Kreuz?

[eccentrically1]

John has his own versions, Georg. They don't happen to agree with your versions.

I

[ME]

I just don't understand how the Pythagorean theorem (or perhaps only the specific 3-4-5 triangle) apparently could have been such a secret in these days (... for people who have had at least a tiny bit of schooling)

[WaltzCee]

I will start a new thread where I will suggest what 5 and 3 means in respect to a mechanical wheel. But first let me make a summary:

I think Bessler was taught the secret teachings of the Jesuits, the Jewish priests and the Rosicrucians. This is old traditions of Geometry, sacred numbers and codes in prior religious/anti-religious art and writings..

But what does that have to do with a PM Wheel?

I think that these numbers and figures somehow "spoke" to Bessler because both the Geometric figures and numbers would coincidentally have fitted as a rough description of his wheel's main parts and structures. This could also be why he spoke of the secret in religious terms and as a gift from God.

As an example; JC found the "hidden" number 5, but I think he is later ignoring that I also find the number 3!
Oystein, you have not been treated fairly. That's the observation of this scientist.
Now that would be cherry-picking, and thus the findings are used to support a prior belief (confirmation bias) rather than to gain new objective knowledge toward an undecided solution (no bias). But I will still and always applaud JC's discoveries and often add on his original ideas!
You are a good person.

We know from at least two witness accounts that the likely number of mechanisms or segments of the wheel/drum is 8. No other number has been mentioned, so no other number can be preferred. 8 bumps per rotation, and mention of a wheel structure divided/constructed from 8 main segments/divisions.

If then the numbers 5 should mean 5 mechanisms, then the number 3 would mean 3 mechanism at the same time! 5:3 was not only used to describe Jesus and God by secret Geometry, but it also fitted Bessler's PM secret.

5 + 3 = 8
There are eight Corners in a circle. I have "spoke".

I found that the number 5 and 3 = 8 and the number 55 and 33 = 88 is among the most used and important numbers to describe the secret. these numbers can also be found throughout Bessler's work and Masonic and RC work in general.

If so, following JC's earlier ideas about the numbers being numbers of mechanisms in his wheel, the one way wheel could have 5 descending and 3 ascending weights at all time in a one way wheel, thus; 5+3 = 8
Then the double config in a bi-directional wheel. (one each direction) 55+33 = "88"

Preponderance:

If this 5+3 means a 5/3 preponderance of weights, it would perfectly describe both the observed effect of his machines AND Bessler's chosen description of his wheel, namely; preponderance!

Hypothesis; Bessler's PM secret is based on a 5:3 preponderance, made from mechanisms resembling Cross-Staffs or Kreuz'.

The suggested 5:3 Preponderance from 8 mechanisms will be discussed in a new thread..

Best
ØR

I might say more in your new thread.

[WaltzCee]

I noticed that Scott is paying attention. This could be Harvest Time.

And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.

Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.

ETA some random thoughts:

Hostile environments are easy to spot. If you notice your team members being overly agreeable or quiet in meetings, that’s a bad sign.

[Oystein]

I just don't understand how the Pythagorean theorem (or perhaps only the specific 3-4-5 triangle) apparently could have been such a secret in these days (... for people who have had at least a tiny bit of schooling)

My initial answer is that Pythagoras had his own version of God, named "ONE". And he could be proven by "numbers". All is numbers he said. I believe this is the "God" or figure it is all about.. Also named Mona(d) meaning "One".

In "ONE"($) we trust.. think about that.. lol

RosyCross was a secret group of men. Scholars. Doctors, Philosophers etc. Their main statement was that they knew the truth about Christ and that the pope was antichrist. (How to say that, and mean it without getting killed??)

They worked to change christianity and islam, to support science facts.. They knew for example the truth about the planetary system forbidden by the church! (actually known for over 2000 years) So at one time it would for example mean; science support, "Protestant support". Or we support RC. We know the truth. enlightened etc. Another example: Euclid's Elements written several hundreds years before Christ still remains all true. While the bible..by knowing science.. don't. So by mixing the Euclid (Geometry bible) Geometry into christian art and writings you can say something to someone.. and it would be a deadly "sin" at some time/s. but they still did it.. The best way to say this is to hide the geometry into others publications. Like a printer or painter could do.. but the methods to send that second message have to stay a branch secret. joining a secret club, swearing an oath, accepted only by close friends etc. proven by faithfully climbing the ladder of degrees would do..

