The ONE WORD that could give it ALL AWAY !

[cloud camper]

Hey guys- been out of the loop for awhile.

Didn't B say the mechanism was similar to a crab moving sideways?

Also there was always more weight on the down going side - "just as it should be" I believe he said.

This means to me the internal mechanism undulates in some manner but not rotate.

Just like a crab does not rotate it undulates.

This seems very compatible with the idea of a group of Scissor Blocks in coordinated motion.

Of course the ideal time to extend was on the down going side just before hitting the radial boards on the wheel and the ideal time to retract would be immediately after hitting the boards as arm speed is reduced or stopped after impact.

But the mechanism cannot be allowed to stop overall, just a single arm so retraction is possible against CF. When a weight is stopped due to impact is the ideal time to retract it as CF becomes zero.

A stopped weight in a rotating wheel is a mathematical discontinuity and interesting things happen at mathematical discontinuities!

[Leafy]

These guys could also produce sounds on the down going side.

https://youtu.be/yaS9Wg-lV7U
https://youtu.be/rbCnzsFjvQU

[cloud camper]

Hey guys- been out of the loop for awhile.

Didn't B say the mechanism was similar to a crab moving sideways?

Also there was always more weight on the down going side - "just as it should be" I believe he said.

This means to me the internal mechanism undulates in some manner but not rotate.

Just like a crab does not rotate it undulates.

This seems very compatible with the idea of a group of Scissor Blocks in coordinated motion.

Of course the ideal time to extend is on the down going side just before hitting the radial boards on the wheel and the ideal time to retract would be immediately after hitting the boards as arm speed is reduced or stopped after impact.

But the mechanism cannot be allowed to stop overall, just a single arm at a time so retraction is possible against CF. When a weight is stopped due to impact is the ideal time to retract it as CF becomes zero.

A stopped weight in a rotating wheel is a mathematical discontinuity and symmetry breaks can occur at discontinuities.

[cloud camper]

Hey guys- been out of the loop for awhile.

Didn't B say the mechanism was similar to a crab moving sideways?

Also there was always more weight on the down going side - "just as it should be" I believe he said.

This means to me the internal mechanism undulates in some manner but not rotate.

Just like a crab does not rotate it undulates.

This seems very compatible with the idea of a group of Scissor Blocks in coordinated motion.

Of course the ideal time to extend is on the down going side just before hitting the radial boards on the wheel and the ideal time to retract would be immediately after hitting the boards as arm speed is reduced or stopped after impact.

But the mechanism cannot be allowed to stop overall, just a single arm at a time so retraction is possible against CF. When a weight is stopped due to impact is the ideal time to retract it as CF becomes zero.

A stopped weight in a rotating wheel is a mathematical discontinuity and symmetry breaks can occur at discontinuities!

[WaltzCee]

Hey CC. Good to see you're still kicking.

But the mechanism cannot be allowed to stop overall, just a single arm at a time so retraction is possible against CF. When a weight is stopped due to impact is the ideal time to retract it as CF becomes zero.

This is a thought provoking way to eliminate that pesky fictitious force.
Would you trap the energy of that stop in a spring?

I'm sure Jim's smiling. :)

[cloud camper]

I dunno Walt - but it would be very helpful if the force of impact would itself cause a weight to retract - say if the weight was spring loaded on the arm such that it would flip over to a retracted position upon impact with the radial boards.

That seems like the most efficient way to retract without the need for a complicated extension/retraction mechanism.

Do the hammer toys of MT138 fit in here? Of course - and we see directly the weights that flip in and out!

Possibly when the arm flips out CF can help to extend a weight, when the arm impacts the wheel the weight stops reducing CF to zero temporarily allowing easy retraction.

Thats a possible symmetry break right there!!

[Fletcher]

Hey guys- been out of the loop for awhile.

Didn't B say the mechanism was similar to a crab moving sideways?

Also there was always more weight on the down going side - "just as it should be" I believe he said.

This means to me the internal mechanism undulates in some manner but not rotate.

Just like a crab does not rotate it undulates.

This seems very compatible with the idea of a group of Scissor Blocks in coordinated motion.

Of course the ideal time to extend is on the down going side just before hitting the radial boards on the wheel and the ideal time to retract would be immediately after hitting the boards as arm speed is reduced or stopped after impact.

But the mechanism cannot be allowed to stop overall, just a single arm at a time so retraction is possible against CF. When a weight is stopped due to impact is the ideal time to retract it as CF becomes zero.

A stopped weight in a rotating wheel is a mathematical discontinuity and symmetry breaks can occur at discontinuities!

Hey CC .. nice to see the fires are still burning.

And that you think SB's might have some relevance in the internals ;7)

Yeah .. he did say amongst his avalanche of words in his AP Poem ..

"A crab crawls from side to side. It is sound, for it is designed thus."

and elsewhere in AP ..

