WM2D Downloads Section

[Wubbly]

It that supposed to run smoothly, or do I have something set wrong in the program?

[Wubbly]

Does anyone know if you can change the colors or fill patterns of bodies in WM2D using WM Basic script code?

Specifically, for a body, can you change the appearance -> pattern -> no

I can't find anything in the documentation or in the help files that describes how to do this.

I'm guessing you can't do it in WM Basic.

[AldenPark]

I didn’t vote. I don’t have the software to use the mechs. Is an eventual goal of using them to try to find actual solutions for the Bessler wheel problem? I will assume that that is often a goal, with simulations to help the exploratory searching. Correct guidance according to the simulations, would depend upon the accuracy of the simulation with respect to modeling of reality.

Simulate Bessler Principle? Can the Bessler principle be simulated using the software that uses the mechs? I think it is a universal property. I gave an example calculation of the Bessler principle in my book, Gravity-Wheel Unveiled, (GWU). See Section 3.2 “Example Bessler Principle Calculation� pp. 72-74 (associated with Fig. 28), within Chapter 3 “BESSLER’S PRINCIPLE�. I think that implementing the Bessler principle requires simulations which depend upon the rotational motion that is involved. If the Bessler principle is not somehow included in the simulation, then there would not be sources of rotational kinetic energy/power to overcome the actual energy/power drains/losses due to friction.

Are mechanical friction and air friction included in the simulations?

Simulate Orffyrean Roller Bearing? For purposes of modelling to greatly reduce mechanical friction for rotating about horizontal axes, can the software simulate an Orffyrean roller bearing with a range of cylindrical surfaces (having a multitude of fine surface lobes and fine surface lobe-holes) with each largest surface lobe continually maintaining contact with its neighboring roller/cylinder surface lobe-hole while rotating through a relative angle of 25 degrees?

Attempting Solutions within Wheels. It appears that people are often looking for partial solutions by arranging all sorts of things within wheels, as if that is what is needed to form a Bessler wheel.

Location of Bessler’s Invention. On a particular occasion within Apologia Bessler provided direct information about the location of his invention. The information can help us as we try to replicate his invention. As background, we know that the eminent Karl saw within the Kassel wheel prior to Apologia being written. Karl gave Orffyreus 4000 thalers (see p. 39 of Perpetual Motion: An Ancient Mystery Solved? 1997 John Collins ie. PM97) and swore an oath not to reveal the interior of the wheel until Orffyreus sold his wheel. Now let us remember Bessler’s later important words just following his little book, of section XLVI. In section XLVII (p. 296 English translation by John Collins of p. 105 German) Bessler wrote in Apologia Poetica for his first question and answer ‘ “Has it ever come about that a person of eminence has seen the interior of my invention?� To this I answer - no. ’ We know that the eminent Karl saw the interior of the wheel. Surely we should then know that Bessler’s actual invention was not to be found in the interior of the ruse wheel. Then where else could it be? There can only be one reasonable possibility and that is in the interior of the difficult-to-construct wonder bearing(s) that Karl never saw within, because their ends were closed off to help keep them clean and to prohibit viewing of their interior. Bessler explained how he built his bearings, though he used coded language in his little book (which I decode in GWU or BLBD). See the coded words in section XLVI of Apologia or see PM97 Appendix A pp. 225-227. Then at the end of Apologia if people still haven’t figured it out yet, he asked them the words of Jesus in Matthew 15:16 “Are ye also yet without understanding?� whereupon he provided his symbolic bearing figure. Don’t we get it? I figure that the figure contains 11 bearing specifications. See Table B.4 “Bearing specifications from Bessler’s final figure.� of my book GWU p. 535 within APPENDIX B ORFFYREUS’S LITTLE BOOK, which book you may download its 18 Mar 2019 .pdf file for free. Or see Table 4 “Bearing specifications from Bessler’s final figure.� of my book Bessler’s Little Book Decoded p. 80, which book you may also download its 18 Mar 2019 .pdf file for free.

Where Solution Resides. It is almost as if Bessler is telling us over and over again in Apologia where the solution resides, if we only have ears to hear his words. Wasn’t it enough that he always focused attention away from his bearings (to protect them), taking extraordinary steps, such as destroying wheels in outrageous fashion or writing poetry on a door? The poetry didn’t say one word about the bearings (PM97 pp. 118-119), even though it was apparently the inspection by ‘sGravesande of the bearings (see pp. 162 and 170 of PM97) without Bessler being present that upset Bessler so much that he destroyed the Kassel wheel and wrote the poem. Can we “see� the writing on the door with respect to actual intent (or rather what was specifically not written on the door)?

