AP, Chapter 43, Part One Proper

[jim_mich]

From post #128143...

I really no longer give a flying rat's ass where many of you search. But when you make an out-right statement that Bessler said something, which it is rather easy to prove that he never made such a statement, then it just plain irritates me to see such absolute untruth.

You are such a blowhard! If it's so easy to prove, then do it! In this game you keep playing, the best you can hope to achieve is a stalemate. The ambiguities won't allow it to be proven absolutely. If you were a real researcher who cared about the truth, you'd have to be open to the alternative to what you are trying to push. If you aren't, which seems obvious, then you are just someone looking to force his opinion on everyone.

You are the one making claims that go against the natural way the text reads. The way anyone with a brain would read it. So stop bullying people into thinking your way, and "prove" it...or shut up!!!

Ed, you write about the "alternative to what you are trying to push." What exactly do you mean by this? Do you mean an alternative where Bessler says his wheel was rotated by a 1 lb lifting 4 lbs? Good God, man, simply read what Bessler wrote. I don't need to push it. Bessler's words are there in plain sight for anyone to read. Are you asking me to accept that science is wrong, and that gravity can self-rotate a PM wheel?

So Ed, you make wild accusations and claims, but you fail miserably when it comes to backing anything up with facts. You keep saying that I'm not open to alternatives. But you never back up any of your own alternatives with factual translations. All I read is Jim's wrong, Jim's wrong. Please show why and where I'm wrong. Crickets is all I hear from you in that respect.

Ed, you write of "the natural way the text reads". But in fact, almost every word that I translate is written in the exact natural order and way that the text was actually written. Of course, to English speaking people, the words seem a little awkward. I have no trouble understanding the awkward sentence structure, for reasons which I've explained before, because I grew up in a German community that was only one or sometimes two generations away from sprechen da Deutsch.

So Ed, prove any of the following to be translate substantially wrong in any way.

If you want this converted to English, that is more comfortable to your English eyes, I can do that. But in doing so, it loses the "natural way the text read" that is inherent to the original German.

Reference:
Pages 81-83 (Original German), Pages 96-98 (JC's German), Page 291 (English) of JC's AP, Page 296 (English) of AP PDF

Code: Select all

 Original German (From John Collin's AP)          | Translated into English by Jim_Mich
--------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------
           XLIII.                                 |     Chapter 43 (of Part One Proper)
Wil sonst ein Zweiffel-Löwe brüllen?    (Zweifel) |Will otherwise a doubt-lion roar?
Der mache mir erst meinen Willen;                 |Which make me first guess intent;
Alsdann so sitze er dabei;                        |Then so sit he there;
Das Werk sol lauffen ohne Scheu.         (laufen) |The work such run without shyness.
Denn alle innere Figuren,                         |Because all internal form
Perpetuirliche Structuren,                        |perpetual-like structure
Behalten ihre freie Jagt,                         |Keep their free hunt
Wie Anno 12 ich schon gesagt;                     |Like year 1712 I already said;
Wil’s auch noch hier, zwar kurz beschreiben:      |Will as also yet here, fact brief describe:
Nemlich, ein Kunstwerk muß sich treiben           |Namely, a craft-work must itself drive
Von vielen sondern Stücken Bleu;           (Blei) |from many separate pieces lead;
Der sind nun immer zwey und zwey; (zwei und zwei) |which are now always two and two;
Nimmt ein Ding äußerlich die Stelle,              |change a thing outward the position,
So Fährt das andre an die Welle;                  |such drives the other to the shaft;
Dies ist bald hier, und jenes dort:               |this is soon here and that there:
Und also wechselt’s fort und fort. x              |and also swaps forth and forth.

(Und dies Principium ist’s eben,                  |(and this Principle it_is precisely,
Darum mir Wagner Schuld gegeben,                  |why to_me Wagner blame given
Und ganz unwahr auf mich gebracht,                |and whole untruth on me brought,
Ich hätt’s niemanden weisgemacht).                |I hast nobody made_to_believe).