"Even according to the ideas my enemies express in their writings,
my Wheel is the true device, and is indeed, per se, a genuine
Perpetuum Mobile. None better will ever be found upon this
earth, for without the principle that I alone possess, there can be
no real perpetual motion. Whoever seeks another method is
deceiving himself, for my device does not need winding; it runs
according to "preponderance", and turns everything else along
with it; so long as its material shall endure, it will revolve of its
own accord. On one side it is heavy and full; on the other empty
and light, just as it should be.

If I were prosecuting this in court I'd say that a crime had been committed. A wheel did not obey the Laws.
That DNA showed there is a prime suspect known to the Law, and an unknown accomplice.
Circumstantial evidence points strongly to the main perpetrator being an ordinary gravity OOB system.
Investigation showed 'weights' had an alibi as they were not always present when a crime occurred.
And that SB's were strongly implicated by an informant, as having motive, opportunity, and means.
However as empirical evidence shows an accomplice in-fact was the trigger-man, guilty at very least of aiding
and abetting a serious crime, and colluding with the prime suspect to disguise and hide from the Force the pairs ill-gotten gains.

May the jury find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the heinous crime for which they have been charged !

;7)

[cloud camper]

Wowzers Fletch - thats really cool - sure I really like your SB concept and it allows all the weights to remain on the down going side of the wheel just like B says!!

I'm just blue sky spasm thinking here but what if we had just two weighted arms that oscillate up and down meshed at the hub with the meshing spur gears as in MT141.

The weights must be able to pass each other such that one weight is going down (the extended weight) while the other is going up (the retracted weight).

We know that with the meshing gears of MT141 that there is basically no effort required to wave the weights up and down as they are counterbalanced - more or less.

There's your crab emulation!

Then we have the spring loaded hammer toy mechanisms at the end of the arms to extend and retract the weights. The downgoing weight would extend due to CF (please God!).

If the flipping weights were orientated just as shown in MT138 the weight would effectively stop downward travel at impact while the main arm continued down for a short distance before reversing hopefully allowing just enough time for the weight to flip over to the retract position while the main arm reverses direction and starts heading back up.

And we can observe that the downgoing arm always has more leverage than the upgoing arm as the weight is extended - at least part of it's travel.

So it might be possible to extend and retract the weights automatically with no other mechanism than extension by CF and retraction by impact.

It would seem that the waving weights would have to be geared to the wheel somehow to get the wave action going. That would be a fugly complication!

How could we get rid of that requirement?

But the motive force of the wheel becomes the use of free CF to extend a weight on the downgoing side and then we retract at impact when CF becomes zero creating a symmetry break.

A symmetry break in physics occurs when background field conditions change during the middle of a conservative process.

In this case the CF field exists part of the time and does not exist at other times during the process, just like being able to turn gravity on and off.

I wonder if this could be simulated without huge problems. Probably not as most physics simulators don't handle impacts well!

[WaltzCee]

This horse assumed room temperature years ago yet I think it is proper to periodically dig it up and beat it.

. .. .. .
If I were prosecuting this in court I'd say that a crime had been committed. A wheel did not obey the Laws.
That DNA showed there is a prime suspect known to the Law, and an unknown accomplice.
Circumstantial evidence points strongly to the main perpetrator being an ordinary gravity OOB system.
Investigation showed 'weights' had an alibi as they were not always present when a crime occurred.
And that SB's were strongly implicated by an informant, as having motive, opportunity, and means.
However as empirical evidence shows an accomplice in-fact was the trigger-man, guilty at very least of aiding
and abetting a serious crime, and colluding with the prime suspect to disguise and hide from the Force the pairs ill-gotten gains.

May the jury find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the heinous crime for which they have been charged !

;7)

As counsel to an idea that most likely is going to work once I get off my lazy arse and build it, I object. Which is the more sensible course for my client, the wheel:

• to operate within the constraints of reality and work? or
  to submit to the imagined authority of demented creation deniers and not work?

The choice is obvious.

If it please the court, I move these trumpted up charges be dismissed by reason of the fact since creation isn't subject to the dictates of some self styled Obi-Wan Kenobi law, neither should things in creation be subject to its absurd notions.

Also, your Honor, I won't be able to make it for golf this week end. & are you still registered at the ABC store for 'christmas gifts'?

I had planned on getting you 2 cases of the same stuff I got you last year. Have your people call my people.

[cloud camper]

Well I was really worried about when the retracted weight on the down going arm would extend due to CF but I just realized that when the upgoing arm reverses and starts down the retracted weight would want to keep going up due to inertia somewhat and then hopefully flip over to the extended position on it's own just after the upgoing arm reverses kinda like casting a fishing lure.

That would be the ideal behavior as I was concerned it might take much too far on the downward stroke to extend.

This part of the flipping action could be simulated to see how it behaves - would the upgoing weight really flip over nicely on it's own or would it be a totally uncontrolled cluster f ?

This is where we might need a full scissor block mechanism to control extension and retraction - that would be unfortunate but of course B shows full scissor blocks in MT138!

