I found Bessler's Wheel!

[WaltzCee]

This is fantastic! I was just wandering here and wondering there and out of now where it just popped up out of no where laying on the ground like so much litter.



I'm going to be world renowned and insanely rich!! Don't worry though, I'm going to remember all the little people that made this possible.

ETA: I own world wide exclusive rights to this. Don't even anyone try and lay any claim to this. As a matter of fact I've included gravity in the patent! I own gravity!!! It's mine!!!!!! All mine!!!!!!!!!

[ME]

eehm... a wheel fair and square?

Did you just find yourself another client and then got fired?
Or perhaps it goes the other way around;
I don't know exactly how that works.
Perhaps you could enlighten us?

[WaltzCee]

eehm... a wheel fair and square?

Round wheels are so Proterozoic. This is the future. Round wheels are too sinusoidal and have a tendency to roll away. Square wheels are more stable. This is going to be an economic boom not seen since the Paleozoic Era when sight was invented. Roadways are going to need to be resurfaced and pot holes are going to finally have a use. After market adapters are going to be made to bring obsolete round ones up to speed. Humanity is going to be blessed without mercy! I'm in the process of rounding, er I mean squaring up venture capitalists right now.

Worse case scenario, I still own gravity.
Same client, different day.
You know how I feel?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ytnrKmUtpc

[jonnynet]

I guess the best thing, due to its efficiency, is the acceleration behavior. The more load you add the more it accelerates up to self-destruction, right?

[WaltzCee]

Thank you jonnynet. I need to amend the patent application to include potential military applications.

[ME]

Round wheels are so Proterozoic. This is the future. Round wheels are too sinusoidal and have a tendency to roll away. Square wheels are more stable.

You might have a point there.

Worse case scenario, I still own gravity.
Same client, different day.
You know how I feel?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ytnrKmUtpc

That's indeed a very worst case scenario.
Your client must have a very weird day...

I think I'm still a bit confused.. Don't worry about it, it happens frequently..
I tried to contact some other guy but he was, let's say, a bit busy with something else, like unavailable or like I don't know....
But to express my confusion here is an impression of [Video:] "Feel Good inc." sung by some other long haired singer

I guess the best thing, due to its efficiency, is the acceleration behavior. The more load you add the more it accelerates up to self-destruction, right?

I think I have to fully agree, only for one thing:
After applying a load it'll accelerate from zero up to 9.81 m/s² in an instant...(until it hits) The more load, the more destruction on the model.

Perhaps it's better that way. :-)

[WaltzCee]

• quote: I think I'm still a bit confused.. Don't worry about it

It would be best if we start at the beginning, but rather than do what's best we'll pick up in the middle instead:

• quote: That's indeed a very worst case scenario. Your client must have a very weird day...

I was alluding to my patent on gravity; I think that's what eluded you. Nothing one way or the other about my client. Moving right along to the beginning I'd like to preface it with an original quote:

• quote: With as many words in the English language and with as many meanings as they have it's a wonder we don't misunderstand one another more often.

Now Marchello, when I use an expression like:

• My money is on the Ancient of Days

and you snatch any connotation of "money" and run with it, then you're naturally going to be confused. I don't know if you're deliberately "taking advantage" (or pimping out) the vagaries of language or not yet allow me to clarify my meaning.

• money: the assets, property, and resources owned by someone or something; wealth.

There was no challenge issued. No wager of lucre on the table, just a simple statement of where my speculation is. So back to the end of this middle; the reason I started this thread. My hope was to take preoccupied's idea and put it in a less toxic thread and have him come here and claim it. Then turn the patent rights over to him (with the exception to my claim on gravity) and fade away, going back to thinking about one of the most interesting things I've ever seen in my life. This evening I down loaded another simulator and I want to start playing around with the mechanics. I certainly hope that helps with any confusion you might have however I really need to get to work.

I'll make a final point about besting my betters in chess and how I know they were. They could play blindfolded. My strength was knowing how to control the center. Their weakness was not understanding the difference between the value of material and position; when to walk away from a gambit. In a Paul Morphy sort of way I Dr. Lasker-ed them. All the while singing, "Emanuel!" I took a twisted sort of delight pissing them off. They knew they were better than me too. I just was very hard to beat. I haven't played in years but I'm thinking about going back to it.

[WaltzCee]

[ME]

Sorry Walter, you fail to make any sense to me.

I think you Should have started at the beginning.
My "Fair and square?" remark:
It would be nice to literally credit "preoccupied" from the beginning; (reason: respect)
It would be nice not to "take" preoccupied's idea for whichever reason or excuse; (reason: don't steal or "borrow")
You can't patent gravity; (reason: it's not patentable)
In all language "vagaries": "square" was obvious, "fair" probably not.

Nothing one way or the other about my client.

But my dear Walter, it is all about your supposed Client. Not my idea, you are the one who mentions. Continuously.

You may pick any other arbitrary expression as example, but in the context of all "vagaries" of your own language: You simply don't put your own Client on sale.
And for all the words in the English curriculum, why "money" again? Why? It is precisely Not those things you mention it is, but a handy virtual substitute. If used uncarefully it leads to the exact opposite result and meaning of those words "ownership" and "resource".

If you hadn't mentioned your "Client" to paint your background all of this would indeed just be a "matter of speak"; It's about your own "deliberate" choice of words being put together- Thereby creating a major contradiction in the process of choosing the precise things already flagged by your Client. Flags perhaps worth considering.

It is not my Client, it's you who claims it's yours. As with all claims, also as like with supposed claims of perpetual devices for example: Who claims, who proofs and defends..