Poor Destruction Rationale. John Collins doubted (p. 119 of PM97) Bessler’s stated rationale (pp. 118-119 of PM97) for Bessler’s destroying the Kassel wheel. I agree with Collins that it was not rational. I think that it only begins to make sense, when one considers the unstated reasons of protecting the bearings from further examination. Karl had not protected the bearings from being examined. Karl had only promised not to reveal the interior of the wheel. Karl had not made any promise about protecting the bearings, which was/were the real invention(s). To protect the bearings, Bessler couldn’t tell Karl that greater protection should be given to the bearings than to the wheel. Telling that to Karl would destroy any portion of Bessler’s bearing protection plan that remained. It was time to destroy the Kassel wheel, since the bearings were now no longer being protected even indirectly through the protection of the wheel.

Construct Ruse Wheels? Do we want to construct/simulate ruse wheels or do we want to solve the tough real problem, that Bessler abundantly provided answers for in Apologia and even gave symbolic design specs for?

Wonder Roller Bearing. We don’t have anything close to the Orffyrean roller bearing that rolls without slipping, maintaining each largest surface lobe contact for 25 degrees of relative rotation while always rolling in its corresponding lobe-hole until it lifts off. The lobe and lobe-hole surface patterns were perfectly replicated throughout the roller bearings. These are essentially unheard-of specifications or wonder specifications (that can’t be machined, that can only be grown asymmetrically, under special conditions and using special materials). Close to zero degrees of continued contact for a point or a “lobe� on a normal cylinder is the usual case today. A largest lobe has a contact angle of 25 degrees, which would allow massive loads to be carried/rotated with very little friction. His wonder bearings had amazing mechanical support while being extremely low friction. It was a totally different class or regime of mechanical bearing.

Bearings Repaired While Used. Bessler was again telling the truth in Apologia in section XLVII (pp. 297-298 English translation by John Collins of p. 108 German) when Bessler wrote in Apologia Poetica for his tenth question and answer regarding repairing. He answered, “… if built properly, should remain serviceable for many years. But, if something does go amiss, … it could be put right within the hour. … the machine can continue to operate while being repaired!� Bessler was quite correct in his truly amazing statement. He really was telling the truth. The bearings could be repaired within the hour but safety-wise he, without his understanding the full consequences, left out something extremely important. If you were to spray/inject into an operating Orffyrean roller bearing (needing some repair) a slight amount of the formation mixture (composed of tiny gunpowder balls, very finely ground ferromagnetic metal “balls�, and mercury), then because of the repair you would be releasing vapor with mercury into the surrounding air, possibly causing many exposed people to begin to fall victim to the Mad Hatter’s disease. Bessler was apparently a victim of the Mad Hatter’s disease because he was the person who was most exposed to the vapor with mercury, while he grew his roller bearing surfaces (so that he could better keep the secret of constructing his special bearings). You could with proper technique rapidly repair the bearing to a new state, but you should almost never do that in practice unless you already have mercury vapor in the surrounding air and people are never exposed to that vapor containing mercury. Bessler’s bearings would last for a long time as long as you kept them clean, kept them free of lubrication, and kept abrasive dirt out of them. If with time or slight abrasives, the pure rolling without slipping interfaces, between the lobes and their corresponding lobe-holes, began to wear down, then the formation mixture in the working bearing could restore the lobes and lobe-holes to their pristine pure-rolling-without-slipping condition. If one waited too long for such simple repairs to be done, say by waiting until the bearings completely failed, then it would be too late for such simple repairs using formation mixture on a marginally working roller bearing. There might be some tricks of inserting end spacers between collided intermediate rollers and slowly re-growing the bearing surfaces, using formation mixture, but such procedures would not be as simple as repairing the bearings before there is a full failure.

Repaired Bearings Might Be Better than Originals. There is a possibility that, with special care, repairing the Orffyrean roller bearings can cause the repaired bearings to be better than the original bearings. During the original construction/growth of the Orffyrean roller bearings, there were inserted pieces of metal constraints that also prevented the intermediate cylinders from getting too close to each other that also prevented the lobe and lobe-hole patterns from growing too close to the edges of the bearings. Upon being repaired, the constraining pieces of metal were no longer there, since the existing interior lobes and lobe-holes now automatically prevented the intermediate cylinders from getting too close to each other. During repairs of the Orffyrean roller bearings, new patterns of lobes and lobe-holes could begin to extend outward into the edges of the bearings, which previously were barren of lobe and lobe-hole patterns because of the prior metal separation external constraints. The repairs are done until there is a slight interference of some lobes with others. There is a stop of the lobe and lobe-hole growing, whereupon the offending lobes are lopped off by use of the bearings. That is the same stopping condition as with the original growth of the Orffyrean roller bearings. Some slight water spray may help foreign particles to be cleaned out of the bearings so that they work best.

