Forget it

[nicbordeaux]

I dropped in and was going to post something clever, but I've changed my mind. Because I think bessler was at best deluded and chasing up his poetry and sketches leads nowhere, and also you can not create energy out of nothing, you can only harness energy which already exists.

[eccentrically1]

what energy do you think bessler harnessed?

[Oystein]

And I just dropped in to say that it leads somewhere.

[justsomeone]

If the same principle is discovered again, I believe Bessler could easily prove he was first through his writings and drawings.

[Oystein]

Bessler was an innovative inventor, going where no one has ever gone , devoting his life as a Christian inventor, with the invention over all inventions through the whole human history. To believe that he did not find just as innovative ways to secure his invention would be an almost outrageous thought.

If you can invent the machine, protecting it would be a small task, compared.

[nicbordeaux]

What energy Bessler might have used had he indeed a "runner" ? Gravity. The full potential of gravity available to him. OB wheels which rotate about an axle fixed to a board, wall or else do not work. At best, if there is no preload or pendulum drive, balls Rolling about or other mass losing height, you will get from "12" to "11" in a CW rotation. No amount of codswallop , hot air or other speculation will get you more. Fact 1.

There is however more gravity available. Or PE unused. It is that available from the actual axle and supporting material upon which the OB wheel rotâtes. As the OB drops from 12 to 6, it weighs less on the support. Ralph will be better qualified than I to explain this "Desaguiller (?) effect. As the weight spins outwards and down then inwards, if the support to which it is attached is free to move vertically or laterally, said support will move initially "down", then up as it is freed of the load, then down. I have already posted videsos showing a OB Wheel being rotated by it's supporting "stick" being minimally moved up or down at a specific point of the rotation. That is fact 2.

[charly2]

Da vinci had very nice and clever designs, IMO very efficient, only if they would work, but...
If gravity was not a source of power to make a wheel run by itself before, why do we expect today that gravity had change to our convenience.
I like the name of your topic: "Forget it"; welcome to the real life, a gravity wheel will never run.
Gravity it is not the only mechanical way, just realize what had in common all the famous non runners: they are/were intended to run by gravity.
If gravity gives something in the side going down (or wherever you want in the wheel), it will take it away on the other side, so the equation gives you zero.
It is necessary to change the equation by other different in order to get a different result.

[rlortie]

Hello Nick,

You say; "chasing up Bessler's poetry and sketches leads nowhere".

Isn't this what I have been preaching for some time now? Your better off junking his so called clues and depictions, use your own innovation and strike out on your own.

I will not argue that you cannot harness energy that is not there, that's why I love gravity; if you got mass you got Pe! I think Bessler used gravity while dreaming of the day that someone would write a song; "Swinging" which did not happen until 1983 by John Anderson.

Oystein wrote: "I just dropped in to say that it leads somewhere." Yes the name Bessler leaves us with the incentive to believe the eyewitness did not have the wool pulled over their eyes and there is indeed the possibility of such a machine. I just do not think Bessler via his alleged codes and clues is going to lead us anywhere, we have been chasing them long enough!

justsomeone, added: "If the same principle is discovered again, I believe Bessler could easily prove he was first through his writings and drawings".

My response is: So who cares whether its identical to Bessler's, he is long dead and gone, sure I am willing to give credit for inciting us to find a self-sustaining machine. But to stand up and say "it is just like his" is bull!

At best, if there is no preload or pendulum drive, balls Rolling about or other mass losing height, you will get from "12" to "11" in a CW rotation. No amount of codswallop , hot air or other speculation will get you more. Fact 1.

I have yet to document any such critter making it from "12" to "11", twelve to ten maybe but even that takes a very low friction factor.

As for weight being removed from the support stand as the weight of the embodiment changes, didn't Johann Gottfried Borlach make a big deal about that, when he saw Bessler's pillar moving up and down in sequence with the machines rotation.