By the nature of things known by anyone, consciously or subconsciously, and indifferent of how it may be called: When you externalize your Client a bit off, then your Client will be equally off internally. Ye can't go left and right at the same time.
I hope I conveyed my "confusion" a bit better now. It was never my intention to put you in some corner, but I don't know about yours. It would just be nice to get some slight hint of the direction you're going.



Perhaps we could restart the whole thing:

Preoccupied's Wheel design

I shared Bessler's Wheel.
Now I will explain it to you again in words that you can understand.

The square that I drew drops levers at the corners and this evenly distributes four weights downward through the entire swing.
this lifts weights that will rotate the square.
The weights that will be lifted on one side will be the bottom two levers in the corner of the square which will sit near the center of the square sitting together.
The top two levers in the corner will sit opposite of each other near the center of the square and this will be balanced during the rotation of the square.
The famous peacocks tail discussed here that Bessler gave as clue as to his wheel is how you can distribute the weight being lifted that will rotate the square.
If you lift weights facing on a lever downward all of the way up to a vertical position facing upwards then you can using a faster gear ratio and place and store already lifted weights vertically at the top while more weights are being lifted at the bottom.
This can be done by lifting one weight every 90 degrees and always leaving one weight 90's to one side sticking out. If you have an 8:2 gear ratio then you can lift 3 weights up to the vertical position and the lifted weights would always be one weight short of a full load.
If the square is balanced with the weights its lifting there would be a 1:2 gear ratio where the weights being lifted have to be lifted twice as far as the four levers in the corner of the square are falling.

This may not be used to produce work for people to use because it will be used to hurt gravity and gravity is used to keep our rotation around the sun.
The sun's heat is more valuable than free electricity and our orbit around the sun could be sustaining all life on Earth which means that if we change the orbit of the planet that we are on we will kill all life on Earth.

source: http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 967#148967

[preoccupied]

You're being a clown, WaltzCee. I've boasted too grandly about what I shared, so you're making fun of me. I have had brain damage. I literally invented when I was a small child what I've shared, among other useful things that I invented then. You are making fun of the real Bessler's wheel, something your brain would never be able to invent on its own apparently because you are inferior to me. The only reason that I shared the real Bessler's wheel while I have purposely intended for it not to be used is because I think it could damage the planet, is that I involuntarily share about things because I have my brain injury. Use your head. If you steal Earth's gravity you can damage the Earth's rotation. It doesn't matter who invents it, although it is relevant that I'm the inventor.

You're making fun of me for being so outspoken in this thread by James Lingard.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... &start=135

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... &start=150

[AB Hammer]

preoccupied

I find this string by WaltzCee, kind of a crude way that forces you out of Lindgaard's string.

But now it is out and more people will be able to see it, and give you different views.

[WaltzCee]

1. You're being a clown, WaltzCee.
   I'm guilty
2. I've boasted too grandly about what I shared,
   You're guilty
3. so you're making fun of me.
   This doesn't follow and no I'm not
4. I have bad brain damage.
   Any thing you say can and will be used against you
5. I literally invented when I was a small child what I've shared , among other useful things that I invented then.
   I'll have to take your word on that
6. You are making fun of the real Bessler's wheel,
   Humanly impossible to know if this was his wheel or not
7. something your brain would never be able to invent on its own apparently
   Time will tell
8. because you are inferior to me.
   You've already confessed to having brain damage
9. The only reason that I shared the real Bessler's wheel while I have purposely intended for it not to be used is because I think it could damage the planet, is that I involuntarily share about things because I have my brain injury.
   We know
10. Use your head.
    It's my haid, I'll do what I want with it
11. If you steal Earth's gravity you can damage the Earth's rotation.
    Sounds like it's going to be a fun ride
12. It doesn't matter who invents it, although it is relevant that I'm the inventor.
    So if the earth careens into the sun, we'll know who to blame
13. You're making fun of me for being so outspoken in this thread by James Lingard.
    ibid

Now that we've got that out of the way, preoccupied, welcome to my thread. Make yourself at home. Let the discussion begin. If you'll excuse me I have work to do.

[preoccupied]

The square with the weights swinging out of the corner at right angles is similar to Bessler's clues and is the only method to create this perpetual motion with swinging weights. It simply is if Bessler had a working gravity wheel the same exact design. This might even be the design that Jim_Mich is keeping a secret, however I would vehemently disagree with Jim_Mich who believes that it would be a motion wheel then. It is a gravity wheel. The acceleration of gravity downward is merely being transferred through gears. It only appears to be a motion wheel then because gravity increases gradually during a longer fall. When you spend gravity by falling harder in a longer fall you are eating energy from the heat the planet is committing to having gravity. For example if the Earth were hit with asteroids repeatedly for a long period of time it would spend the Earths gravity quickly and the Earth would change its orbit but not due to the impacts but the gravity that is spent pulling the asteroids in. Using this perpetual motion machine for making electricity or other work would be equivalent to hitting the Earth repeatedly with asteroids. We would likely not run into the sun, that would require an extremely cold planet I think, but we might offset our orbit and run into something we are not supposed to. I think that the sun is being fed fuel but that it's not easily seen because it's transparent. We could pull this fuel out of collision with the sun and the sun could stop burning. This might happen with even a slight change in our gravity behavior because other planets might also change due to our behavior like Jupiter and a big domino effect could black out the sun. Then all plant life would die and it would be hard to see and the freeze might remove gravity and then we would be floating too like a non solar system that is completely dark and cold.