Power Produced within Wheel. Sure (according to the automatically-present Bessler principle) the internally-rotating nuclei/matter within the Bessler wheel itself, by their internal rotations allowed two-part gravitons to produce more internal rotational kinetic energy, but so as not to have that produced rotational kinetic energy destroyed by friction, the necessary real invention was Bessler’s wonderful Orffyrean-roller-bearing. AEP – 25 Apr 2019

[Art]

Hi Alden ! :)

Excellent post ! .

Up until now you have been just a name that I have heard others mention over the years but I never had the opportunity to see or understand your take on Bessler .

Much of that is just one of my problems because I don't actively chase other's Bessler work because of the fact that I feel there has always been more than enough of my own that I havn't yet got around to .

I guess my attitude is that no matter what somebody else says they believe about how Besslers wheel worked , I ignore until I have tried to build the idea myself .

Thats not to say I'm not interested in others ideas , just that I find it very difficult to find others with " New " ideas I havn't actually done some work on .

Your above post I'm glad to say qualifies in my eyes though as being an original idea that I have only ever considered in general terms ie the importance of friction as being the key component and what we havn't considered about it.

Your idea is very well presented and supported IMO , and I don't see any major objections to what you have stated about it .

However I don't at this stage think that it is the total answer but I think you make some very good points .

Over the next 9 days I'm "going bush" , the only mental stimulation I expect to get will be from a small , old , very good book on "Matter" with an introduction by C.P.Snow where in he says , " the more the scientists analyse the situation " (in regards to how we make the atom work for man) , "the less obvious the answers become" .

That book and your ideas from above I think should be sufficient stimulation ! : )

Have you done any physical experiments on your ideas ?

I think I can think of one that might add some supporting information (or the opposite depending on the results).

I'm looking forward to catching up on the discussion when I get back .

[AldenPark]

Have you done any physical experiments on your ideas ?

I’ve tried building a Bessler clock but I couldn’t get friction low enough. I could try again, but with the Yildiz patent, a more important point (of continual practical power production) has been demonstrated. I probably don’t need to try to build a working Bessler clock unless I am just interested in doing so.

I think that there is a great amount of evidence for the Bessler principle. I have made many observations of many phenomena and many practical situations.

See my Page 2 post of Wed 17 Apr, 2019 9:54 am Post subject: re: Gravity
Under Some Evidences of Bessler Principle, I listed 18+19=37 different subjects providing evidences for the Bessler principle! The last listed one (the magnetic motor by Muammer Yildiz) is an example of a patented device with links I provided to the Internet. It is a perpetual motion device that continually produces power by repeated extraction of rotational kinetic energy from the two pull-downs of gravity. See what I wrote about it there on the topic “Gravity� and in what I wrote about it in my book, GWU, on pp. 429-430. I think that the solutions to either of the two little books (which I decoded) would be much more cost effective for producing power in the long run than the motor by Yildiz.

This World Needs The Solutions from The Two Little Books. I have decoded two little books in my overarching book, GWU, which (latest 18 March 2019 version) you can download for free, as well as my two other books, within which I believe that I decoded the little books of Bessler and Leedskalnin. I tend to be more theoretical but I think that the theoretical and practical-observed evidences are overwhelmingly in support of the Bessler principle. Since I think that I have decoded both those little books I think I have much insight into those devices.

Orffyrean Roller Bearing. Bessler’s device (Orffyrean roller bearing) is difficult and even dangerous to build, due to the vapor containing mercury, released during the production/repair of the bearings. Mass safe production of his bearings would require specialized robots. People could become extremely rich, if they succeed in that tough route. The answer to Bessler’s eighth question in Poetica Apologia In section XLVII (p. 297 English translation by John Collins of p. 107 German) was that craftsmen could build a machine in four weeks which would take him half a year to build. I would think that the bearings alone would take less time. The use of robots and factory assembly techniques could greatly speed up the production of the bearings. To optimize the production of power the rotating mass should be large but the radius should be small so as to reduce air friction. The Gera wheel rotated the most rapidly and had the smallest radius.

Such considerations (large angular speed, large mass, and small radius) were implicit in Leedskalnin’s approach where he reduced friction in other ways. He exploited large angular speeds, where the effect of the Bessler principle was greater, as long as it was not overdone.

Sweet Sixteen Family of Cylinders. Leedskalnin’s approach is difficult but doable. It requires following particular rules, which I tried to interpret correctly, when I decoded his little book. The major rule is don’t rotate the cylinders too rapidly, since that would cause the nuclear-ground-states to rotate much too rapidly, which would permanently damage the rotational connection between the nuclei and the surrounding lattice. He provided heuristics to balance slowly approaching a large enough angular speed, while retaining lattice “sweetness�. Leedskalnin’s approach requires massive cylinders, extremely-low-friction magnetically-repulsive sprocket wheels to connect the cylinders, and ordinary truck roller bearings. The fastest-rotating daughter cylinder has the least surface air friction because of its small radius (and size). I won’t be able to try Leedskalnin’s approach (Sweet Sixteen family of cylinders) in the near future, but I was hoping that others might consider his approach. Rotationally reinforced concrete might be used for the massive rotationally-new cylinders.