When a pendulum reaches its peak amplitude or zenith it weighs nothing, in fact the only time it applies anything more than negligible is at "6", any other time Cf is pulling on it at a tangent. I consider vertical load other than "6" insignificant. No need to bring up "JohnTheophilus Desaguliers " here.

If gravity gives something in the side going down (or wherever you want in the wheel), it will take it away on the other side, so the equation gives you zero.
It is necessary to change the equation by other different in order to get a different result.

charly2, you are showing that you are still in the box that your math and physics teachers built around you! As written, I am obligated to agree, but you must learn to broaden you scope of thinking. Yes you must change the equation, Make it an algebra equation that does not balance at the equal sign. You cannot re-lift what has fallen and have energy left over. So why attempt to do so.

Forget Bessler and one pound weights lifting four pounds, it does not nor never did exist. The only words of Bessler you should heed, is where he says" What if I were to show you how, then you would say "Now I understand"....

Think molecular!!

Ralph

[rlortie]

If you have problems comprehending the skills and craftsmanship available in the 18th century of Bessler, consider this!

http://www.chonday.com/Videos/the-writer-automaton

And Leibniz only made a calculator.

Ralph

[DrWhat]

Extraordinary, amazing!

Thanks for the link.

[nicbordeaux]

Snippet from Ralph's post:

Hello Nick,

"As for weight being removed from the support stand as the weight of the embodiment changes, didn't Johann Gottfried Borlach make a big deal about that, when he saw Bessler's pillar moving up and down in sequence with the machines rotation."

Ralph

That is indeed where I'm coming from (or going, who cares...). When the Wheel is attached to a free to move pillar or swingarm, on rotating it will induce quite considerable movement of the said support. This support is also subjected to gravity . Therefore, any movement it makes upwards from it's initial position can be pe. In a straightforward (untuned or random dia and weights) wheel attached to pendulum arm build, double pendulum dynamics we are familiar with show up : the Wheel will stop revolving and transfer it's energy to the arm, which will start swinging, or if a "column", start moving up or down. The Wheel will usually stop at 6. The energy is manifest as the half turn of wheel and gain of height of the attachment . Two points : if the Wheel dia/pendulum arm length was perfectly tuned (if such a thing were possible) the kickback from the arm would jerk the Wheel with the necessary impetus to make it 360°. This theoretical perfect behavior would only be valid for one turn, as the synch would be out on the second turn. Which means a reset to start position on each turn. I'm mucking around with accumulated pe from the moving support being fed back, and also a belt linkage between wheel and arm. If there is a system in which enough mass is in movement to provide the ke or pe to drive a full turn, I can only see this tpe of device. Which, obviously, also let's you harness any CF if CF is a useful form of energy, eg not just a by product the sum of which is to be deducted from the total energy.

I'm not going to invent "pm" unless by mistake, because I have a load of other things to study and do, but having spent quite a lot of spare time on thought and builds (yeah, real builds made out of real world solid stuff like metal, wood, plastic), but everything I've looked at and done leads to the above "conclusion". Which you could summarize as : the OB Wheel must be fixed to a free to move arm.

[rlortie]

Nick,

When the Wheel is attached to a free to move pillar or swing arm, on rotating it will induce quite considerable movement of the said support. This support is also subjected to gravity.

What you got here, and it hard to believe you do not see it, is the "Milkovic compound pendulum. The Pendulums Pe is transferred to the swing arm, which could be a spring loaded pillar.

I have seen many versions including magnets and bicycle wheels in an attempt to produce self-staining power. To date no one has succeeded in gaining any use out of this principle other than pumping water with outside muscle force.

Milkovic's builder "Ron Pugh" is a close contact of mine, he has built many versions including but not limited to computerized models. His opinion is that other than its current use it will never amount to anything more.

The only way I know of accelerating and/or increasing amplitude in a pendulum is to shorten the rod or rope when the bob is either approaching or just past "6". I refer you to the swinging church incense pot discussed on this forum, the name slips my mind.

