IQ needed for solving Besslers challenge?

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Bessler Wheel is a IQ test!

[AB Hammer]

Alan, only reason you did not work with me is because I am the inventor. You're a bigot.
If you would still like to call my father, I can give you his phone number. You can tell him I am a bad little boy. I did save your post. You do have quite a few of them. By the way, my local police dept. has probably been watching you. I did let them see your posts to me. Lewd is one way to put some of them.
One of those things, online, you never know when you are posting with an adult, do you ?

edited to add; Alan, this isn't a joke. My medical situation is not as bad as yours, the police have been in my home and it did give me the opportunity to alert them about you. And these days, the police are inline and do monitor forums. And you did talk to me about your private and my private. They probably have Stefan's info from his hard drive where you discussed that quite openly. The police do co-operate.

Jim Lindgaard posting an all new low I see with his lies.

Now he is banned again!!

What kind of a person would come back after being banned again and again multiple times despite. IQ ?

[Fletcher]

Sometimes questions is being answer without the person knowing it. It`s about reading between the lines. Very often that is where the answer lurks. The answer to a thread`s topic question, or even the real secrets of the old masters.

Most of us probably feel that having a high IQ (I can't even spell that :) has to be an advantage. Because it usually confers an increased ability to problem solve. And that usually means being able to join dots so to speak, or see patterns etc. To anticipate a future outcome from available options that have been discerned. So that has to be good right, for a project such as this. Just understand all the Newtonian Laws of physics and the Laws of Thermodynamics and there must be a corner somewhere that observational science has failed to identify and paint itself into with a law for it that dovetails the other known laws nicely and conveniently.

"The world is full of intelligent derelict people". So intelligence alone is not the complete answer, obviously.

I do get the impression Oystein that you are applying hindsight to this topic. Perhaps you feel that a high IQ is a necessity to find that loophole from scratch (first principles) ? I probably feel that any IQ person might conduct an experiment that shows an anomaly that could be used as the genesis of OU. Recognizing that it was an anomaly is the trick though, isn't it ? That might take belief in PM; determination and resilience; an education in mechanics and forces; and perhaps the smarts to say "that's interesting" and do the experiment again instead of checking what's for lunch.

[Oystein]

Yes, the most important thing of all is to know that what you are looking for exist. So Besslers story and the testimonials help us a lot!

This can be summarized by this word of wisdom:

"Those who don't believe in magic will never find it".
Roald Dahl

My reasoning has come from a series of conclusions I have made from experiences and observations I made while writing several books about this. The proofs and conclusions comes from now knowing most of the common codes and methods used by the old masters. So I have tried to identify why scholars don`t find it, and how that can be compared to why they haven`t found Besslers mechanical secret.

So we have to know that a code and a system is there before we have a chance to succeed. Then we need dedication, correct tools, and finally enough IQ, enough to know how to apply it anyway.

To increase our chances, we first have to believe or rather "know". We can`t start looking for Alcohol or any other distraction, because "Those who don't believe in magic will never find it".

So I started to gather all sort of information and started to to put it together, and discovered ALOT of exiting stuff.If one thing say this, then all things is such... etc etc..

This also forced me to believe that IQ had a great deal to do with this, because our problem is at a Nobel level, and Nobel winners don`t have 100 in IQ. Its just facts, one leading to another...

It also led me to the fact that building and simulation of machines after machines is like buying a lottery ticket. Well it didn`t run. So what? Build another...well it didn`t run... lottery--lottery...

So this have to be when IQ takes over, right?

So comes the talk about improvements... oh I can learn how to improve... NO you don`t. It still = ZERO. So you actually learn how to fail.

So, yes you have fooled yourself all along. So how can you learn when all test turns out ZERO?? This must be where IQ comes into play... IQ vs. lottery, who will win?

[Fletcher]

"The average IQ of a university graduate is 120.

The IQ of an average university graduate is 120."