Zur Zeit mag noch ein jedes rahten,       (raten) |At this time, like yet one each take_a_guess
Durch was für wunderbare Thaten                   |by what kind_of wonderful exploits
Dies’ Schwere nach dem Centro kehrt,              |This weight to the Center returns,
Und jene in die höhe fährt. x                     |and that to the extent/height drives.
Denn deutscher darff ich hier nicht reden,        |because German may I here not talk,
Noch öffnen alle Fenster-Laden;                   |else open all window-shutters;

Doch wil freundwillig ongefähr         (ungefähr) |However will friend-willing about
Dies Nota Bene noch setzen her:                   |This Nota Bene more set here:

Der wird ein großer Künstler heißen,              |He shall a great artist be_called,
Wer ein schwer Ding leicht hoch kann schmeißen,   |Who/anybody a heavy thing lightly high can throw,
Und wenn ein Pfund ein Viertel fällt,             |And when a pound a quarter/fourth falls,
Es vier Pfund hoch vier Viertel schnellt. x       |it four pound high four quarters/fourths shoots/snaps.

Wer dieses aus kann spekuliren,                   |Who/anybody this from can speculate/hope,
Wird bald den Lauf perpetuiren;                   |would soon the running perpetuate;
Wer aber dieses noch nicht weiß,                  |Who/anybody but/however this still not know;
Da ist vergebens aller Fleiß;                     |since/then is in vain all diligence/hard_work;

Man tue, denke, sinne, dichte                     |Man/You/(Wagner) do, suppose, mean, dictate/write
Gleich schon auf noch so viel Gewichte;           |same already towards yet so many weights;
Sein Ding davon vielmehr wird schwer,             |His thing thereof rather is heavy,
Und lief’ viel länger, da es leer;                |And run much longer, were it empty;
Ja, es geh’t solchen seinem Dinge,                |Yes, it goes such his things,
Als ob gleich noch so viel’ Sperlinge             |as if equal to so much sparrows
Sich greulich bissen um und um                    |themselves dreadfully bite round and round
Auf einem stillen Mühlrad rum;                    |On a still mill-wheel run;
Wie ich unlängst nur wahr genommen,               |as I recently truthfully observed,
Als ich zu solchem Streit gekommen. x             |when I to such quarrel come.

Nun die Nachricht (deucht mich) ist gut,          |Now the message (seems to me) is good,
Dem, der sie fein einfassen thut;                 |To_that_one, who they fine fence does;
Denn manche Möb’lemacher denken,                  |because some Mobile-makers think
Wenn ihre Sachen sich nur lenken,                 |when their stuff only guide
Heraus ein wenig weiter hier                      |Out a little further here
Als dort – o! so wird’s lauffen schier;           |as there - oh! so wouldst run almost;
Ich habe dieses selbst erfahren                   |I have this even learned
Mit lauter Müh’ vor vielen Jahren,                |with pure toil prior many years,
Bis mich das wahre Sprichwort schlug:             |to me the true proverb suggest:
Ein jeder wird mit Schaden klug. x                |every-one shall with hurt strike.

Drum steckt im mechanischen Grunde                |That's_why put in_the mechanical reason
Noch viel verborgen diese Stunde;                 |Still much hidden this hour;
Doch weil mich keine Noht hier treibt,            |But because me no not here pushing, 
Von mir mehr Nachricht unterbleibt.               |From me more message omitted

So Ed, either put up a more accurate translation, showing why its more accurate, else stop telling me to shut-up.

[ovyyus]

Why has a members only forum posting been reposted to the public forum?

[jim_mich]

Why has a members only forum posting been reposted to the public forum?

Because I wanted this translation in the public forum. And nothing that Ed said warrants hiding his words inside Community Buzz.

But I expect to hear only the chirp chirp of crickets here. I expect Ed will hide, and not debate anything.

Ed claims that I'm not a real researcher, but Ed is the one that runs and hides.
Ed calls me a blowhard. Ed says "prove" it...or shut up!!!

Nowhere in these words by Bessler does Bessler ever say that his own wheel was rotated by a light weight lifting a heavy weight. Ed said "prove" it...or shut up!!! The proof is right there in Bessler's words. He never said it was his wheel that used 1 lb lift 4 lbs. Read Bessler's words. The wheel Bessler was writing about was Wagner's proposed wheel.

