Poss. Symmetry Break?

[daanopperman]

Mr V

" Similarly, the smaller levers are either both out, ... "

I do not think they are leavers , I think they are pulley's , with the string bond to the base of the toothed weights . Also I do not think the center " roberval beam is what you see it to be , as the strings run there and back to the opposing side .

[Furcurequs]

Maybe???

The "children with heavy clubs" is/was not a Bessler wheel clue.

Quite literally Bessler wrote:

Code: Select all

Die Kinder spielen auf den Säulgen       |The children play at the pillars
Mit lauter schweren Schniebe-käulgen;    |With loud tough shifty-colleagues;

Lately I am getting "ein bisschen" better with German. Still that looks a really hard one for me to translate.

Schniebe-käulgen:
I have the impression that these words are old forms of something which is now a different word in today's German.

"Schnieben" might be an old word for Schnauben which basically means Snorting, possibly in the artistic sense that the object in question is kind of sleepy/slow.
source:
http://www.duden.de/suchen/dudenonline/schniebe
https://www.wort-suchen.de/woerterbuch/schnieb

Or "Schnieben" can possibly mean "edge(d)" too.
source:
http://woerterbuchnetz.de/PfWB/?sigle=P ... 3#XPS04644

Or Schniebe leads to Schiebe? Sliding, shifting, pushing...

"Käulge" might be an old form of Keule, means: club, leg, mace.
Old medieval maces can be edged, right... Or "käulge" might be also something else.

So based on this information the sentence translates to:
"The children are playing on the pillars,
With loud heavy snorting/edged clubs"

But really, these things have to be asked from someone who is German by mother language. This is nothing like translating a cake recipe or something...

Cheers!

Hey Gregory,

I believe this has been discussed before.

So previously I was able to find these entries in old German dictionaries using Google Books:







So the old German "schnieben" seems to mean to breathe or blow.

...and kaulgen seems to mean little spheres or globules.



I've seen an old German reference to "marbles" where "schnip-kaulgen" was used - which would more literally be "snapping balls" or "flipping balls."

Anno 1693

Denselben Sommer waren schreckliche Donner-Wetter, und fielen einst [einmal] auch Schloßen, wie Schnip-Käulgen [Murmeln] so groß, welche den Fenstern in der ganzen Stadt großen Schaden taten.

http://www.zeno.org/Kulturgeschichte/M/ ... reibung/21.

The original text did not have the modern word Murmeln (German for marble) in it. That was apparently added to a 1973 copy of the text by an editor to clarify what the "snapping- balls" were. The old text was comparing hailstones to snapping-balls/marbles.

So, the original Bessler text in question may be more literally "blowing balls."

What exactly those were, I don't know.

Here is where I started addressing all of this in an older thread:

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 907#112907

ETA: Looking up schnieben again on Google Books, it looks like the more recent translations also add sniff, snuff and snort to the breathe and blow. I've not seen those definitions from sources around Bessler's time, however.

[MrVibrating]

Mr V

" Similarly, the smaller levers are either both out, ... "

I do not think they are leavers , I think they are pulley's , with the string bond to the base of the toothed weights . Also I do not think the center " roberval beam is what you see it to be , as the strings run there and back to the opposing side .

They're the same levers highlighted in the previous image, MT 133.

When these are drawn inwards, the MoI is reduced, so the velocity, and thus energy, rises.

In order for the primary levers (A) to achieve this, they'd have to accelerate relative to the wheel - the left one exerting an upwards force, the right one a downwards force, but, as i've explained, they're not "toothed weights" (what on earth would that achieve?), to be interpreted literally, but rather a glyph - a symbolic representation of a powerful torque - of the kind of magnitude we'd expect from the long weight levers - but instead associated with an axial, not vertical, vector... ie. the force they're representing is not weight, but rather angular inertia / momentum, as induced by radial translations, itself the subject of the preceding image MT 132, among many others.

IOW what the "toothed weight" means is a torque caused by changing the radius of an orbiting mass.

That, IMHO, is the only consistent explanation possible.

If they were "toothed weights" merely drooping under gravity (which, as noted, the internal linkage precludes), then only the upper levers would be drawn inwards, yielding little net effect.

The reason they're shaped this way is to indicate the reducing MoI in the CW direction of travel - the direction in which positive torque will be induced by drawing a mass inwards.

