i have solved it! Please help contribute to getting this out to the world!

[gkrouse]

Yes,

I have much to share, but must be discrete simultaneously. Many clues, all of which have now come together into my complete working model of the device. It is not what most have been trying, and most will be astounding as to the simplicity of the actual mechanism inside the leather covered barrel container. Obviously, as most will agree, the barrel is not even needed, but, it was what Bessler had to use to keep his intellectual property safe.

[Fletcher]

Congratulations Glenn on having solved Bessler's clues and having a complete working model; created in Working Model 2D (just read your other threads of today).

How can I help contribute to getting this out to the world as the thread title suggests ?

I look forward to being astounded, especially once the 'Prime Mover' is revealed.

P.S. I don't know you personally Glenn but I assume you are the same Glenn Rouse from the forward in John Collins MT, whom introduced him to Andrew Witter !

[Fletcher]

Hi Glenn ..

I took the liberty of summerising your threads today into one essence here i.e. what I believe your backstory and plan is ? If I have missed the mark my apologies.

I have solved the mysterious Bessler mechanics inside the covered barrel! I have simulated the mechanics using working model, if only the one who actually can demonstrate it via a simulation using working model or other, and then get others to help get the thing built through mutual cooperation!

It is not what most have been trying, and most will be astounded as to the simplicity of the actual mechanism inside.

I am daunted by the magnitude of this, and will require the help of others. Banishment of greed with mutual cooperation must be found now. I have exhausted everything in my life to get this solution, for I firmly believe in Bessler's accomplishment, and honor his wishes to have his name and work remembered. Please, if you feel my words, and can confirm my thoughts on this, please reply with encouragement.

Bessler, through his wonderful discovery, was able to convey so splendidly, how Newton, Galileo, and many others had been corrupted ‘by the establishment’.

I have done my homework, and I can point out right inside of Besslers documents clues which I believe Bessler was trying to cleverly hide, again, in plain sight. Not surprising that many of us have embarked on this journey to uncover what was lost. I think we all share in a sense that a disastrous injustice took place back then, shrouded in secrecy, but still lingering enough for us to sense it.

I am ready to mail my provisional patent application, if only to find the application fee. Once I receive receipt of what I will call something like: "a new universal method for mechanical advantage�, which dramatically improves the efficiency of energy producing rotation found in turbines, engines, generators, and motors of all kinds, I shall also present a new thought on this lie called gravity, and the grand Newtonian deception.

I have much to share. Many clues, all of which have now come together into my complete working model of the device, but need patent protection before conveying its contents!

[John Collins]

Congratulations Glenn!

There are ten weights.

JC

[Furcurequs]

I did a quick search for "gkrouse" and found a fellow by the name of "Greg Krouse" who was going on and on about Bessler on several different websites. His occupation and interests also seem to agree with what is on gkrouse's profile.

So, this may not be the "Glenn" that you are thinking of. He's not yet said, has he?

[Fletcher]

Well spotted Dwayne, looks like you are right.

However because he probably isn't Glenn Rouse it doesn't materially change his proposition to the members here.

I must admit I have an interest in his explanations about increased efficiency and MA.

Archimedes Law of Levers currently states (simplistically) that Mechanical Advantage x Speed Ratio = 1.0

i.e. MA x SR = 100% efficiency (this does not include system frictional losses etc which would result in a lesser mechanical efficiency).

IOW's; MA and SR are reciprocals, the product of which is always 1.0.

And this relationship in terms of CoE means that gravity is conservative.

However gkrouse seems to suggest that he has found a greater efficiency for MA and SR which makes gravity explanations as conservative an institutional lie ?!

I guess we'll have to wait to hear from the author with a fuller explanation and context.

[John Collins]

Also Glenn doesn't live in Wisconsin. So it probably isn't the Glenn we know.

