Bessler's wheel as a 'gift' to mankind.

[jim_mich]

Yes, Ralph, I'm skirting very close to disclosure, but I don't see anyone sketching it up and saying, "Here... this is your idea!" Everything I've mentioned has already been discussed on this forum any number of times before.

[Dwylbtzle]

Did anyone ever stop to think that when water freezes, heat energy is being removed, but energy is increased as the water expands enough to break rocks. Somewhat contrary to Thermodynamic Laws.

EXACTLY--these quantum energy "cheat" methods can yield energies that have hardly been frikkin LOOKED at
and don't follow newton's laws

but they have to be coaxed out--in conjunction with other quantum milking arrangements
a series of hummingbird sips, as itwere

the natural human tendency is to be concerned with "how can i DRIVE this bitchen camero real hard with this?"

so it isn't THERE for them to worry about
the yeti is jumping up and down, bellowing
and the hummingbird flits above and away

even when thinking quantum
here's how a yeti thinks:
"maybe ah can SPLIT this here damn atom!--and git a big bang!"

well, maybe you don't need to split anything
maybe you should dance with it
(positioning is everything)

[Dwylbtzle]

But I seriously disagree with your optimistic assessment that it will be picked up by good hearted men and will flash across the face of the planet if it is given away

never said that
there aren't enough good hearted men to worry about
it will flash across the earth because you've given the greedy bastards something to play with

and i was the first to predict that we probably will fuck it up
(well, maybe Shakespeare was)
you've been warned

*****************

"First, we kill all the lawyers"
-William Shakespeare

[eccentrically1]

eccentrically1, do you understand nonsymmetric parametric oscillation? Are you interested in learning? Or are you just trolling?

Oh no not the child's swing.
Nothing to troll, Jim. Don't flatter yourself.
I know as much as you do about it. And more, because I know it isn't a form of energy being converted. It's a pendulum, for pete sake. The child is torquing the axis of rotation. No child, no torque.

[Dwylbtzle]

that's the rub--the crux of the biscuit--therein squats the toad:
he's basically saying --boiled down--that he's found a way to reset the weights
but without even using gravity--so hell--maybe he has
(he's saying he's doing the same thing as reseting weights in a theoretical gravity engine wheel thinggy
but he's still gotta fight (or trick or flip) CF--instead of gravity)

so i'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he's got a magic kid in there somewhere

maybe he uses permanent magnetism to do it?--(i'm just throwin shit out there)
{which, by the way, would be a quantum cheat that utilizes an energy that no-one can explain--from another dimension
that comes from photons passing back and forth between aligned iron atoms}

probably not
but that's what i'm saying it will take:
SOME trick like that

MY idea doesn't re-set anything
and doesn't fight the gravity re-setting the weights so you can then USE the gravity
and hope to come out ahead
'cause that's a hoary but hapless hope

[Fletcher]

eccentrically1, do you understand nonsymmetric parametric oscillation? Are you interested in learning? Or are you just trolling?

Oh no not the child's swing. Nothing to troll, Jim. Don't flatter yourself.

I know as much as you do about it. And more, because I know it isn't a form of energy being converted. It's a pendulum, for pete sake. The child is torquing the axis of rotation. No child, no torque.

EC1 .. it appears you have instantly focused on one popular application that is often cited as an example of parametric oscillation - there may be other examples, one's that don't involve the use of additional periodic energy entering the system to cause the 'pump' & increase in pendulum amplitude ?!

I guess it's time I wrote up a simple example of Cf's/Cp regarding a mass traveling in a vertical circle so you can see the accelerations & forces at various positions around the radius [appearing in various threads concurrently] - at some positions Cf's & gravity force work together & at other times & positions they oppose & this may be able to be manipulated for an advantage - I'll leave that for you to ponder.

At the least it should give you an alternative to think about outside the kiiking mindset & perhaps better grasp jim_mich's directions.

I'll get to it as soon as I have some free time.

[Dwylbtzle]

i'm pondering ALL that
but i still don't see how he pulls that rabbit out of the hat
(but that means nothing)
are you saying YOU can see it?

i like your incluson of the possibility that energies are (or could be) entering the pumpery system from the outside
(things (sources) are THERE (or COULD be, if positioned correctly--and made of the right stuff) that get overlooked)

think outside the wheel
that's what i always say

[Dwylbtzle]

he's saying he's substituted the problems of gravity with CF
and then says he's found the way to reset the "weights"

but in this case MASS WITH MOMENTUM would be a better term--because he's skipped gravity--and replaced it with CF

same problem with the tricky internal-to-the-wheel magic kid resetting (or in this case, re-torquing) everything in a gravity wheel see saw

that's the one thing he hasn't explained
how he flips (or you could say "resets") that stuff
but no sane person would expect him to
not in HERE

it occurs to me that if he can do it with CF--then the same mechanism would flip the reset button on a gravity wheel, also
but, of course, his idea would be better, because it would work without gravity (like in outer space)

but since no-one's ever been able show how to do it overcoming gravity--
(though we've all seen zillions of rube goldberg drawings), he's making extraordinary claims just the same, eh?
basically the same old claims
but hey--i don't rule it out
and i'm not prying

i hope he has

[Fletcher]

EC1 .. it appears you have instantly focused on one popular application that is often cited as an example of parametric oscillation - there may be other examples, one's that don't involve the use of additional periodic energy entering the system to cause the 'pump' & increase in pendulum amplitude ?!