So the toothed weights are a kind of conceptual chimera, representing the functional equivalencies of differing approaches to torque induction via gravity as opposed to MoI variation.

The same applies to the connecting point of the chords to the arms (A) in MT 134 - like the elaborate linkage beneath, it only makes mechancial sense, let alone symbolically, if the left strut rises relative to the rest of the wheel, while the right strut descends - this coupling enforced by the circular brace interconnecting both horizontal beams.

We're looking at Bessler's conceptions of heiroglyphs, not literal diagrams. Symbolically, they chart a consistent and succinct chain of logic. But as literal mechanical diagrams, they're complete gibberish.

I don't think you've fully grasped the concept i'm presenting..

Which is cool, me neither, probably...

[MrVibrating]

Maybe???

The "children with heavy clubs" is/was not a Bessler wheel clue.

Quite literally Bessler wrote:

Code: Select all

Die Kinder spielen auf den Säulgen       |The children play at the pillars
Mit lauter schweren Schniebe-käulgen;    |With loud tough shifty-colleagues;

Lately I am getting "ein bisschen" better with German. Still that looks a really hard one for me to translate.

Schniebe-käulgen:
I have the impression that these words are old forms of something which is now a different word in today's German.

"Schnieben" might be an old word for Schnauben which basically means Snorting, possibly in the artistic sense that the object in question is kind of sleepy/slow.
source:
http://www.duden.de/suchen/dudenonline/schniebe
https://www.wort-suchen.de/woerterbuch/schnieb

Or "Schnieben" can possibly mean "edge(d)" too.
source:
http://woerterbuchnetz.de/PfWB/?sigle=P ... 3#XPS04644

Or Schniebe leads to Schiebe? Sliding, shifting, pushing...

"Käulge" might be an old form of Keule, means: club, leg, mace.
Old medieval maces can be edged, right... Or "käulge" might be also something else.

So based on this information the sentence translates to:
"The children are playing on the pillars,
With loud heavy snorting/edged clubs"

But really, these things have to be asked from someone who is German by mother language. This is nothing like translating a cake recipe or something...

Cheers!

Thanks for chipping in, and what you've suggested seems perfectly fitting with my interpretation that the 'children" are child MoI variations (likely of parent, primary, ones), as represented in the above mentioned MT examples.

Again, though, any correlation between that line of AP and this interpretation of MT / the toys page is entirely incidental - i only noticed it last night and it would be just another consistency (or pure coincidence, even), not some kind of lynchpin of the whole concept as Jim seemed to think..

[Furcurequs]

Maybe???

The "children with heavy clubs" is/was not a Bessler wheel clue.

Quite literally Bessler wrote:

Die Kinder spielen auf den Säulgen |The children play at the pillars
Mit lauter schweren Schniebe-käulgen; |With loud tough shifty-colleagues;

jim_mich,

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that your translation of the hyphenated word "Schniebe-käulgen" is correct?

If you do, maybe it would be good for everyone if you could present that to the forum.

Believe it or not, though, there are actually German to Latin and German to English dictionaries from Bessler's time that have the definition of the root words of that hyphenated word. You can even see in my other post some clipped screen shots from Google scans of some of those books showing the actual "literal" definitions.

So, your translations don't seem to be very literal.

Bessler was writing about Wagner (the "kindergardener" child student) playing amongst the stately pillars of the university, along with his shifty college buddies.

They were like acrobats, fast and nimble like the wind, jumping to conclusions.

And the metaphor continued as Bessler wrote about Wagner and his friends.



There are many erroneous conclusions here on the forum, which many jump to.

Edit: I'm sorry. I MUST be wrong. I MUST be once again twisting Bessler's words. (you guys do know very well that I will NEVER NEVER get over being falsely accused of twisting Bessler words.)

It appears to me that you may indeed be twisting Bessler's words, so those erroneous conclusions jumped to here on the forum may actually be your own.

I'm not sure how you get "shifty-colleagues" from something that may have been more literally "blow-balls."

ETA: ...although when I think of you as a "little blow sphere," I can kind of understand where you might be coming from. ...lol

[MrVibrating]

Note also that MT 132, dealing with radial translations, has this square hub, as noted on the previous page, perhaps correlating with the square anvil of the lower hammer toy on the toys page, and the square section of the funky letter 'A' on the previous page, 28.. as well as the AP wheel.



All these things represent "a force that squares with radius".

(Again, MoI squares with radius, for a given mass.)