All kinds of messy details like this to consider and debug!

[Fletcher]

This horse assumed room temperature years ago yet I think it is proper to periodically dig it up and beat it.

. .. .. .
If I were prosecuting this in court I'd say that a crime had been committed. A wheel did not obey the Laws.
That DNA showed there is a prime suspect known to the Law, and an unknown accomplice.
Circumstantial evidence points strongly to the main perpetrator being an ordinary gravity OOB system.
Investigation showed 'weights' had an alibi as they were not always present when a crime occurred.
And that SB's were strongly implicated by an informant, as having motive, opportunity, and means.
However as empirical evidence shows an accomplice in-fact was the trigger-man, guilty at very least of aiding
and abetting a serious crime, and colluding with the prime suspect to disguise and hide from the Force the pairs ill-gotten gains.

May the jury find them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the heinous crime for which they have been charged !

;7)

As counsel to an idea that most likely is going to work once I get off my lazy arse and build it, I object. Which is the more sensible course for my client, the wheel:

• to operate within the constraints of reality and work? or
  to submit to the imagined authority of demented creation deniers and not work?

The choice is obvious.

If it please the court, I move these trumped up charges be dismissed by reason of the fact since creation isn't subject to the dictates of some self styled Obi-Wan Kenobi law, neither should things in creation be subject to its absurd notions.

Also, your Honor, I won't be able to make it for golf this week end. & are you still registered at the ABC store for 'christmas gifts'?

I had planned on getting you 2 cases of the same stuff I got you last year. Have your people call my people.

Good luck, as always CC .. hope it comes to something for you.


Walt .. it is neither magical or otherworldly (just seems that way until we figure it out). It is part of, and operated in, our realm of reality, along with all other machines. If we are analytical and logical it will be cracked open.

Follow the evidence, once you determine what that evidence is, to stay in character ;7)

For me, a while back I had what I thought was a pretty sound 'general' theory for a PM Principle. Recap .. take 2 torquing mechanical OOB systems (the subsystem) and have them cancel or mitigate each other so there was little torque bias in any position turned to. Add back a driver like a continuous hanging chain to the nulled subsystem to add torque bias in one direction. I still think it was a very rational hypothesis. Unfortunately, whatever I investigated I could not find a mechanical method of combining the 2 sub systems with the required torque cancelling. That was the end of that grand theory.

But I did have a competing Plan B theory .. which I will be letting off the leash in 2022. That's the plan, all things being equal. Let's hope its not a dog lol.

So get off your self-proclaimed lazy arse and get building ;7)

[eccentrically1]

From Karl's testimony Fletcher quoted (JC's book pg. 195)

And so, notwithstanding the
fact that the inventor freely offered a longer test run, we
considered (especially as the already completed run of eight
weeks had exceeded by a factor of two that which had been
demanded by his adversaries) that this was quite unnecessary.
As far as the much-denied practical applications of the device
are concerned, they revealed themselves firstly, through the
lifting of the chest full of stones, secondly through that of the
solid wooden beams, but thirdly, and particularly,
through the fairly large Archimedes Screw – and our hopes on
this score were wonderfully exceeded. Indeed, we cannot doubt
that if the device, after suitable negotiations as to better siting
than in a small room in my castle, and with better ancillary
support and fewer associated problems than have prevailed
here, can be constructed on a larger scale, thus producing more
power, then the result will be (especially if several such
machines can be combined in tandem) a resource of great value
in such fields as horology, milling, hydraulics and mining.

It's interesting that even with this sentence included it still couldn't persuade any buyers.
Free power?! But no takers. Something ain't right. Either Karl didn't have as much influence as we think,
or some rumor that isn't in the historical record discouraged potential takers; we'll never know.

[Robinhood46]

"Something ain't right. Either Karl didn't have as much influence as we think"
We can observe the same thing today.
Many well respected scientists,in the medical field, with substantial qualifications and a track record of having contributed considerably to our current understanding, are being brushed off as "nut jobs" simply because their opinion goes against our collective belief.
In my opinion, i can't see any reason why it would have been any different, back in Bessler's time. When what you say contradicts a solid belief, any credibility goes out the window. Adding additional knowledge to our current knowledge, is accepted with open arms. Telling us we got it wrong, is a different kettle of fish.

[John Collins]

I agree Robin, but Bessler’s terms were unacceptable anyway, he said paraphrasing, “the buyer puts the money on the table and I put the wheel on the table and he takes the wheel and I take the money”. The buyer could not look inside the wheel and there was no trust on either side. Later a solution was organised by Wolff where the money was to be held in escrow, prior to his taking up a position under Peter the Great of Russia, but unfortunately Frederick King of Prussia, Wolff’s current employer at the time, found out about Wolff’s planned change of employer and fell into a bitter frenzy of rage, and the whole plan was destroyed.

JC

[Sam Peppiatt]

You don't suppose the 100,000 ounces of silver had any thing to do with it? In todays money about $7,000,000.00-----------------------Sam