Newton was sure that the Bible was written and designed in that way too, to convey a secret mathematical/geometric figure, the legacy of the "pre-christ" Philosophers by secret use of numbers and gematria etc. These philosophers was for example Pythagoras and the followers: Socrates, Plato and Aristotle.. The 3 best known Philosophers of all time was followers of namely Pythagoras. ( I claim that the codes say that this was the real "Philosophers Stone". This figure was constructed from among other geometry, 3-4-5 triangles..and Ploto and Socrates most famous allegory.. The public symbol used to describe it is a pyramid with an eye and/or a square and compass.

My final answer to you is then:

So by actually hiding Pythagoras in religious writings and paintings it has a whole other meaning than just to show the formula in a math. book. Then to hint a the final still secret Philosophers Stone figure" would be even more exciting and forbidden. Then to go on and show in your own publications that you know how it was hidden and to hint at the final formula, you say you know the truth in the bible and that you favor science and that you challenge religion and the catholic church..

Let's think just for one minute that at one time in history a group of printers aligned their letters in a way to show this figure of the Rosy Cross in English "Holy Bible" itself.. Think about that.. if you knew..where, who and how.. and what the Catholic Church would do... all the Catholics read it all day..

Claim: This is the deepest secret, and most dangerous implications when you know how Pythagoras was hidden in text and art..

[Oystein]

Another connection between Evclid's "The Elements and the "Kreuz".

On the front page of Sir Henry Billingsley's first English version of Euclid's Elements, 1570 we see a Kreuz used for measuring a stars position..

Strabo was a Greek geographer born 64 BC.

It is also reported and speculated that the Kreuz predates the Cross of Christ If so it's not so hard to think of a parallell/dual message...

Best
ØR

[ME]

Many thanks for that elaborate answer.

And yeah, that "religion" is totally another thing. Compare the stone written 10 cmd's with the actions of that church and hypocrisy drips like Noah's tsunami. It is easily found in that Bible (almost literally) that one doesn't require a mediator for communicating with this One - hence it's self-fulfilling!
Yet...

The few things I know from those secret societies is that I don't see them contribute much themselves, except for marking common things as secret and hide secrets behind more secrets and rituals for the sake of secrets.
When we can discover knowledge without all that fluff then in my not so humble opinion I regard them as yet another unnecessary mediator.
So I'm sorry I'm not taking the Freemason's words for it that they protect things by mystifying other people's discoveries and for the sake of all. (despite nice pictures)

So what do we have next:
The summary for those times as I know it paints a picture that during the Renaissance (14th/15th ct) scientific curiosity really started to bloom. Calvijn and Protestantism (16 ct) broke with the Catholic church, and things eventually ramped up to the Enlightenment period with free thinkers (like Descartes, Spinoza and Kant much later).
The wind of rationalism was blowing strong. It was already growing out of Catholic's control.

Bessler may have used the 3-4-5 triangle extensively - that part is indeed interesting to find any stuff that may be hidden.
In that way I understand that the 3-4-5 triangle *can* be used as a key to some secret, but that doesn't mean that the "key" itself really is a secret too.

But is the 3-4-5 triangle really that magical?
A quick look around seems to indicate that the Pythagoras theorem was widespread enough at universities, and independently rediscovered many times over throughout history.

For example, Bhaskara (from that like-named perpetual motion wheel 12th century) tried to figure out the (much more difficult) spherical trigonometry, did he overlook the 3-4-5 triangle? - Likely not, because he has a proof of Pythagoras named after him.
But sure, maybe we recognized that much later in the last few centuries. Yet that doesn't really matter, as it shows that at least one person was much more advanced than just figuring out a triangle.