Ditto rope or water rising or descending, from an axial connection, out of the system via a square window.

Likewise, in the Weissenstein demo image showing an Archimedes screw, the water is raised or lowered (depending on the direction of rotation) in the axial plane, via the square wheel, also in the axial plane and connected directly to it by the drive rope. The otherwise-redundant pendulums in the background, as noted at the beginning of this thread, also symbolise angular inertia.

The overriding consistency of these repeated motifs is unlikely to be random coincidence.

The four-strut 'A' linkage goes further, showing us a literal means by which a torque and counter torque can be coupled cooperatively together, independently of an external reference frame (ie. statorless), which is why daisy-chaining this form of torque induction sidesteps the usual practical constraints of Newton's 3rd law (because the reaction mass remains in the accelerating reference frame).

So my conclusions are drawn from reconciling multiple engimas, into the only cohesive narrative i can see. Bessler's symbolism is concerned with delineating angular and gravitational forces, and playing them off against one another. Squares - per the lower hammer toy's anvil on the Toys page - represent the force that squares with radius, radial translations, and their associated inertial torques. Circular masses - such as the anvil on the upper hammer toy - represent gravitational or perhaps axial forces.

These recurrent thematic elements are established in earlier images and then mechanical concepts developed and represented using these emblematic devices, and manipulations of them.



Literally, it presents gibberish, including deliberate anomalies and inconsistencies. But figuratively, it represents the root, the stem, the nature of the PM principal, as a system for managing angular inertia.

[jim_mich]

I'm not sure how you get "shifty-colleagues" from something that may have been more literally "blow-balls."

German words in question -> Schniebe-käulgen

Both halves of this word combination have either changed over the last 300 years.
Or Bessler simply spelled the words wrong.

English -> push/shove = German -> schieben (Bessler wrote Schniebe 300 years ago)
http://www.lexilogos.com/english/german_translation.htm#
https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#de/en/schieben

English -> colleagues = German -> kollegen (Bessler wrote käulgen 300 years ago)
http://www.lexilogos.com/english/german_translation.htm#
https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#de/en/kollegen

This makes sense. Bessler was writing about Wagner being a young student (kindergartener) playing at the pillars (stately columns of the university), with his loud and tough pushy/shifty colleagues.

Colleagues means "together in league with". Or collegium (Latin) meaning college.
Bessler was writing about Wagner and his college friends. Wagner's colleagues. His fellow workers at the college/university.

Imagine young college students. Loud, boisterous, pushy. Typical young men who think they know everything, while being ignorant of what they have not yet learned.

Anything else makes no sense.

It appears to me that you may indeed be twisting Bessler's words, so those erroneous conclusions jumped to here on the forum may actually be your own.

You can claim I'm twisting Bessler's words. Or you can open your eyes and examine if this makes more sense than "blow-marbles". So is this any more of an erroneous conclusion than making the claim this phrase means "blow-marbles" ??

I stand by my conclusion that "Schniebe-käulgen" means shifty/pushy colleagues.

[MrVibrating]

@Dwayne


Thanks for contributing, again, all seems consistent with the 'children' being the outer MoI-varying levers per MT 20 et al, as i've been suggesting here.




Just as John Collins had been suggesting for some time, the principle is basically kiiking, of a kind, controlling the distribution of swinging / orbiting mass to convert MoI into velocity and energy. So this could be the "childrens game", and these small levers the "perpetual motion structures".

But MT 20, aside from gravitational symmetry, runs up against a significant increase in MoI of the primary levers themelseves, robbing the advantage of the outer retracted MoI. MT 134 represents the final assault on this hurdle, wherein positive (CW) torque applied to the arms (A) via inbound sliding masses (represented symbolically by the 'toothed weights'), causes them to accelerate ahead of the rest of the system's rotation, which in turn pulls the small outer levers, inwards - a paired MoI retraction causing cooperative torques which in turn are applied to further retract the net system's MoI.

This concept of a two-stage MoI retraction - one causing the other - could be the key..

Perhaps, when Bessler claims he can potentially "raise the power up to fourfold" for a given unit's dimensions, he's referring to this kind of multi-staging principle. In which case, it should become apparent that a four-stage daisy chain is some kind of practical limit, for some reason.. will have to look out for any signs of this as a further possible waypoint marking the right path..

[MrVibrating]

Anything else makes no sense.

..but it's a poem..?

