Besslers Codes

[zoelra]

0ystein, thanks for the clarification.

One other question if I may (and I understand if you would rather not reply). You refer to each cross as a module, and then you say you can mount several of them on the axle to increase the overall power. Are the modules tied together in some way so the shifting in one module assists another, or are the modules independent and their force is just cumulative? The reason I ask is you said in another JC blog post that when 1 weight falls towards the center, 4 weights rise towards the rim. Since there are only 4 weights in a module, I don't see how this can happen unless the modules are interconnected (that is unless after the first weight falls, it then rises along with the other 3 weights).

Thanks,
Rick

[Oystein]

Yes, the crosses or modules are inter-connected. Or else Bessler could not state that all calculations can be thrown out the window as soon as more than one cross is used. "everything needs to be connected to everything" or else the mathematics will be the same no matter how many mechanisms you place in there. 0 x 1000 is still = 0

I will correct my explenation and say that in Besslers bi-directional wheel (if 8 weights are used) when 1 weight fall, 5 others will move, but only 4 is actually raised. The position before one weight fall, the wheel is in balance.

Thats as far as I am willing to explain.

[Oystein]

I can add that in MT there are about 30 simple drawings alone that is depicting a "cross" of the same type (not mechanicly equal of course, but showing the same general apearance or complexity). A horisontal mechanism lifting a vertical mechanism. Thus a cross. +

[zoelra]

@0ystein,

If one cross provides a certain amount of force, adding a second would double the force, a third would triple, and so on. The only limit to the force would be the number of crosses or modules in the overall wheel. That's what I was thinking about Bessler's statement. But from what you just said, it sounds like there's more to the connection than just the crosses being bound to a common axle.

Also, thanks for the reply on the Preponderance question. That pretty much sums up the way we all see the movement I think. However, I have never looked at the movement in terms of an accumulation or preponderance before. I need to give this some more thought.

[Oystein]

That is correct. I read it as the calculations drastically change when more crosses are mounted, so they have to effect eachothers movement. This specific connection is appearing in the AP chipers somewhere above 10 times. I believe this is the most creative, beautiful but simple manipulation of print and letters that I have ever seen or heard of. Even the translator in Collins translation of AP played somewhat along, but its purpose(chipher) was obviously not disovered.

[zoelra]

Head slap. Looking at MT20, I think I now understand what Bessler meant by "harness the horse in front".

Thanks 0ystein

[Grimer]

Care to share cos I'm damned if I can see what he meant.

[zoelra]

Take MT13 for example, as the weight at 11 rises, it also moves in the direction the wheel rotates (this is the key), the CoM shifts towards the right side of the wheel. The overbalance force due to the increase in leverage is still there, but there is an additional component of overbalance force due to the shifting of weight along the perimeter "in the direction of wheel rotation". In my past wheel designs, I have intentionally designed the shifting so this force is negated, when I should have taken advantage of it.

In MT20, when the horizontal (or nearly horizontal) lever drops, the special weight is pulled up from its inward position, to the right, then down to the outer position. Relative to the crossbar, the special weight moves opposite the direction of wheel movement, hence the CoM shifts towards the left side of the wheel. The horse (overbalance due to perimeter shifting) is no longer in front of the cart (wheel).

In the attached picture, assume both wheels rotate in the CW direction. The first wheel is balanced. The CoM is at the axle position. In the second wheel, the left weight is rotated CW ahead of the wheel. The CoM is shifted to the right of the axle and the wheel is overbalanced due to the shift.

I hope I explained this properly. In reality, the net overbalance needed may be a combination of radial and perimeter shifting. * Note, perimeter shifting can only take place thru a specific range of rotation, otherwise backforce will occur.

[Oystein]

Update: 2 new pages using Besslers ciphers solved and documented, and I have today reached 140 pages pure documentary provable ciphers and description of all methods used.

Todays page was from AP, where Bessler actually uses Wagners name several times to complete the cipher. I can tell that a new word or mehanical part (in addition to the ones I have solved before) transformed at a defined location, using the AP cipher key. the mechanical part or substitute is 100% in line with the solution ( Not changing or adding anything.) I have always thougt and hoped that Bessler would use his enemies name in the patent cipher. Now I can prove that too. (Happy days)

Bessler laughs at Wagner, the fool.

[Mark]

I'll tell you this, Oystein... You certainly sound convinced that you have it figured out. You are even beginning to convince me!

When you first posted the drawings [last November], my first thought was that the drawings were the basis for your deciphering. I now see that they were actually the result of your efforts. Well done, old man!

I certainly hope that you really do have a solution, at long last. I await seeing the proof [i.e., a turning wheel].

Mark

[Oystein]

Hi Oystein ..

FWIW I have the utmost faith in you & your sincerity, & that you have found undeniable & provable hidden codes etc.

I never had enough interest, ability or patience, in this line of research, to undertake it myself but always hoped dedicated searchers such as yourself, or dax, or JC etc, would one day come up trumps & break the ciphers & finally give an unequivocal steer in a right direction to solving this mechanical mystery.