Are these two statements the same ?

Clearly IQ is a bell distribution curve with outliers at both ends. Since the worlds population is reaching 7 billion (more people alive today than all deceased modern men together) then there ought to be a plethora of geniuses out there well able to solve the problem.

That is assuming that Bessler was in the top quartile but NOT absolutely the smartest man that ever lived, including todays crop.

If people were sufficiently motivated, worked as a team instead of as individuals, and had the prerequisite smarts then this problem should have been solved years ago. We all know that but individual glory and wealth motivates many who would try and so go it alone. "Many heads are smarter than one". We also inherently know this to be true because we can't all know everything.

The point with Bessler is we don't know whether he was the original brilliant discoverer of an anomaly/loophole. Or whether he had the wits to recognize something of value for his quest when he came across it from another previous source.

I tend to apply Ockham's razor to this. It is more likely that he came across it somewhere and applied it differently to his goal, recognizing its potential.

IMO it is far less likely to accept that he was the most brilliant man that ever lived, or that lives; the top one percent of the top one percetile in IQ. That would make him superhuman. We know from some witnesses accounts that he was skilled in mechanics and had a a working knowledge of math but wasn't rated in the top percentile for that. That seems to suggest that he wasn't superhuman.

And besides his poetry was pretty ordinary ;7) But then that is a subjective opinion.

[Oystein]

The research I read, said that there was no correlation between higher IQ than 130 and more success! So I would assume that Bessler had an IQ of about 130 or above and that covers about 2% of the population.

We can see that Leibniz IQ has been estimated @ 205 and Newton @ 190 and those did not manage to do what Bessler did. But did they try, and did they "know" or believe it was possible ? No, Leibniz never really believed it to be pure mechanical, so he had no chance to solve it.

We can see that Francis Bacon and da Vinci is estimated @ 180, and all I can do is to compare their code work. From Besslers code work I have earlier estimated him to have about an IQ of at least 150, and with an extreme determination and focus. Every day, every hour.

So we see that there are several factors more important than high IQ, but at the same time you need enough, and I think that somewhere around 130 may be the threshold.. But at the same time, people also win i lotteries..

IMO

[Zhyyra]

I think it doesn't matter what your IQ is.
I think it matters that God may reveal it to you if you are a diligent seeker of the find. You do need to apply your eyes to the correct field though, don't go looking for it in medical science (for example). You need a yearning for it and the favor and grace of God for him to reveal it to you.

Bessler had those.

[Fletcher]

Quite true.

I also think that Bessler built on the codes of others that he was shown in his travels and studies. As many of those originals did also.

It is not often that synchronicity is seen with individuals all separately inventing the same thing in private.

We know he was determined and smart. But as you point out many other people are like that, then and now.

That is why if we ever see a mechanism hidden in his works then the belief factor and motivation will rise exponentially, at least here.

[ME]

I guess one needs to be smart enough to understand why perpetual motion is impossible or at least difficult; while on the other hand one needs to be dumb enough in trying to circumvent this inconvenience; while again just intelligent enough to combine certain things to make it happen.... Perhaps there needs to be a certain imbalance between the multitude of intelligences?

Whatever quantifiable number one puts on it, I think anyone recognizes those massive failures which start with an "eureka!"-like feeling followed by a "d'oh!"-moment. New discoveries are often introduced by an "oh?". I bet the number of those occurrences are more important.

You need a yearning for it and the favor and grace of God for him to reveal it to you

We could call that a "Connectedness principle".

[Fletcher]

My perfect women. Smart enough to have a conversation with. Dumb enough to like me ;7)

All joking aside. I am certain that Bessler had more than the goods intellectually, else he may never have made the connection (like many of us haven't). We know he had other qualities in abundance including faith and persistence, not to mention his technical skills. The perfect storm analogy.