Chained mutts creeping through hoops to receive pats on the paw from 'stiff fops' - he knows how to please by playing with his toys and knick-knacks?

Cunning cats creeping silently along, snatching juicy mice...?

Mis-translations and transliterations aside, if there's any useful meaning behind the rhymes, it's almost certainly all metaphorical. And as i'm showing, MT establishes and then relies upon consistent metaphors. But whether or not the line translates as "children playing with mallets", if it does, then coincidentally or not, that correlates with the lower hammer toy on the Toys page, and if not, it's moot since that's still what the Toys page shows - children on the lower toy, adults on the upper one, hammers in hand.

It'd be a correlation with the hypothesis, not a causation of it.

[jim_mich]

But at this point in his poem Bessler is NOT writing about his wheel. He is writing about his enemies.

[Furcurequs]

@Dwayne


Thanks for contributing, again, all seems consistent with the 'children' being the outer MoI-varying levers per MT 20 et al, as i've been suggesting here.

Hey MrVibrating,

You're welcome.

I personally try not to limit myself to any of the supposed Bessler clues. The ideas I'm pursuing, then, are based upon my own observations, experimentation and even quite a bit of my formal book learnin'. ...lol

For those more concerned with Bessler's words, however, I thought that some of those old dictionary entries I found could be helpful in deciphering what he might have actually meant.

Take care.

Dwayne

[Furcurequs]

I'm not sure how you get "shifty-colleagues" from something that may have been more literally "blow-balls."

German words in question -> Schniebe-käulgen

Both halves of this word combination have either changed over the last 300 years.

If we look at German dictionaries from the early 18th century on, there seems to be evidence of this very thing.

Or Bessler simply spelled the words wrong.

Why would you believe that he spelled both those words wrong when there is evidence from dictionaries from his time period that both of those words were actually used? ...and even spelled the way he spelled them?

English -> push/shove = German -> schieben (Bessler wrote Schniebe 300 years ago)
http://www.lexilogos.com/english/german_translation.htm#
https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#de/en/schieben

"Schnieben," based upon old dictionary entries, seems to have actually been used 300 years ago.

English -> colleagues = German -> kollegen (Bessler wrote käulgen 300 years ago)
http://www.lexilogos.com/english/german_translation.htm#
https://translate.google.com/?hl=en#de/en/kollegen

"Käulgen," based upon old dictionary entries, seems to have actually been used 300 years ago.

This makes sense. Bessler was writing about Wagner being a young student (kindergartener) playing at the pillars (stately columns of the university), with his loud and tough pushy/shifty colleagues.

You seem to have changed two words that were used 300 years ago and which were actually spelled the way Bessler spelled them into similar sounding modern words that are spelled differently - while, of course, suggesting that Bessler just misspelled the modern words.

Colleagues means "together in league with". Or collegium (Latin) meaning college.
Bessler was writing about Wagner and his college friends. Wagner's colleagues. His fellow workers at the college/university.

Imagine young college students. Loud, boisterous, pushy. Typical young men who think they know everything, while being ignorant of what they have not yet learned.

Anything else makes no sense.

I'm sure what you "imagine" makes sense to you, but it doesn't seem to make much sense to others of us.

It appears to me that you may indeed be twisting Bessler's words, so those erroneous conclusions jumped to here on the forum may actually be your own.

You can claim I'm twisting Bessler's words. Or you can open your eyes and examine if this makes more sense than "blow-marbles". So is this any more of an erroneous conclusion than making the claim this phrase means "blow-marbles" ??

I stand by my conclusion that "Schniebe-käulgen" means shifty/pushy colleagues.

I guess each member of this forum can decide for himself whether Bessler just misspelled two modern words so as to fit your own pet theory and opinion or whether he used and spelled properly words that were used and spelled that way in his own time.

It would be nice, though, if we could find another example from history of his exact use of the two hyphenated root words. Maybe one of us will get lucky one day.

[jim_mich]

Come on Furcurequs, I added the comment that Bessler may have spelled the words wrong, since I'm not an idiot that believes that Bessler's spelling is/was ALWAYS one-hundred percent perfect. EVERYONE makes mistakes at times. And we all know that spellings change over the years. And the meanings of some words also change from generation to generation.

You seem to have changed two words that were used 300 years ago and which were actually spelled the way Bessler spelled them into similar sounding modern words that are spelled differently - while, of course, suggesting that Bessler just misspelled the modern words.

