how many years? He has added pneumatic pistons to untold number of builds and still cannot produce more power than his air compressor puts in.
As Jim_Mich points out; Bessler does not say that his machine can lift a heavy weight while a light one falls. He says it would take a great craftsman to acquire this feat.
You can take just about any design, and by using Bessler's play on words describe your machine. I am currently building one of my own design on an idea sparked by forum member "Erick". I can describe it as follows without lying.
It has weights that work in pairs, They move in and out, if it works then I can add; seeking but never finding. I can also say it is a balanced wheel, bi-directional and has a lever sticking through the axle not unlike the Merseburg drawing. Used for stopping, starting and changing direction of rotation.
None of the above is in any attempt to duplicate Bessler's wheels or his written text. It is in fact influenced more by the 1771 disquisitions of William Kendrick (1725-1779)... It is not recorded as to what his knowledge of Bessler was known, but he most certainly had something up his sleeve!
It is my opinion that if you waste one decade attempting to build by Bessler's alleged clues, you will waste 10 years of your life as I readily admit exceeding.
Ralph
