I'm curious as to what other members think about the Apologia wheel. When you consider how long it takes to do an engraving like that, I really think that it must carry some significance. It could be a decoding wheel as some have suggested in the past, it could be a representation of the wheel's interior form or parts of the machine, or it might be just something added to throw readers off track. I'd really know what everyone else thinks.
My vote is that it is a represention of the wheel's "principle" or "rough blueprint of the wheel" in it's simplest form. By simplest I mean the very bare minimum required for a wheel to turn. (And by default, the very bare minimum he needed to show in order to establish he was the first to invent it). In other words, I think the apologia wheel was, in essence, his patent.
Apologia wheel thoughts
Moderator: scott
re: Apologia wheel thoughts
As I'm struggling through a quick course in symbolism I notice there will always be more symbols than one can imagine and even more meaning to project...nevertheless I can still try.
So my current guess is: "Fiat Lux", or in English: "Let there be light" - Genesis 1.3.
It can be thought of (and visualized) as a point in time and space where Unity splits up in Trinity what's called: The Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
We can try to project this heavenly occurrence to our own perspective: "As above , as below" - so we flip above and below.
Then we project this to MT013 (assuming because of Gen 1.3), and see what is important to let a wheel see the light: Raise a weight, one side is full, one side is empty.
Found an old thread:
Bessler wheel principle solved?
So my current guess is: "Fiat Lux", or in English: "Let there be light" - Genesis 1.3.
It can be thought of (and visualized) as a point in time and space where Unity splits up in Trinity what's called: The Father, Son, Holy Spirit.
We can try to project this heavenly occurrence to our own perspective: "As above , as below" - so we flip above and below.
Then we project this to MT013 (assuming because of Gen 1.3), and see what is important to let a wheel see the light: Raise a weight, one side is full, one side is empty.
Found an old thread:
Bessler wheel principle solved?
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
-
MrVibrating
- Addict
- Posts: 2879
- Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:19 am
- Location: W3
re: Apologia wheel thoughts
JC has given some very interesting hints about his re-discovered JC / Bessler principle, one of which being that the form of symmetry break it exploits is an N3 violation - the rarest and most thrilling kind of symmetry break, if true.
He's also said that it depends upon an odd number of mechanisms - that three would work, but five is more optimum.
So, the AP wheel could signify the most rudimentary depiction of a complete, minimum mechanism.
However remember also Bessler's teasing description of a "single crossbar" being the minimum required for auto-rotation... Hence maybe the AP wheel represents such a "crossbar", albeit of the tripartite kind.
Similarly, perhaps the tripartite cross is symbolic, representing the elements of an N3 break - three forces rather than two or four, implying either a missing or extra force or counterforce in an interaction.
The further implications of JC's clues warrant a thread in their own right - from just the two hints above some very interesting conclusions can be extrapolated about how the mechanisms interact with each other and the wheel. The witness descriptions of Bessler's wheel under load, plus his claim of being able to build a very slow but very powerful wheel, given enough time... these and other clues are all consistent with an unbalanced reaction force being the prime mover.
Without wanting to step on JC's toes too hard, why would the asymmetry disappear if four mechanisms were used? Three works, five works better, but one, two, four and six etc., no disco.
What makes it all the more perplexing is our habit of considering each potential mechanism as contributing its own equal asymmetric interaction to the complete cycle. Find an OU lever or wotnot, then add more of them. But here's something different - conceptually, right outside the box; each mechanism makes a discrete energy contribution to the net per cycle (because we're led to believe five is better than three), but only if there's an odd number of mechanisms.
So take a good ol' stare at that AP wheel and think about why that might be...
He's also said that it depends upon an odd number of mechanisms - that three would work, but five is more optimum.
So, the AP wheel could signify the most rudimentary depiction of a complete, minimum mechanism.
However remember also Bessler's teasing description of a "single crossbar" being the minimum required for auto-rotation... Hence maybe the AP wheel represents such a "crossbar", albeit of the tripartite kind.
Similarly, perhaps the tripartite cross is symbolic, representing the elements of an N3 break - three forces rather than two or four, implying either a missing or extra force or counterforce in an interaction.
The further implications of JC's clues warrant a thread in their own right - from just the two hints above some very interesting conclusions can be extrapolated about how the mechanisms interact with each other and the wheel. The witness descriptions of Bessler's wheel under load, plus his claim of being able to build a very slow but very powerful wheel, given enough time... these and other clues are all consistent with an unbalanced reaction force being the prime mover.
Without wanting to step on JC's toes too hard, why would the asymmetry disappear if four mechanisms were used? Three works, five works better, but one, two, four and six etc., no disco.
What makes it all the more perplexing is our habit of considering each potential mechanism as contributing its own equal asymmetric interaction to the complete cycle. Find an OU lever or wotnot, then add more of them. But here's something different - conceptually, right outside the box; each mechanism makes a discrete energy contribution to the net per cycle (because we're led to believe five is better than three), but only if there's an odd number of mechanisms.
So take a good ol' stare at that AP wheel and think about why that might be...
-
John Collins
- Addict
- Posts: 3310
- Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 6:33 am
- Location: Warwickshire. England
- Contact:
http://www.theorffyreuscode.com/html/ap ... wheel.html
This is my explanation for the AP wheel drawing.
JC
This is my explanation for the AP wheel drawing.
JC