And if Ed, or others are going to continue to personally bash me, then they must do it out in the open in public, where their shameful conduct will be visible for all to see.

[Dunesbury]

He never says it was rotated by impulse.
He never says it was rotated by motion! He just called it a perpetual motion wheel. That doesn't mean it was rotated by motion. It just means it could remain in motion forever. Ahem.
Can we please stop trying to outdo each other in the translation department?

[Ed]

Apparently, Jim's time here has made him into a hardened bully.

I don't have a problem with people seeing what I said there. There is plenty of your actual shameful behavior that can be seen throughout this forum. Like posting everyone's images for all to see, so you could get my image out there and you could hide behind your patented plausible deniability.

In order to even think about debating a disingenuous individual like yourself, I'd have to have a block of time free, because you are a time burglar.

Every warp you place in reality has to get straightened out, and that takes enormous amounts of time to craft a post for.

Stewart was trying to take the time to do it a while back, but you couldn't wait and had to "bully" him about it.

[Furcurequs]

Why has a members only forum posting been reposted to the public forum?

Because I wanted this translation in the public forum. And nothing that Ed said warrants hiding his words inside Community Buzz.

What makes you believe that that is your call? Shouldn't you ask others their permission before dragging their quotes outside of the members only forum?

And if Ed, or others are going to continue to personally bash me, then they must do it out in the open in public, where their shameful conduct will be visible for all to see.

You mean like when I "bashed" you in the public forum by merely speaking honestly about how you had quite apparently grabbed the wrong formula out of your handbook in that one case - since using the proper formula would have given you the same correct answer as all the other valid methods that had been discussed? ...lol

I agree with you, though, that we should be willing to just air it all publicly if it must be aired. How else could everyone be able to see your ignorance and your dishonesty and your hypocrisy, for instance?

;)

Don't forget, it has been pointed out to you publicly (I believe) that quite a few things you said about me personally were just plain untrue. So, there we have it.

Who is the shameful one?

Dwayne

[preoccupied]

He never says it was rotated by impulse.
He never says it was rotated by motion! He just called it a perpetual motion wheel. That doesn't mean it was rotated by motion. It just means it could remain in motion forever. Ahem.
Can we please stop trying to outdo each other in the translation department?

Bessler literally didn't say he had a "perpetual motion wheel". If he had said that it would have literally meant "motion" because people in English and German back even 100 years ago spoke more literally than we do today. Words literally meant what were said instead of the greatly mixed meanings we now have. Am I wrong?

"
Der wird ein großer Künstler heißen, |He shall a great artist be_called,
Wer ein schwer Ding leicht hoch kann schmeißen, |Who/anybody a heavy thing lightly high can throw,
Und wenn ein Pfund ein Viertel fällt, |And when a pound a quarter/fourth falls,
Es vier Pfund hoch vier Viertel schnellt. x |it four pound high four quarters/fourths shoots/snaps.
"

I think it's important to note that Bessler never mentions that the lifting weights are going straight up and I think he means that they just move in a direction by the grammar. I don't speak German anymore especially after concussions but I think he is not talking about a upward direction but instead the direction in which he is referring to. Maybe Wagner knew this but it's not clear in the writings. So basically a weight can shift another weight and it can travel a distance as a result that is 4 times further and there could be leverage that pushes this weight that could be 4 times heavier. In my swastika hypothesizes design the leverage on the top right is good when falling down to move the weight to the left on the top left or bottom right, which then in turn causes the weight that was shifted to travel greater distance during rotation because of being further from the axle. I think that I do have Bessler's wheel and that Bessler might have literally been referring to his actual design but needs to be applied his design which I think is my hypothesis which I think is the correct wheel design. Bessler's writing could just need to be applied to the correct design but you can't just assume he is referring to an upward direction. Or am I totally wrong there - if I am then I should be corrected because I just wrote a bunch of stuff someone might read, here.

[ovyyus]

What makes you believe that that is your call? Shouldn't you ask others their permission before dragging their quotes outside of the members only forum?

Precisely. But it's all about what Jim wants. This horrible individual is too busy digging and defending his one man hole to China.

[jim_mich]

What makes you believe that that is your call? Shouldn't you ask others their permission before dragging their quotes outside of the members only forum?

