The puzzle has been solved

[ovyyus]

I agree with ST. However... good never beats dumbluck :D

[Art]

OK , thats a good idea , Lets back up a bit .

"Wie überwucht so plötzlich steigt. &c."

Googles rendition I don't think is 100% correct , - but close enough for this discussion .

“How the overweight rises so suddenly�. Google translation

Ovyyus asks - "Can a weight rise without being lifted?"

With the use of the word "lifted " in that question the meaning in the phrase ""Wie überwucht so plötzlich steigt. &c."
has changed from an "overweight " rising to a situation where it has "rised" (if I may slaughter the english language a bit more) or has been lifted .

Bessler used the word "steigt" which can only be translated in the continuous "action happening" meaning of the word "steig" which usually
translates as "climb" but with the t means - rises , increases , increasing , on the rise , etc

Georg's example of a cylinder rolling on a ramp captures the meaning of the sentence before being altered by the word lifted very nicely.
ie A cylinder (falling and) rising on the surface of a ramp .

Georg specifically speaks about the force of contact between the surface and the cylinder and states it as F=a*M .
ie the force is acceleration times mass .

Perfectly correct .

So Georg has explained how a cylinder can be rising differently where there is a trade off between force and distance travelled on a ramp .

As a non native English speaker Georg has not fallen into the absurdity of the expression like ST has :)

ST tells Georg : "Lift and Raise mean EXACTLY the same thing "

(Made me wonder if people could be Uplifted by the Uprising in Syria or Uprised by the Uplifting )

ST also informs Georg that "--the forces are exactly the same ! " ie "F =mg(Cos0) "

Which is not correct because that formula does not allow for the time factor required to take into account the KE of the cylinder mass
at the different positions on the ramp .

The time factor used in calculating the force of gravity in the g term is not sufficient in this instance when calculating the overall force
because it is independant of the speed of the mass on the ramp.

Georg is right , the force on the cylinder is different while rising on the ramp faster or slower.

There are other statements made as a result of misunderstandings of what Georg is trying to explain but which are stated as fact incorrectly , -- but enough already !

Statements like "....Do you understand why your answer does not matter .." and " Your answer is meaningless " unfortunately are easily generalised but still insulting no matter what the language or technical misunderstandings are .

They can also bounce very easily .

ST Do you understand why your answer does not matter ?

Could it be that your answer is meaningless ! :)

[ovyyus]

Ovyyus asks - "Can a weight rise without being lifted?"

With the use of the word "lifted " in that question the meaning in the phrase ""Wie überwucht so plötzlich steigt. &c."
has changed from an "overweight " rising to a situation where it has "rised" (if I may slaughter the english language a bit more) or has been lifted .

Can a rising weight not be lifted?

In Georg's example the weight is lifted up the ramp by it's own momentum.

[Art]

"Can a rising weight not be lifted? "

---

Yes I don't see why not .

But you don't say a rising Sun was lifted by anything .

By using the term "lifted " changes the meaning of the "uberwucht" rising or increasing , to a specific meaning of change of height which I'm not sure is intended in that sentence .

That T on the end of steig I think is quite critical to the meaning .

For example --' The restriction is rising ' or 'The restriction is increasing ' is not the same as 'The restriction is lifted ' .

[ovyyus]

Yes I don't see why not .

Can you give an example? Your rising Sun example is out of context.

For example --' The restriction is rising ' or 'The restriction is increasing ' is not the same as 'The restriction is lifted ' .

I'm not trying to change Bessler's words. AFAIK, the underlying cause of a weight rising or increasing in height is application of a lifting force of some kind. I'd like to know about exceptions.

[unstable]

Good point Art !
I agree with you. Without blaming anyone, some translated words are likely to not match what Bessler meant. It is not easy to correctly interpret his texts.

[John Collins]

The meanings of many modern English words have subtly changed since the 18th C. The same is also true of the German language. So trying to extract the exact meaning of Bessler’s writing is difficult, to say the least.

A brief examination of this tendency to diverge from its original meaning reveals that some modern words can even change to a word of opposite meaning to its 18th C original.