I guess it's time I wrote up a simple example of Cf's/Cp regarding a mass traveling in a vertical circle so you can see the accelerations & forces at various positions around the radius [appearing in various threads concurrently] - at some positions Cf's & gravity force work together & at other times & positions they oppose & this may be able to be manipulated for an advantage - I'll leave that for you to ponder.

At the least it should give you an alternative to think about outside the kiiking mindset & perhaps better grasp jim_mich's directions.

I'll get to it as soon as I have some free time.

Centripetal Force & Centripetal Acceleration:

Example : Swing a mass around vertically on a length of string.

To keep a constant radius path the string pulls on the mass towards the Center of Rotation [the center of the circle].

The force & acceleration are in the same direction therefore the acceleration must also be towards the center.

The greater the mass & the smaller the radius which it travels [at constant velocity], the greater the pull on the string & therefore the greater the acceleration.

N.B. Velocity is more important than radius where acceleration is a simple formula a = v^2/r.

The Centripetal force [center-seeking force] is equal to the amount of mass x Centripetal acceleration i.e. Cp force = m x v^2 / r Newtons.

Using Figures :

If the mass is whirled around at one revolution per second, & the length of string is 1.0 meter, the distance traveled by the mass in 1 sec will be 2Pir i.e. 2Pi x 1.0 = 6.28 meters, therefore, velocity = 6.28 m/s, r = 1.0 m.

Therefore acceleration towards the center [Centripetal acceleration] = v^2 / r = 6.28^2 / 1.0 = 39.5 m/s^2 [approx].

N.B. this acceleration towards the center is almost 4 times the acceleration of gravity, or nearly 4 g.

This means that the velocity of the mass is changing at a rate 4 times as that of a falling mass.

Question :

What Cp force is required to produce an acceleration of 4 g ?

N.B. F = ma => F = m x 4 g.

So if mass is 0.5 kg Cp force is 0.5 x 4 g = 2 x 9.81 = 19.62 N’s [say 20N’s].

Therefore the pull on the string is 20 N in order to give the mass of 0.5 kg an acceleration of 4 g.

N.B. the force is 20 Newtons, the acceleration is 4 g.

Gravity also acts on the mass as it circles vertically – a 0.5 kg mass has a Weight force of approx 5 N’s – if it must rotate with an acceleration of 4 g’s [assuming constant speed] then the string must also provide a Cp force of 20 N’s – so when the mass is at the 6 o’cl position [D] the total pull force on the string will be 25 N [20 + 5] – when the mass is at 12 o’cl [C] its own weight force will act towards the center & will provide 5 N so the string need only supply an additional 15 N to produce the total 20 N’s required for a constant 4 g acceleration & constant speed of 6.28 m/s.

At 3 o’cl & 9 o’cl [A & B] the weight force of the mass acts at right angles to the string therefore the pull in the string will be 20 N’s.

To Sum Up :

The pull in the string varies between 15 & 25 N’s but the ACCELERATION is always 4 g & the Cp [center-seeking] force is always 20 N.

Supposition :

At various positions the forces of Cp & gravity align & then oppose & various combinations in between – in some circumstances it might be conceivable, with synchronized opposing swinging/moving weights, that gravity force may overcome Cp force & visa versa, to aid transitions to & from greater to lesser radii & back again.

[Dwylbtzle]

oh, now i get it

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi Fletcher,

but first you have to get it there, and second you have to keep it there, my experiments have shown me that a static length rotating like that runs down and is not sustainable, now if you put it on a seesaw you maybe able to pump the energy back ( maybe with a crank assemble) as the frame wants to lift up and down. just a thought!

Edit, It would be fun playing in the gyroscopic forces as well!

With respect Trevor


With respect Trevor

[eccentrically1]

Gravity's contribution sums to zero; this is in practically every thread; it might be the most ironclad law in the universe.
Masses on strings don't swing themselves in a circle.
Something or someone is pulling it to the center.
I'm in ovyyus' camp.

Ovyyus said:
Fraud: After much research and development I have managed to find a way to replicate Bessler's demonstrations, including his long duration test. I have constructed several proofs of principle. This can be done using only materials and construction techniques available to Bessler, combined with some very astute observations and clever thinking. I even sometimes think that Bessler's 18th century perspective may have given him enough wiggle room to claim it as a legitimate solution to the ages-old problem of the perpetually overbalanced wheel. But certainly by todays standard it would be categorized as fraud.

If Jim has something, good for him. But I don't think he does the way he talks.

[Fletcher]

Trevor .. the above is a simple example of forces & accelerations, with NO change in mass radius !

jim_mich's idea IINM is to change the radius of two connected opposing masses equally & compensatorily [one in & one out the same distance] - this creates a change in speed of the masses & since KE = 1/2mv^2 the change in mass energy is proportional to the new speeds & not the same i.e. KE increase.

It is clear [as ovyyus said in another thread today] that moving one mass forward & the other backward relative to the rotating rim would cause a change in Cp forces so that one might overpower the other & cause oscillation of those two masses positions, depending on the combination of Cp's & gravity affecting both masses at some positions.

How that happens is the technology which jim_mich seems to have isolated & proved to his satisfaction - it must provide impetus to a wheel i.e. asymmetric torque, & be able to reset the oscillating pattern each revolution - no small mechanical feat.

[Dwylbtzle]

so how much would it cost to build, dang it?
i'll flippin' chip in
jeez, life ain't THAT bad

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi Ec1,

your Quote,

Gravity's contribution sums to zero; this is in practically every thread; it might be the most ironclad law in the universe.

The only problem being that the Universe unlocks it!

With respect, Trevor