No matter if 3-4-5 it was known by the Babyloneans or the Chinese even before Pythagoras made it popular, things may be suppressed during some time period.
Yet, there are many study books printed in the 16th century showing the theorem. At least that proofs that the triangle is not like some DaVinci Codex that's stored away in some dungeon in some castle.
We have Leibniz in the same time period as Bessler's who figuring out more advanced math and geometry than the simple quadratics, while helped with books like La Géométrie from Descartes.
I find it increasingly unlikely that Fermat missed the n=2 situation either and overlooked the basic numbers, when he wrote about aⁿ+bⁿ=cⁿ and gave an enigma for other mathematicians to solve.
Euler had a go at Fermat's theorems, so that proofs it was out in the open.
We have Ms Germain who read some books in times where people were still scared of woman. Lucky she wasn't burned to death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Ge ... 7s_theorem.
So they had absolutely the ability to proof the 3-4-5 triangle exactly. And for those who couldn't, I'm less surprised when used as some rule of thumb for many who did little construction work like with timbre frame houses or otherwise used where geometry and right angles was required:

I'm also not convinced that Pythagoras himself was suppressed and hidden.
Not only in mathematics and geometry, everyone who was slightly interested in music theory and how to fill octaves was familiar with the Pythagorean tuning (Stevin, Kepler, Galileo, Mersenne ...)
The perfect fifth 3/2 and perfect fourth 4/3 are known since Pythagoras days. The perfect pitch was widely used in medieval times. And thus known to people who had to tune their instruments.
We talk about times *after* the priest Marin Mersenne (around 1650?) found exponents of primes M=2ⁿ-1. As an understatement, he knew about numbers. He also seems to have figured out how frequency related to pendulums (L'Harmonie universelle).
And so with more effort I could probably continue and find more compelling proof that it was knowable for those who had little schooling.

Despite my view and doubts, please continue with your investigation!
The more useful information is out in the open the more we can freely use it to discover new things.

By the way, that front cover of Euclids book by Sir Henry Billingsley is covered with pictures that may resemble card pictures from 15th century Italy. These cards have numbers.

Oops, sorry... a bit of a long post.

[John Collins]

Excellent post ME and I find myself in agreement with much that you said, and yet also like you I enjoy seeing what Øystein posts, it is fascinating.

Recently I posted an anagram on my blog, which appeared thus, “Karl’s next mobilizers sunk�, amazingly someone deciphered it, and the answer is “kreuz means x in storksbill". I thought I would post this as the subject matter was originally Kreuz. The answer to my puzzle is that the word Kreuz, simply means cross, and not crossbar. It refers to the Xs which make up the links in the storksbill, or scissor jack. So all the work done in trying to find a way to use the crossbar is in vain, as it means how many crosses do you need in the storksbill to obtain the correct travel distance.

JC

[gravityman52]

I am going to join the team of an even number..... I believe he said that it could just barely turn with one mechanism. He also said that they worked in pairs. 2... or 4 or 6 or 8 the more the merrier. The principle of interconnectedness surely must connect one side with the other in an out of balance condition, which is really easy when they are 180 degrees from each other

[Oystein]

Many thanks for that elaborate answer.

And yeah, that "religion" is totally another thing.

Bessler may have used the 3-4-5 triangle extensively - that part is indeed interesting to find any stuff that may be hidden.
In that way I understand that the 3-4-5 triangle *can* be used as a key to some secret, but that doesn't mean that the "key" itself really is a secret too.

But is the 3-4-5 triangle really that magical?

Hi, note that I said that the 3-4-5 triangle is in NO WAY secret (nor magical) in any way. But that the 3-4-5 triangle can be used in another formula!

Pythagoras was known to have created the 12 tone music scale and Bessler's MT 137 is a picture of it. Or actually Plato's circle of fifths. Again (IMO) MT has added a proof of how to construct it by ancient and simplest means. Also a secret method.

Or was it actually Pythagoras that discovered and put music into system? The bible say that is was Tubal and Jubal Cain, two sons of Cain that discovered music by Hammering on anvils. .something reminds me of "the MT toypage"..Again Pythagoras would be more correct than the bible.. some people have noted this before....

I take note of that MT 137 Showing Pythagoras'/Plato's musical system and the Biblical version where Jubal and Tubal Cain would hammering on anvils (proposedly discovering musical notes) are the two last pages stacked together in MT. I found that these two views (religion and science) is the nature of RC and masonry. Two opposing messages in one. Message of science in an initial Religious message.