I’m not saying stop trying to find out what Bessler meant, just be aware that the meaning might have altered to something slightly different.

JC

[Silvertiger]

Art...the tradeoff is not force for distance. To state otherwise is to say that gravity is not conservative. It is for this reason that his answer is meaningless in physics. Rising Sun is a different context for the term "rise." The context in question is view versus action. In physics, to lift something or to raise something mean the same exact thing and are interchangeable terms. Do you really think that I am wrong about the physics or are you just trying to defend? The question itself was rhetorical to begin with Art. So how could I also have an answer that is meaningless if I did not answer it? Think about it.

And I will restate that only the vector components are different...it is the SUM of forces that is actually equivocated. Now, in my opinion, nothing in classical mechanics is subject to different interpretations just because someone doesn't like the truth. However, it does have different contexts and meanings based on how formulae are derived.

You think I am poking insults. Would it be an insult to tell someone they have spinach in their teeth? You're an intelligent person Art but you're either over-thinking this or you're just doing it because you're irritated. Of course, based on past conversations I think you love a good debate as well. :)

[Art]

JC -- "A brief examination of this tendency to diverge from its original meaning reveals that some modern words can even change to a word of opposite meaning to its 18th C original. "

---

That is a sick comment ! .

- But Wait , theres more . I'm using the the term "sick" in the context of how local school kids in my area currently use the term .

If something is "sick" that is really Good ! .I hadn't realised there were so many 'sick' celebrities around . It's hard to understand what prompts a whole generation it appears to just decide to do an 'about face " on meanings like that .

Makes one wonder how you can be sure of what anybody means in these days of twitterdum . Quite often it seems to come down to how many different ways they repeat it before you become confident that you "get it" .

But definitely , that is a relevant and very sick comment ! : )

++++++++++++

Unstable --- "I agree with you."

---

Your sick too ! : )

++++++++++++

Ovyyus ---"the underlying cause of a weight rising or increasing in height is application of a lifting force of some kind"

---

Thats my whole point . Thats confirmation bias ! . (That's sick , well maybe it is , - I dunno :) )

That sentence in German "Wie überwucht so plötzlich steigt. &c." is saying something like

"why this "uberwucht" so abruptly increases" .
or
"why this "uberwucht" so abruptly rises"

Our confirmation bias interprets this as a weight rising . Possibly right but only one of the possible interpretations .

By asking the question about "lift" (and lift only has a common meaning in this forum imo of "lift against gravity" "or "Lift in height over groundlevel " ) the original meaning that you can take from the sentence is subtly skewed from the possible meaning it had without the added word .

Both Georg (I think) and Bessler (and me and maybe others ) are seemingly focused on rotating wheels , so the "context" can be quite different.

So as the defence lawyer I have to complain to the Judge that your question , "is a leading question" : )

++++++++++++

ST --"So how could I also have an answer that is meaningless..."

---

I don't know ! : ) But I think the quote has had the same effect on you as it had on me , and I'm not even Georg.

The thing is everything we say in our posts concerning our rote knowledge may be correct in their specific context ("all other things being equal" :)) .

But if they are not correctly applied to the correct problem then this "knowledge" takes us off in the wrong direction .

Your quote -"Now, in my opinion, nothing in classical mechanics is subject to different interpretations just because someone doesn't like the truth. "

If you and I both decided to climb a tree and pick the fruit , and the interpretation of the fruit we want to pick is different , you want oranges and I want apples , the truth of that is not in question.

Our interpretations are also probably identical for most of the actions required to pick the fruit, ie a tree is a thing with a trunk and leaves etc so a bit of high tech equipment like a ladder would be handy , and it might be wise to have a nonconductive wooden one in view of those electricity wires that are close to the tree etc ad infinitum (- practically ).

Presuming that there is fruit there to be picked , one of us however is going to miss out ! Thats physics and mathematics . Provable ! : )

Because our respective assumptions to start with are different ! Both entirely true .

But if the gardener who knows that the tree we're climbing is a pear tree then his knowledge could have an effect on both of our quests should he give us the 'inside' information.