And you're being an idiot again. Those two original words no longer exist in today's German language. They have evolved into the similar sounding modern words that are indeed spelled differently, but which have basically the same modern meaning as the original words from 300 years ago.

You also must understand that many words, in whatever language, often have a number of different meaning. Sometime these meanings are totally unrelated. And you can only tell which meaning is the right one by the context of the sentence. And sometimes one needs to know the back-story in order to understand a sentence.

You are free to think that those two words should be translated as "blow-balls".

Or you can accept that it's highly likely that those two words mean "pushy-colleagues", which fits in very well with the surrounding text and the back-story.

You remind me of an infant that needs spoon-feeding, but you keep burping out the tiny baby bites of food and refuse to be nourished.

PS, my theory doesn't have a damn thing to do with this translation. And why do you refer to my theory as a "PET" theory? You do it to be derogatory.

[ME]

I'll try an attempt on: "Schniebe-käulgen". My antique DE:NL dictionary doesn't give anything new, DE:"Schnieben": EN: to sniff, puff or blow.

In my Dutch view there are two possibilities:
NL:"Kogel"=DE:"Kugel"=EN: an iron sphere or canon ball, a bullet (plural, DE:"Kugeln")
NL:"Kegel"=DE:"Kegel"=EN:Bowling-pin, or cone-shaped
The sound of the first word seems to deviate less (accent-wise) from "käulgen"

The sound of "Schnieben" (a lot of adjectives have a sound-alike meaning) reminds me of "scratching", or "snapping", or some other "sharp" noise.

It could be something like (baoding balls), like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caJCwqGKRCY ?
Perhaps when using a club we might get one of the pre-golf games, like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pall-mall ?
-with children it's always loud and heavy-

[Furcurequs]

Come on Furcurequs, I added the comment that Bessler may have spelled the words wrong, since I'm not an idiot that believes that Bessler's spelling is/was ALWAYS one-hundred percent perfect.

...but your argument actually depends upon Bessler having misspelled BOTH of the root words of his hyphenated word and even in such a way that BOTH misspelled words just happened to be legitimate words that were apparently in use in his own day!

EVERYONE makes mistakes at times.

Since EVERYONE indeed makes mistakes at times, and considering how many mistakes I've actually seen from you that you've even mistakenly gone on to stubbornly defend, I have to assume that in this case the mistakes could once again be YOURS!

And we all know that spellings change over the years. And the meanings of some words also change from generation to generation.

Yes, we seem to have evidence for both of these things. So why wouldn't you turn to dictionaries from Bessler's own time to try to understand his words?!!

You seem to have changed two words that were used 300 years ago and which were actually spelled the way Bessler spelled them into similar sounding modern words that are spelled differently - while, of course, suggesting that Bessler just misspelled the modern words.

And you're being an idiot again. Those two original words no longer exist in today's German language.

So, again, why aren't you looking them up in the old dictionaries or looking for other examples of their use in the past instead of arguing that he must have misspelled them?!!

They have evolved into the similar sounding modern words that are indeed spelled differently, but which have basically the same modern meaning as the original words from 300 years ago.

What? The words you believe he misspelled? What were the original spellings supposed to be, then?

You also must understand that many words, in whatever language, often have a number of different meaning. Sometime these meanings are totally unrelated. And you can only tell which meaning is the right one by the context of the sentence. And sometimes one needs to know the back-story in order to understand a sentence.

I've seen your back-story, so I have to take that into consideration when interpreting your words.

You are free to think that those two words should be translated as "blow-balls".

Thanks? ...lol

Or you can accept that it's highly likely that those two words mean "pushy-colleagues", which fits in very well with the surrounding text and the back-story.

Again, I must first consider your own back-story when considering what is more likely.

You remind me of an infant that needs spoon-feeding, but you keep burping out the tiny baby bites of food and refuse to be nourished.

Well, what do you expect from me?! You had me looking forward to some crow puree and yet you just keep dishing out this same old BS! Phew!

PS, my theory doesn't have a damn thing to do with this translation.

...uh... ...okay... ...good?

And why do you refer to my theory as a "PET" theory? You do it to be derogatory.

Well, from one idiot to another, you do vigorously defend your highly speculative notions which seem to have no logical explanation nor experimental validation whatsoever. So, whether seemingly derogatory or not, I do try to point out the obvious for those who may not have been paying attention.