I summarize again:

1. Pythagoras theorem - Euclid's Elements - the 3-4-5 triangle etc. has been public knowledge for over 2000 years. NO secret NO magic. Even though the Pythagoreans was driven under ground and the church has forbidden the knowledge about true astronomy etc. Galileo was imprisoned for life, and lived under the pope's supervision for saying the sun is at the center of the planetary system. Still it was calculated using Pythagoras theorem by Aristarchus over 2000 yeas ago. daVinci even said that it is certain that the earth is NOT at the center of the planetary system.. But he was not allowed to show by the catholic church, a hundred years before Galileo......or did daVinci show it..? People like Bessler would know.. Knowledge brought from Italy to Germany by Albrecht Durer. "The Leonardo of the North"! This was RC's types of secrets I found. Could that be found in MT.. yes. These things is why in my opinion MT had such a suggested value by itself. like 10% of the wheels value..

2. It's not the Pythagoras formula that is secret..but the use of them, and what they can be used prove. Some things they can be used to prove has been secret.

3. There exist another formula that was not written in Euclid's Elements, but has by Internet has become known for those who search! This formula uses Pythagoras' and Plato's Figure to prove several of these things in nature. (Formula is proven and public. Not by me). But I'm in no hurry showing it, because it's really how and where it was hidden that is fun for us today..that is a lot of work and attention to present and study properly.

4. This figure and the "un-biblical" truth about the planetary system etc. has been hidden in many great books and art in front of you, me and the church!

5. The methods used to hide them has a "protocol". This protocol is used and proven in AP and MT.

6. Example: this protocol dictates that the number 52 in MT should be 5Z. And that MT 37 should convey the ancient and simplest/most basic proven method of constructing a 37 degrees angle in the 3-4-5 triangle etc. etc.

7. JC. I don't say a cross couldn't also mean a scissor X, as I have also showed that I think Bessler, by solving the devil's number show us a minor/shorter scissor jack! It could be that I think a "Kreuz" (the instrument) is just a sliding rod. It need more parts :-) And if you study the function of a "Kreuz" (the Cross-Staff) you see that is actually does the same basic thing as a scissor jack. While extending or shortening the center, it gets wider or more narrow...

The purpose of this thread was not to prove this final figure and discoveries I made, but to show you that Bessler most likely points us to a historical instrument that he would be very well aware of. (NO secret).
I also claim that this astronomical "Kreuz" can be found in Both the "AP wheel page" and in Merseburg drawing..showing both the open and closed / inner/outer position..

Best
ØR

[ME]

I found that these two views (religion and science) is the nature of RC and masonry. Two opposing messages in one. Message of science in an initial Religious message.

It may be a vehicle.

For it is the meaning of the word "Science", I can argue that religion is actually the first steps of Science.
Science is the attempt to *dissect* and understand the World around us.
Religion in that sense can be seen as an attempt to interpret the environment in way that is most familiar and discriminates by appointing a higher consciousness to correlation and appointing mysticism where that remains unclear.
Sure, especially in line with that story about the "wind of rationalism" I can understand that some people, as a counter/coping reaction, want to hide into secrets and mysticism.

Unfortunately it leads to mystification for just the sake of it: layers upon layers, within layers of secrets with multiple interpretation ("in plain sight").
The only outcome is that it *encapsulates* knowledge which is not even close to Science that's essentially: "Do you see what I see, and will another one see it too?". In organized religion style this becomes: "You need to see what I see, and how can we make the other see it in the same way".
It's their prerogative but that leads to the sorry situation that *nothing* coming out of these groups can be marked as true, just another puzzle ("in plain sight").
Especially 'strange' when we can simply learn the same stuff without such detour where the puzzle is only a distraction.


We could just agree that Bessler may have used the common 2:3 typeset ratio (or 4:3 for two pages), used a ruler to line things up and see how that works out.

Maybe he used things that are known to Freemasons, fine. By why should he be one, especially when we learned a while back that Bessler wasn't very strict or deviated from "the code".
Talking about code, that Bessler Caesar-ciphered his name into "Orffyre" should not automatically imply he was a Roman Secret Agent... maybe he was.
When we look at Plato who supposedly meant to say that the sum of cubes equals that scary biblical 6 cubed, then via Pythagoras and a bible study he should probably be a Feemason too.

The thing that constantly evades:
Even when we can find circumstantial alignments, we seem to never get anywhere closer in deciphering Bessler's mechanism and only move deeper in the secrets of more secret stuff that's hidden somewhere else...
So I ask, what is the point?