Precisely. But it's all about what Jim wants. This horrible individual is too busy digging and defending his one man hole to China.

Now who is the liar?
Bill sure likes to put other people's words into my mouth.
And will there be any apology?

[ovyyus]

Idiot. I made a typo (now fixed). Keep deflecting. Keep digging.

[Ed]

Interesting. Seems only the bearded son of Jim would get away with spamming his own motion wheel ideas into Jim's thread about Bessler text, without getting a "bashing".

[ovyyus]

bromance?

[Dunesbury]

Bessler literally didn't say he had a "perpetual motion wheel". If he had said that it would have literally meant "motion" because people in English and German back even 100 years ago spoke more literally than we do today. Words literally meant what were said instead of the greatly mixed meanings we now have. Am I wrong?

Yes, you are wrong. For example, Bessler said his "weights gained force from their motion", or similar. From this, we could say his wheels were "force" wheels.
But all forces cancel each other, his weights only gained force from an equal loss, so that is poor argument for what his wheels accomplished.
For that argument to hold, we would need example from nature where forces do not cancel, to my knowledge there are none.

In modern terminology, we would say mass gains energy from motion.
So his wheels would be called "perpetual energy" wheels.

But mass doesn't create more energy from motion, that is the catch. Energy gained from that motion came from energy conversion at earlier point in time. People seem to overlook this part. Which came first, motion or energy conversion? Conversion. His wheel, last one in sealed room, was drawing energy from environment or it was very elaborate ruse, which I have good idea about. Short lifts were not good tests, in my opinion. They could have been accomplished with spring loaded weights and clever gearing.

Everyone is allowing the writings to do what Bessler intended!

[daxwc]

You need to read the whole chapter in context and remember Bessler is not above twisting of words or misleading people. It is not clear so everybody is going to have to form their own opinion.

XLIII.
Are there any more doubting lions roaring around? Then let them
come and sit down by me, and my wheel shall openly revolve for
them. I've nothing to hide, for all the inmost parts, and the
perpetual-motion structures, retain the power of free movement,
as I've been saying since 1712. I'd like, at this point, to give a
brief description of it. So then, a work of this kind of
craftsmanship has, as its basis of motion, many separate pieces
of lead. These come in pairs, such that, as one of them takes up
an outer position, the other takes up a position nearer the axle.
Later, they swap places, and so they go on and on changing
places all the time. (This principle is in fact the one that Wagner
said he owed to me - but I was quite wrongly implicated, as I'd
never informed anyone about the matter.) At present, as far as
I'm concerned, anyone who wants can go on about the wonderful
doings of these weights, alternately gravitating to the centre and
climbing back up again, for I can't put the matter more clearly.
But I would just like to add this friendly little note of caution:- A
great craftsman would be that man who can "lightly" cause a
heavy weight to fly upwards! Who can make a pound-weight rise
as 4 ounces fall, or 4 pounds rise as 16 ounces fall. If he can sort
that out, the motion will perpetuate itself. But if he can't, then his
hard work shall be all in vain. He can rack his brains and work his
fingers to the bones with all sorts of ingenious ideas about adding
extra weights here and there. The only result will be that his
wheel will get heavier and heavier - it would run longer if it were
empty! Have you ever seen a crowd of starlings squabbling
angrily over the crumbs on a stationary mill-wheel? That's what it
would be like for such a fellow and his invention, as I know only
too well from my own recent experience!
I also think it's a good thing to be completely clear about one
further point. Many would-be Mobile-makers think that if they can
arrange for some of the weights to be a little more distant from the
centre than the others, then the thing will surely revolve. A few
years ago I learned all about this the hard way. And then the
truth of the old proverb came home to me that one has to learn
through bitter experience. There's a lot more to matters of
mechanics than I've revealed to date, but since there's no urgent
need involved, I'll refrain from giving more information at the moment.
http://www.free-energy.co.uk/

[Tarsier79]

Nice. In context: "The above description is BS, as it was described by Wagner."

So, weights were not in pairs. Weights did not move further or closer to the axle to perpetuate the wheel. Jim, in his translation used the word "guide" into position, which I think also fits the bill. Just guiding weights into position will not work.