I look forward to your book & the discussions around your findings, & of course, those mechanisms.

I do have some questions if you don't mind !

You have said previously you have simmed the basic mechanics in WM2D & that a single mech behaved as you expected - I take it to mean that a physical build of the same mech had performance the same or similar to the sim model & there were no comparison surprises ?

Using multiple mechs in a sim 'interconnected' so one affects all others etc, have you seen sim evidence that these mechs will provide a mechanical solution to gravity PM ?

N.B. I know well that you are experienced & not likely to be easily fooled into false hope where none might actually exist, with mechanical devices !

So, in my mind the final question is ... has the ciphers & codes revealed Bessler's mechanism(s) to the solution to gravity PM, or has he wowed us with his knowledge of ciphers & codes (retrospectively engineered into his writings & drawings) for his [& our] amusement & to legitimize his own educated background ?

Your thoughts are appreciated.

ETA: my bad, didn't check which thread Grimer had posted into - this post probably belongs in another thread so sorry to have taken it off-topic.

Hi, I have said that I built one mechanism in real life and tested it behavior. I have decided not to spend time running this in a SIM, because it is pretty hard to make as all part interact and funny thing started to "tear apart" etc. and anyway I will not be sure if a SIM will work on a true PM principle. So I decided that my time is used on deciphering all of Bessler material and then use the natural manual calculation of torque in positions. Those traditional calculations show a surplus of force in one direction, as far as I am able to conclude.

The reason I have dug those Besslers Codes really to the bottom is just as you suggest, to be able to conclude without any doubt. There are no way to miss understand Besslers method. It is now so clear that people not knowing of Bessler can conclude that the cipher are correct in some tenth of minutes. (Tried it on two people the last days) With the method, the same mechanical mechanism appear with all its levers and joints in over a handful of pages, and in several "versions". Some are wider and some more narrow. It seems, the more narrow, the slower the RPM. Meaning that the Kassel-related solutions are the most narrow. It must be because they use a longer time to "close".

It also appear in a simpler version witch is more like a simple geometrical "patent", connected to his name/change etc. Other places he show a special figure showing the basic secret mechanism. This mechanism is what he call "the devil" and he also call it "the hero" in other places.

The text ciphers in AP tell how those mechanisms are connected to each other by adding converted words upon the same geometric solutions. and also naming some parts and describing actions. The most are a set of 6-7 words in one group.

One friend not knowing of Bessler looked at the book with me last weekend and he just said, this is crazy, shaking his head, laughing and said Bessler was brilliant etc and there are are no way this is speculations and said that even without a running machine this book would be extremely exiting and educational for many readers. Also important to history to know of these beautiful methods and such a special person.

[Unbalanced]

Oystein writes

the same mechanical mechanism appear with all its levers and joints in over a handful of pages, and in several "versions".

Just out of curiosity, how many is a" handful"?

Your research certainly seems to have merit and is very exciting. I really want this to lead to your success in finding a solution. Good luck to you.

Even if this isn't the answer, it certainly is the foundation for a great work of fiction.

I envision the hero / heroine falling through the floor of an old, dilapidated, German barn only to be confronted by a twelve foot diameter wheel, still turning after 300+ years.

Please keep us comprised.

[justsomeone]

Oystein, you are using the original text and not the translated version, yes?

I remain very skeptical. I think you are looking at inkblots and giving an interpretation.

Just my opinion and I do wish you good luck!

[Oystein]

I use only the original versions, yes. And I use no inkblots at all!
Only the provable geometric, mathematical, and repeated solutions is used. I would have no use of any interpretation as this would make me first of all look stupid and then not able to publish a book accepted by scholars, but rather be mocked in public. And just as important, I would not be sure that it was Besslers own information, but rather my own. This is the reason this work is done in the first place, so I can throw those speculations out, and only be left with proven truths and finally build it.

As an example, the translations or the re-drawn versions of MT etc. contain no concrete information that can be used to solve or prove the mystery. Not because of inkblots but from geometric proven truths.
I repeat, that I use no inkblots or interpretations in my work.

On the other hand, it is not necessary for me to convince anybody at this stage. The information will finally be out there, and then you can decide for yourself. I know others will confirm that the information is correct, and then you may choose to read and understand.

[Oystein]

Oystein writes

the same mechanical mechanism appear with all its levers and joints in over a handful of pages, and in several "versions".

Just out of curiosity, how many is a" handful"?

Your research certainly seems to have merit and is very exciting. I really want this to lead to your success in finding a solution. Good luck to you.

Even if this isn't the answer, it certainly is the foundation for a great work of fiction.

I envision the hero / heroine falling through the floor of an old, dilapidated, German barn only to be confronted by a twelve foot diameter wheel, still turning after 300+ years.

Please keep us comprised.

"over a handful" may be as much as 10 - 15.