[Fletcher]

Revealing, thought provoking, and interesting discussions as always.

I've followed Oystein's research for some time now. Taking it in as best I can and trying to keep an open non judgemental mind. Always with the intent to perhaps learn something of current and historical importance, with the possibly that a Bessler mechanism might eventually reveal itself. And generally I'm mightily impressed with Oystein's ethic and most of what he has purportedly found (personal opinion). Be that coincidence or not ME. I think not in the main. He's attempted to use the scientific principle (minimise confirmation bias) and cross-check and double check, find correlations and corroborating evidence, and other examples outside of Bessler's works to show at the very least a trend or common thread of secret/uncommon engagement. I'll have to start calling him the "Postie" coz he keeps on delivering ;)

Sorry to snip your post Oystein. It is only for expediency, as I have a few hypothetical questions for you, if you don't mind answering.

I summarize again:

1. Pythagoras theorem - Euclid's Elements - the 3-4-5 triangle etc.

... Knowledge brought from Italy to Germany by Albrecht Durer. "The Leonardo of the North"! This was RC's types of secrets I found. Could that be found in MT.. yes. These things is why in my opinion MT had such a suggested value by itself. like 10% of the wheels value.

Oystein .. if a Bessleresque one-way gravity PM wheel design were to be revealed here in the near future are you sufficiently along with your books etc so that they could stand alone for you and your family ? Would you consider that you could still get a worthwhile financial return on your investment, even without the final piece of the puzzle (the Bessler mech and wheel) ? Who knows, you may have the whole kit and caboodle and are just tying up lose ends (the perfectionist conundrum) before publishing all 100% information and research ? This bullet train has gotta pull into the station sometime ! One day someone will solve this mystery (if not you) and would you be OK with that ? It goes to a question I'm going to ask later.

3. There exist another formula that was not written in Euclid's Elements, but has by Internet has become known for those who search! This formula uses Pythagoras' and Plato's Figure to prove several of these things in nature. (Formula is proven and public. Not by me). But I'm in no hurry showing it, because it's really how and where it was hidden that is fun for us today..that is a lot of work and attention to present and study properly.

5. The methods used to hide them has a "protocol". This protocol is used and proven in AP and MT.

6. Example: this protocol dictates that the number 52 in MT should be 5Z. And that MT 37 should convey the ancient and simplest/most basic proven method of constructing a 37 degrees angle in the 3-4-5 triangle etc. etc.

Goes to the above questions. You fought hard over many years to make all these connections.

@JC. I don't say a cross couldn't also mean a scissor X, as I have also showed that I think Bessler, by solving the devil's number show us a minor/shorter scissor jack!

It could be that I think a "Kreuz" (the instrument) is just a sliding rod. It need more parts :-) And if you study the function of a "Kreuz" (the Cross-Staff) you see that is actually does the same basic thing as a scissor jack. While extending or shortening the center, it gets wider or more narrow...

The purpose of this thread was not to prove this final figure and discoveries I made, but to show you that Bessler most likely points us to a historical instrument that he would be very well aware of. (NO secret).

I also claim that this astronomical "Kreuz" can be found in Both the "AP wheel page" and in Merseburg drawing..showing both the open and closed / inner/outer position.

Best ØR

I think your deductions are right on the money Oystein.

It may be a vehicle...

The thing that constantly evades:

Even when we can find circumstantial alignments, we seem to never get anywhere closer in deciphering Bessler's mechanism and only move deeper in the secrets of more secret stuff that's hidden somewhere else...

So I ask, what is the point?

Bessler tells us in MT ... (my order)

1. MT9 .. that we need the Connectedness (Zusammen Gehängten/Together Hang) Principle
2. MT10 .. that we need the Correct Handle and Construction
3. MT38 .. that we need the Correct Application of the Stork's Bills. N.B. He makes a further overture in MT41, where he says "I can assure the reader that there is something special behind the stork's bills"
4. MT15 .. that we need the Prime Mover

Note that Bessler doesn't say about the Prime Mover that there is a correct application, or that there is anything special behind it; or a correct construction required. It only gets a mention in passing in MT15. The steers relate to the Kreuz contribution because it is the one mechanical element and application that is fundamental (and indispensable) to achieving a gravity PM wheel, imo.

So the point is to examine all avenues of inquiry, perhaps leading somewhere for someone.