This is reverse of applying the vertical pull gained at "6" and puts the Pe gain back into the pendulum via change in angular momentum.

The approach Grimer is pursuing, IMO is of no value.

Ralph

[pequaide]

Nick: One thread mentioned that the length of the string does not matter; so I went back to the cylinder that had a very long string. It was a PVC pipe that had a mass of about 2300 grams, I had drilled a small hole through a diameter and placed a long fishing string through the holes. I placed 50 grams of nut, bolt, and washers on each end of the string. This allowed the 50 g weights to hang about half way down the pipe on the end of the string, on both sides.

I wrapped the string around the pipe so that the weights came up to the plane of the holes, this was probably about four wraps. I held the weights up against the pipe and spun and released the pipe and weights. The original spin was clockwise. The weights unwound and quickly stopped the rotation of the pipe. The weights then began to spin the pipe counterclockwise. It appeared that the unwinding of the string slowed dramatically; I assume because at some point the unwinding of the string matched the counterclockwise spin of the pipe.

An obvious fact is that at some point the nuts, bolts and washers had all of the motion, and then they gave some of the motion back to the pipe.

My experiments show that mv is the conserved quantity of motion; and that energy is therefore increased. KE 1/2mv² is not conserved.

I find it sadly amusing that people think Newtonian Physics does not apply to objects in a rotational path. The motion of the Moon for instance was properly described by Newton using mv. And that is how he found the gravitational constant; by using the linear mv of the Moon.

[Oystein]

Oystein wrote: "I just dropped in to say that it leads somewhere." Yes the name Bessler leaves us with the incentive to believe the eyewitness did not have the wool pulled over their eyes and there is indeed the possibility of such a machine. I just do not think Bessler via his alleged codes and clues is going to lead us anywhere, we have been chasing them long enough!

justsomeone, added: "If the same principle is discovered again, I believe Bessler could easily prove he was first through his writings and drawings".

My response is: So who cares whether its identical to Bessler's, he is long dead and gone, sure I am willing to give credit for inciting us to find a self-sustaining machine. But to stand up and say "it is just like his" is bull!

Ralph

You imply that there are several ways to replicate Besslers demonstrations, and that it does not matter if we can prove it was Besslers original But it is important for MANY reasons.
I like to mention historical reasons, including all the famous names involved. Then it is VERY important to future research. If a principle is the same, it would mean that we don`t need too "waste time" further searching for Besslers principle, and can focus on improving the one working principle.

Do you actually think that this is Bull?

[nicbordeaux]

Nick,

When the Wheel is attached to a free to move pillar or swing arm, on rotating it will induce quite considerable movement of the said support. This support is also subjected to gravity.

What you got here, and it hard to believe you do not see it, is the "Milkovic compound pendulum. The Pendulums Pe is transferred to the swing arm, which could be a spring loaded pillar.

The only way I know of accelerating and/or increasing amplitude in a pendulum is to shorten the rod or rope when the bob is either approaching or just past "6". I refer you to the swinging church incense pot discussed on this forum, the name slips my mind.

Ralph

Believe me, I see it it Ralph. And I'll also state that the so-called "Milkovic" device is a simple variation on a double pendulum. In fact, it's not even a variation, it is a double pendulum. It's main use is in winning bets with muscle kids who you tell they can't with all their might stop the thing dead in it's tracks by holding onto one end. As the drive pendulum is disconnected from the arm, and is constantly changing the center of gravity/mass, and the human hand has a bit of "yielding"flesh on it, it is indeed impossible to stop over the few mm of travel where the force is concentrated. You can stop it by grabbing the pendulum, but this is brains vs muscle ;-)

I'll try and do a couple of vids of my old test bed (if it hasn't rusted and crumbled) and post on youtube. Nothing revolutionary, but will be interesting, or fun. The one of most interest might be where the winding up of a suspended weight is done on the downstroke. You won't agree 'till you've tried it yourself, but there is a window of opportunity in that, if you feed back some of the acquired gravity pe.