I assume that “IMO� means indefinitely moving object. AEP – 1 May 2019

[Art]

Hi Alden ,

I'm back after my almost "distractionless " break where contrary to what I expected it wasn't completely so, as far as the thinking I had planned to devote to my good little "Matter" book and your hypothesis ! : )

I say almost because on the first day of the trip I picked up another small book which immediately comandeered most of the initial "stimulation free time" I had planned .

The book was a summary of Leibniz's life and Ideas by Paul Strathern and serendipitously answered a number of questions I had been wondering about , about the man and his relationship and attitudes, which underpinned his thinking .

Although we don't know the full details , Leibniz had contact with Gravesand , dispute with Newton , and contact with Peter the Great ,among the many notables of the day .

Although its not mentioned in the book I would be very surprised if Bessler and Leibniz were not familiar with each other . They were born and lived in the same area of Germany within a "stones throw" of each other, and I think possibly Peter the Great's interest in Besslers wheel was brokered through Leibniz.

The question I had wondered most about before reading the book , was how come Leibniz's ideas (which were extraordinarily advanced and included concepts about relativity , computers , mathematics - calculus and binary , momentum , etc ) simply faded away after his death while Newtons ideas (about matter and gravity etc ) ended up being the basis of modern Science and engineering.

My conclusion is that the main reason is that Newton methodically documented the ideas with worked examples (in Principia ) which were not open to alternate interpretations and could be followed with hard data from real experiments while Leibniz spent his effort in trying to influence people of power with his philosophies while not even publishing most of his work.

Bertrand Russell according to the book has been one of the few people to read all of Leibniz's notes (contained in a trunk which Liebniz continuously added to through his life ) . Russell's conclusions was that Leibniz had produced two philosophies , -

Quote- "The first was a simple philosophy for public consumption : a shallow optimistic metaphysics intended to delight princesses. His other , less optimistic ideas he consigned to his trunk .
These were part of a more complex , logical, and profound system which could only be understood with difficulty by minds of the caliber of Leibniz himself (and Russel, of course)."

I suppose if Leibniz had had access to the internet and had posted to it , he would have had a much better chance of finding minds of the right caliber for his theories .

Especially if he posted on Bessler Wheel . com . ! : )

Glad to see you have opened up the thread "Where was Bessler's invention located" .

I shall go there and catch up on the discussion and give Silvertiger back his WMD Survey thread .

Cheers .

[AldenPark]

Have you done any physical experiments on your ideas ?

I also tried to build a rotational-air-bearing. My son asked me on the weekend of 4 May 2019 what a particular device was in my garage, which I had forgotten. Long ago, I tried to build a very-low-rotational-friction air-bearing that might allow the Bessler principle to be manifest. Air was supplied to a PVC pipe tube with some tiny holes in the top (and flared at their top) that would hopefully lift off from the tube a slightly larger surrounding tiny PVC ring so that the ring might rotate with very low friction about a horizontal axis. If there had been an air delivery bias, then I would need to make sure that the Bessler principle was manifest for rotations in both directions, to be a reasonably valid confirmation. I used my electric air pump as a source of air pressure. It was a failed experiment only because I couldn’t obtain a great enough air pressure into the tube to lift the tiny ring up off from resting on the inner PVC tube. There remained rubbing friction between the tube and the ring, so it failed to test out the Bessler principle. But again with the Yildiz patent, a more important point (of continual practical power production) has been demonstrated. It makes my failed experiment unnecessary. I don’t need to try to obtain a larger air-pressure source, unless I want to.

Collins’ book Perpetual Motion: An Ancient Mystery Solved? 1997 John Collins (PM97) mentioned connections between Bessler and both Peter the Great and Leibniz. Chapter eight is “Peter the Great, Czar of Russia� pp. 125-146. According to the index, Peter the Great is mentioned at least on pages 16, 50, 125. According to the index, Gottfried Leibniz is mentioned at least on pages 49, 50, 53, 55, 56, 58, 64, 65, 69, 84, 90, 104, 118, 126, and 158. Page 50 mentioned that Leibniz examined Bessler’s wheel on two times (in addition to writing many letters of inquiry).

Yes, I mentioned some things on the new topic of “Where was Bessler’s invention located?� I also mentioned some things on a prior topic of “Gravity�. AEP – 8 May 2019