On to my final questions for all ..

If a Bessleresque one-way gravity PM wheel design were to be revealed here in the near future could/would we as individuals critique it to the best of our ability ? If it looked upon examination to have real merit (on balance) and perhaps viable potential after that process (even if we perhaps can't fathom the Newtonian math) could we cooperate, chip in together, to further analyze it and perhaps improve the basic mechanics, make it more efficient ? All this in the public domain.

IOW's employ our individual skills (previously in coopetition) to take a design, collectively improve it, maximise its power output potential, to build such a model of the PM Principle ? Effectively change the direction and focus of much of Scott's discussion board and take it to a new level ? Some are gonna sulk for sure, but by and large I think most would think it a positive development after all these years.

I ask coz one day someone will solve the mystery and we have to prepare for that.

[Oystein]

I found that these two views (religion and science) is the nature of RC and masonry. Two opposing messages in one. Message of science in an initial Religious message.

It may be a vehicle.

For it is the meaning of the word "Science", I can argue that religion is actually the first steps of Science.
Science is the attempt to *dissect* and understand the World around us.
Religion in that sense can be seen as an attempt to interpret the environment in way that is most familiar and discriminates by appointing a higher consciousness to correlation and appointing mysticism where that remains unclear.
Sure, especially in line with that story about the "wind of rationalism" I can understand that some people, as a counter/coping reaction, want to hide into secrets and mysticism.

Unfortunately it leads to mystification for just the sake of it: layers upon layers, within layers of secrets with multiple interpretation ("in plain sight").
The only outcome is that it *encapsulates* knowledge which is not even close to Science that's essentially: "Do you see what I see, and will another one see it too?". In organized religion style this becomes: "You need to see what I see, and how can we make the other see it in the same way".
It's their prerogative but that leads to the sorry situation that *nothing* coming out of these groups can be marked as true, just another puzzle ("in plain sight").
Especially 'strange' when we can simply learn the same stuff without such detour where the puzzle is only a distraction.


We could just agree that Bessler may have used the common 2:3 typeset ratio (or 4:3 for two pages), used a ruler to line things up and see how that works out.

Maybe he used things that are known to Freemasons, fine. By why should he be one, especially when we learned a while back that Bessler wasn't very strict or deviated from "the code".
Talking about code, that Bessler Caesar-ciphered his name into "Orffyre" should not automatically imply he was a Roman Secret Agent... maybe he was.
When we look at Plato who supposedly meant to say that the sum of cubes equals that scary biblical 6 cubed, then via Pythagoras and a bible study he should probably be a Feemason too.

The thing that constantly evades:
Even when we can find circumstantial alignments, we seem to never get anywhere closer in deciphering Bessler's mechanism and only move deeper in the secrets of more secret stuff that's hidden somewhere else...
So I ask, what is the point?

Hello ME. In my opinion you ask many questions that really does no good. Why do I think that?

Your main concerns are:

1. Why would Bessler be a Rosicrucian? OR have the Rosicrucian knowledge? (Freemasonry was not officially founded until "17 17" so most likely he wouldn't be one by name).

2. If he did, why should we care?

3. So where does it lead us in regards to the wheel? It's like you say: If we don't have an total answer to the wheel at once, why should we care?

Answers:
1.
We just a easy could ask: Why couldn't he be a Rosicrucian?
Why is it important to know? To know, the only way is to look for signs and the practical possibility that he could have been in possession of the knowledge.

2.
- If he knew the RC secrets and/or codes. We should not mix them and think it is just a personal secret about his wheel we have found! It could actually be a RC code (early masonic code.).
- If it was a special tradition for special enlightened people of that time, Bessler would by applying such a code, lend more credit to himself among the special high ranks of Europe.
- Kassel was the "RC capitol" and RC's anonymous manifestos was originally printed in Kassel.
- Castle Weissenstein has been mentioned as a haven for Rosicrucians, as Karl and his son was was into RC. The most famous Rosicrucian is said to have died at Castle Weissenstein!
- Bessler was taught secrets by a Jesuit Priest. The Jesuits was known for infiltrating RC. It seems the Freemasonic societies was founded to keep track of such Jesuits trying to say they are members. Now they started to keep membership records, and blacklists!
- Freemasons and RC use the same symbols and figures as the Jews. Bessler was taught by a Rabi.
- Bessler spied on the notebooks on every person of higher rank than himself, and traded secrets, to know "it all". If there was a secret of that time and place, I think Bessler knew! To think anything else would be naive!
- AP has a watermark spelling "cr". So has other Rosicruian writings It is said that "CR" should be the initials of a Rosicrucian adept. Christian Rosenkreuz.