Even very minor differences in the interpretation of any knowledge can be a "Universe" changer .The gardeners interpretation in this instance actually relates very meaningfully with both yours and mine , but its up to us to know what it is for it to be "useful" for our individual tasks .

No matter how you cut it , interpretations are "opinions" , and those opinions are always (it appears) 100% correct to the beholder . So you have to be a bit circumspect when you interpret anything and realise that unless you are coming from an IDENTICAL background (which in effect must mean that you are them) that 100% surety cannot mathematically or physically be 100% for both persons in a discussion even in a rigid discipline like mathematics. ( try discussing "infinity of Infinities " with a mathematician and watch that 100% shrink).

--
Quote ".the tradeoff is not force for distance. To state otherwise is to say that gravity is not conservative."

--- I understand what you are saying here (as much as I think anybody can understand what another person is saying ) but that's the equivalent of say the ladder in the above analogy . Your looking for Oranges , and I'm looking for Apples ! and Bessler the gardener is dead , leaving only cryptic messages .

---
Quote "You think I am poking insults. Would it be an insult to tell someone they have spinach in their teeth? You're an intelligent person Art but you're either over-thinking this or you're just doing it because you're irritated. Of course, based on past conversations I think you love a good debate as well. :)"

---

Thats a sick comment on top of a sick comment ! :)

[unstable]

Sick issue ? :-)) ... for a sick wheel

[ovyyus]

No matter how you cut it , interpretations are "opinions"...

Reducing everything to 'opinion' allows anyone to be right about anything to someone. I can see how that might appeal.

English, "the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog"

Translated into French it is, "Le rapide renard brun sauta par dessus le chien paresseux"

Then translated back into English it becomes, "The fast brown fox jumped over the lazy dog"

From this exercise the word 'quick' becomes 'fast', as a product of the interpretation process. Is quick and fast the same thing? Can they mean the opposite (something can be made or secured fast). Is it now impossible to know how the brown fox actually moved? Can a fox even jump when made fast? So many questions :7)

[Art]

"Reducing everything to 'opinion' allows anyone to be right about anything to someone."

--

But isn't that reality ?

The nicety of conventional science is that if one is trying to convince another of the truth of their opinion , it is done by enlisting viewpoints from others down through a long chain of viewpoints which eventually settle (hopefully) on a consensus of direct observation of the relevant matters ( normally referred to as "data" :) )

A good indication IMO that it all comes down to opinion is that even though "Science" has been chasing fundamental questions about reality for as long as it has been around ,there is no 100% agreement even about some of the most basic parts .

Is it a particle or is it a wave ? Is it a Black hole or a collapsed Neutron star ? . Is it Dark matter or faulty reasoning ? etc

Even "Fact" opinions seem to always have counteracting other "fact" opinions.

How do you handle the opinion by some apparently very knowledgeable people that "physical Reality" is a projection of the beholders "thoughts" . There is no way to disprove their hypothesis other than to say it is only "Opinion"

The opinion is either correct or it is not (binary thinking ?) Both stances cannot be 100% correct ! So do we say that there maybe a 50 % chance of one or the other stances being correct ?

My opinion is that the only way a question like that can be resolved is by admitting that everything we know is someone's opinion and doesn't necessarily give 100 % insurance of truth on anything .

A statistical approach is probably the more reasonable approach to evaluating the correctness of opinions . Consensus .

But even that has its drawbacks Ovyyusly because I don't think we are a consensus forum and it doesn't always give the right answers anyway IMO :)

[Georg Künstler]

Here you have an example how to change the a.

You can discuss it again with which F is changed with a.
And you can also use your vectors to split the forces in any direction.


Only let the cylinder roll against a wall.

[Silvertiger]

Left field Georg. :)

[Georg Künstler]

I will open a new thread to explain how i see the way to solve
"Die Überwucht so plötzlich steigt. "

maybe not all will agree with my way, but I assume it is the only way to solve Besslers unidirectional running wheel.

As you know I am making experiments and after that I try to find the formulars for that.

So you can complete the formulars if you are able to do so.