[AB Hammer]

When I was young I learned and competed in Judo. In 1971 I came in ninth during the nationals in Arazona category 13 heavy. I was 12 at the time. In Judo you learn a lot about balance and with simple movements can through a much greater size person. I think there is information in this that may help in this quest. Other sports like in gymnastics may also open up some ideas. Bessler watched nature for information as well. So I think an open mind is the first step and observation is the second and the rest we have to learn and/or develop.

Alan

[killemaces]

So what is the code?have you found it Oistein,Why dont ?is it in your question?Dont need high IQ to make a guess:)

[Zhyyra]

You need a yearning for it and the favor and grace of God for him to reveal it to you

We could call that a "Connectedness principle".

You could indeed ME. The physical is a manifestation realm of the spiritual.

[ME]

killemaces, I can make a guess, because I don't know...

The code is complex, it's probably self-referenced, it doesn't describe a mechanism, did I mentioned 'complex'?, and it needs a certain level of understanding the 'general' way of how secret codes work, the several known and unknown ways to understand it's possible meaning, did I mention 'secret' and perseverance?, and then the ability to project all that stuff onto Bessler's way of thinking.

When we combine this with the given threshold of 130 and the topic-opening-statement, I would guess Oystein's IQ is at least measured at 135.

I guess guessing some true and final answer could eventually still be barely intelligible without proper intelligence?

---
Zhyyra,
Sometimes I just wonder what kind of impact a physical Perpetual Motion could have on some spiritual level; and possibly feeds-back again on the physical level. What makes it hard to build, despite all the intelligent minds in this world? What side-effects would a PM have on something seemingly unrelated. It could be that it's difficult because it can't physically exist?

I think PM-research slowly reaches a point where we can't go any further without serious outside help: Perhaps we need Fletcher's girl here ?!

[primemignonite]

Here, now, James as speaking into The Cavernous Void . . .

I honestly do not know what to vote on this one so I won't.

Speaking of intelligence quotients: Excepting for myself ONCE, the subject of William James Sidis has never been broached here. Very well it might have been.

He was a misfit in most ways social and all ways physical-amorous but, had a measured I.Q. of between 250 and 300, this done only two years before his tragic, too-early death. It was so off-the-charts that his examiners could only provide a range of 'no lower than, and not over,' etc.

In 1925 Sidis published his title formally The Animate and the Inanimate, the little book comprising a Preface and nineteen following chapters.

Sidis was not a physicist per se, the entire conjuration was a product of his mind and intellect solely, having had very little or no reference to anything like it of-previous nor colleague contact, as I am aware.

Within it will be found his reasoning for why perpetual motion (as I deduced it) would be expected to exist in his Reverse Universe, and much as explanation as for 'why'.

He cited one handy earmark for identifying a Reverse Universe item: It would appear AS IF ALIVE! (Ring any bells?)

m m", . . . the peculiarity of life is its ability to draw on more energy than the second law
m mof thermodynamics would allow; that is, its ability, in some circumstances at least,
m mto reverse that second law." - fr. Chapter VII "Theories of Life"

Sidis, his life, and his tragically short but brilliant history is well worth an afternoon's study. His book may be read and/or downloaded in various of extension sorts gratis here.

http://www.sidis.net/ANIMContents.htm

As based upon copious, past painful experience, I am sure that 99% of the lovely BWF members will respond hostilely (since I am surrounded by proven enemies that DO hate me and my guts, and any thing such that I might ever produce - perpetual motion included, even) to what I have provided here but, it is not intended for these.

Rather, it is for THE ONE among them that might actually use Sidis' material to some real, productive utility (intellectually if not tangibly as I believe he does not build?):

MrVibrating (Dextral - the "creepy" N&N List.)

Of course I could not know but, my guess is that his would come-in at about 150-160? ("I reserve the right to be wrong" - Jim_Mich)

As for others here . . . so-so, la-la?

CHEEERS!!!

J.

Note: Added quotation in blue.