3. All knowledge must be applied by the individual, and you may use it as you like. The posts I write here is to show interesting stuff in Bessler's writings, that the forum readers actually may learn something from. I will not just draw a wheel config here. If that is not the final or perfect version it will simply not do any good for anybody. All knowledge would be dismissed!

But on the other hand if I show you that it seems like Bessler show us a special tool, it would mean that it is possible that YOU can draw that tool into a wheel and search on your own for a solution. If Bessler meant that the astronomical "Kreuz" is a part of the "Special handle construction" it would be bad if we dismissed it being drawn by Bessler, right in front of us.

Where does it lead us?
- That is up to you. You may keep receiving information and trying to make up you mind over time, or you may not. I said that I believe the "Kreuz" we found is a part of Bessler's mechanisms, creating a preponderance effect by the ratio 5:3 that I will create a new post about. I write these post as small snapshots from my earlier "journey" where I spent all my time following a code trail that I was taught and partially discovered myself. I said I will go on and show how the number 5:3 could have had another meaning directly related to Perpetual Motion as a problem, and a solution.

Best
ØR

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Oystein,
the Kreuz is indeed showing the way to one of the solutions, the bi-directional wheel.

You think in the cross like it is in the church,
I think to a cross like an X-cross.

An x-cross is representing 2 feet on the ground.
Turning an X-cross in a Wheel will cause some Impacts on the downgoing side.
The condition is, that the x-cross is smaller than the Diameter of the Wheel.
It is free to fall Forward.
Depending on the size of the X-cross in the Wheel, you can variate the Count of Impacts.
if we have 2 x-crosses, then we have a tumbling octagon, and 8 Impacts on the downgoung side.

it is a Wheel which has rims and also not rims.

[Oystein]

Revealing, thought provoking, and interesting discussions as always.

I've followed Oystein's research for some time now. Taking it in as best I can and trying to keep an open non judgemental mind. Always with the intent to perhaps learn something of current and historical importance, with the possibly that a Bessler mechanism might eventually reveal itself. And generally I'm mightily impressed with Oystein's ethic and most of what he has purportedly found (personal opinion). Be that coincidence or not ME. I think not in the main. He's attempted to use the scientific principle (minimise confirmation bias) and cross-check and double check, find correlations and corroborating evidence, and other examples outside of Bessler's works to show at the very least a trend or common thread of secret/uncommon engagement. I'll have to start calling him the "Postie" coz he keeps on delivering ;)

Sorry to snip your post Oystein. It is only for expediency, as I have a few hypothetical questions for you, if you don't mind answering.

I summarize again:

1. Pythagoras theorem - Euclid's Elements - the 3-4-5 triangle etc.

... Knowledge brought from Italy to Germany by Albrecht Durer. "The Leonardo of the North"! This was RC's types of secrets I found. Could that be found in MT.. yes. These things is why in my opinion MT had such a suggested value by itself. like 10% of the wheels value.

Oystein .. if a Bessleresque one-way gravity PM wheel design were to be revealed here in the near future are you sufficiently along with your books etc so that they could stand alone for you and your family ? Would you consider that you could still get a worthwhile financial return on your investment, even without the final piece of the puzzle (the Bessler mech and wheel) ? Who knows, you may have the whole kit and caboodle and are just tying up lose ends (the perfectionist conundrum) before publishing all 100% information and research ? This bullet train has gotta pull into the station sometime ! One day someone will solve this mystery (if not you) and would you be OK with that ? It goes to a question I'm going to ask later.

3. There exist another formula that was not written in Euclid's Elements, but has by Internet has become known for those who search! This formula uses Pythagoras' and Plato's Figure to prove several of these things in nature. (Formula is proven and public. Not by me). But I'm in no hurry showing it, because it's really how and where it was hidden that is fun for us today..that is a lot of work and attention to present and study properly.