JC

[sleepy]

Congrats.
You say you want to share it with the world,then say you must keep it secret until you get a patent.
Well,which is it? You could be one of the greatest humanitarians in the history of the planet and share it with the world,right here,right now!
You could literally start saving lives today.Or you could wait another 10 years to get your patent along with a working model,and sell it to some company that will hide it in a warehouse until it is forgotten. If you have achieved this astounding feat,and you let people continue to suffer,then you need to rethink your path.

[Andyb]

Well done ,look forward to seeing your solution ,just out of interest does the mech resemble 1717 for i think i have it to,but hey i am always saying that ,hope to hear the world will be changing for the better and it could be down to you ,hope your the real deal,all the best Andyb.

[charly2]

Hi gkrouse and everyone, great you found it.
Now about the weights, my conclusion is that the unidiectional wheels had only 1 weight (1 spoke), and the bidirectionals had 2 (2 spokes), that is enough for a wheel to run. It can be used more bars up to 3, something like the AP wheel depicts (that is the limit due the space).
How many do you have in your simulation?

[WaltzCee]

I'm not an early adapter. Please forgive me yet I'm just not buying it.

[DannyBouy]

Please help contribute to getting this out to the world!

I could step up to the plate here.

Thanks

Daniel

[jim_mich]

How many weights do I think Bessler used?
Which Bessler wheel are we talking about?

Bessler said he build and tested about a hundred wheels, which all failed to work, until he build his first wheel that barely self-rotated. He then went off to earn some money by means of his Doctoring, and he got married. He then built and displayed public wheel number one. He destroyed that wheel and built public wheel number two. Both of these wheels functioned in only one direction. The sounds of the weights were muffled by felt. No one will ever know how many weights they had.

My best guess is that they each used three mechanisms, which were represented in the image at the end of Apologia Poetica, which had three pie-shaped section. An each mechanism used two weight. One move inward as the other moved outward. Thus, it is my guess that public wheels number one and two each had six weights. But they might have had eight or more weights each.

Public wheels three and four were similar to each other, except number three ran much faster than number four, which was designed to run a long time. Slower motion causes less wear. Both these later wheels were noisy. Weights could be heard banging inside. The last wheel had about eight impacts per rotation.

My best guess for these last two is rather complex. In order for the wheel to be able to work in either direction, it was two wheels combined. One for forward rotation. And one for reverse rotation. This required both wheels to be always balanced. This required the wheel to gain its rotational torque from the motions of the weights, rather from gravity. (Science tells us gravity is a conservative force and thus can't power a gravity PM wheel.) So, in order to balance the weights, each two-weight mechanism was coupled and synchronized to a second two-weight mechanism. Thus each mechanism used four weights. Each bang was caused by two of the four weight hitting the wheel at the same time. The other two weights then hit the wheel at 180 degrees. Thus two bangs per mechanism, per rotation. Eight bangs equals four mechanisms, with four weights each mechanism, thus four time four is sixteen weights.

There other reversed part of the wheel also had sixteen weights. Thus it is my guess the total weights in each of the last two public wheels were 32 weights each, about four pounds per weight. This gives the wheel 128 pounds of weights.

Add this weight to wheel itself and you can see why Bessler needed to remove the weights so as to relocate the wheel for the testing. These weights filled a box when removed from the wheel.

It is known that Bessler had smaller wheel models in his home at different times. Little is known about these wheels.

[Art]

I don't buy it either . !

If the poll for how many weights Bessler used is any measure of gkrouse's expertise then I think we have possibly another wannabe with delusions of grandeur or worse someone who is trying to set up some sort of scam !

Its hard to have respect for anybody that spreads copies of their one masterpiece post around and doesn't bother responding to any answering posts . That behavior doesn't exhibit the type of ability required to do something constructive like "getting it out to the world" !

I think if I was Glenn Rouse I would be thoroughly pissed off if somebody posted what he has posted without clarifying that he is not G.Rouse of "Bessler Fame"

Will the real Glenn Rouse please identify himself or risk being implicated with what looks to me as an attempt at a scam in the making .

[justsomeone]

https://futurenet.club/p/gkrouse#!


This must be him. He's can't be trying to hide his identity if this info matches his profile here and one quick Google of gkrouse.....