5. The methods used to hide them has a "protocol". This protocol is used and proven in AP and MT.

6. Example: this protocol dictates that the number 52 in MT should be 5Z. And that MT 37 should convey the ancient and simplest/most basic proven method of constructing a 37 degrees angle in the 3-4-5 triangle etc. etc.

Goes to the above questions. You fought hard over many years to make all these connections.

@JC. I don't say a cross couldn't also mean a scissor X, as I have also showed that I think Bessler, by solving the devil's number show us a minor/shorter scissor jack!

It could be that I think a "Kreuz" (the instrument) is just a sliding rod. It need more parts :-) And if you study the function of a "Kreuz" (the Cross-Staff) you see that is actually does the same basic thing as a scissor jack. While extending or shortening the center, it gets wider or more narrow...

The purpose of this thread was not to prove this final figure and discoveries I made, but to show you that Bessler most likely points us to a historical instrument that he would be very well aware of. (NO secret).

I also claim that this astronomical "Kreuz" can be found in Both the "AP wheel page" and in Merseburg drawing..showing both the open and closed / inner/outer position.

Best ØR

I think your deductions are right on the money Oystein.

It may be a vehicle...

The thing that constantly evades:

Even when we can find circumstantial alignments, we seem to never get anywhere closer in deciphering Bessler's mechanism and only move deeper in the secrets of more secret stuff that's hidden somewhere else...

So I ask, what is the point?

Bessler tells us in MT ... (my order)

1. MT9 .. that we need the Connectedness (Zusammen Gehängten/Together Hang) Principle
2. MT10 .. that we need the Correct Handle and Construction
3. MT38 .. that we need the Correct Application of the Stork's Bills. N.B. He makes a further overture in MT41, where he says "I can assure the reader that there is something special behind the stork's bills"
4. MT15 .. that we need the Prime Mover

Note that Bessler doesn't say about the Prime Mover that there is a correct application, or that there is anything special behind it; or a correct construction required. It only gets a mention in passing in MT15. The steers relate to the Kreuz contribution because it is the one mechanical element and application that is fundamental (and indispensable) to achieving a gravity PM wheel, imo.

So the point is to examine all avenues of inquiry, perhaps leading somewhere for someone.

On to my final questions for all ..

If a Bessleresque one-way gravity PM wheel design were to be revealed here in the near future could/would we as individuals critique it to the best of our ability ? If it looked upon examination to have real merit (on balance) and perhaps viable potential after that process (even if we perhaps can't fathom the Newtonian math) could we cooperate, chip in together, to further analyze it and perhaps improve the basic mechanics, make it more efficient ? All this in the public domain.

IOW's employ our individual skills (previously in coopetition) to take a design, collectively improve it, maximise its power output potential, to build such a model of the PM Principle ? Effectively change the direction and focus of much of Scott's discussion board and take it to a new level ? Some are gonna sulk for sure, but by and large I think most would think it a positive development after all these years.

I ask coz one day someone will solve the mystery and we have to prepare for that.

Thank you Fletcher! Nice to hear from you again I must really say, it's a shame we live so far apart. I would like to show my real discoveries over a few beers and good conversations.

My written work, the first book would really benefit from someone building a working wheel and getting Orffyreus known. It only uses small parts of Bessler's anomalies to show how they confirm a historical code/hidden protocol in several of the most important historical artistic work we know. The rumors of an old secret in these works are indeed true. And more than one secret "club" has been working to keep this tradition alive. I believe I can prove that the first inventor of a working PM knew it too. Just a big bonus, why? Because if he kept the secret of the impossible Perpetual Motion, why could't the very possible codes in art be true? A true genius Orffyreus! If Orffyreus documented Albrecht Durer (Leonardo of the North) and Leonardo da Vinci's secret use of a Pythagorean formula and code, and this was RC's secret on which they was founded, I think it's sensational. The initial readers of the first book said that is was sensational without knowing Orffyreus at all, so yes, it would make me a busy man if someone else build a working PM wheel

I do believe I found the basic motive principle, but not only from codes, in parallell following Bessler's and witness' descriptions, my own experiments and testing of any perpetual motion design and investigating claims, and own philosophy and study of mechanical interactions and Bessler's MT. If we don't have a deep understanding of all this and understanding what we must look for, what is missing and what simply doesn't work we wont't get anywhere.

Best ØR