Bessler Wheel Secrets #3

[Tarsier79]

Right; it's better to shift the weights in and or out along a radius than along the rim.

I completely disagree with you, but thank you.

[johannesbender]

@general, Big fat lazy horses wandering around aimlessly , no need to eat or drink , they are filled up to the brim , i think that was a good analogy :)
Were not big fat lazy horses , we may be wandering around a little , but eventually we will find a nice green pasture and eat .

Anyway , its nice to know were all still trying.

[WaltzCee]

Right; it's better to shift the weights in and or out along a radius than along the rim.

I completely disagree with you, but thank you.

2 masses held at a constant radius moving toward or away from each other have a CoM that moves away from or toward their common center of rotation with the benefit of practically eliminating c.f.

That was in part how I managed to get a sim spinning at 9.2 million rpm, well before the McD napkin sketch.

There was another gimmick in the sim also.

[mikeyned]

Trasier79
Moving a weight circumference-ally does seem to be a STRONGER effect on the balance of the larger wheel than radial but the problem has always been getting the weight lifted back into its original position (reset) is an impossible task at least with every test that I did.
Had I not done that demonstration right in front of an enlarged MT-7 I would not have believed that that mechanism would have lifted the weight the way it does. The weight does fall back circumference-ally at first but then catches up... it's kind of "the" reset for this mechanism ... I think.
mIKEY

[Robinhood46]

I've always considered moving a weight radially, to signify moving it from one rayon to another. I think this is what you mean when you say "circumference-allly".
I'm not sure if my interpretation of "moving a weight" or "moving the COG" "radially" is the correct interpretation. Your use of "circumference-ally" certainly allows us to understand what you mean, although it does give me the impression that it isn't really a word.

You could avoid your weight falling back circumference-ally and then "catching up", by reducing the number of weights and eliminating the need for the weight to do the catching up. This would create the need of passing the weight from one section to the next, which is obviously not an easy task.

[Tarsier79]

Also, there is reference to circumferential weight movement specifically in 133,134

As mentioned before, it has no advantage as far as a direct static lift, nor disadvantage. It can reduce some CF/inertia issues though.

[mikeyned]

Anyone ever notice this ?
The two arms are connected to different weights on the opposite sides.
mIKEY



Why can't I get the stupid image to show up ??

[thx4]

"The secret of the Bessler wheel", nice title, a little (a lot even) racoleur, and mostly nonsense. I'm waiting for the secret I do not hang up. lol
As usual another one who has seen, and already killed the bear.
It's funny on this forum, everyone has found what to do but no one knows how to do. strange lol.

A++

[WaltzCee]

. .. .. .



Why can't I get the stupid image to show up ??

I see it well enough.

I've never spent much time studying the MT's or following clues. I have modelled the idea though and it's interesting.

• How to catch a bear:
  • Dig a hole & put ashes in it.
    Cover it up with branches
    Put a jar of honey on the branches
    When the bear comes to investigate the honey kick it in the ash hole

[Sam Peppiatt]

I say fuck him and his bear, no matter what color it is------------------------------------------------------Sam

[Fletcher]

It's funny on this forum, everyone has found what to do but no one knows how to do. strange lol.

A++

Nahh .. everyone, given enough time, eventually becomes an expert in what does not work.

Usually when the realization comes that a lever a little longer here, and a little less weight there, or a spring here and there, does not a runner make.

And that B. did not 'tweak and guess' a non-runner to success by trial and error .. he made an inspired fundamental design change to his non-runner mechanics that gave a net positive directional force so that it could become a runner.

IMO !

[thx4]

And that B. did not 'tweak and guess' a non-runner to success by trial and error .. he made an inspired fundamental design change to his non-runner mechanics that gave a net positive directional force so that it could become a runner.
IMO !

You can't fight with B, his model fell from the sky in a dream... lol
Which reassures me, I believe we are all a piece of god, so I remain optimistic.
The physical experience is paramount, yesterday by doing a simple manipulation on an imbalance, with a witness, I solved a puzzle that I thought unsolvable. I think that proceeding by elimination is the only method, assuming "strongly" and without any doubt that a solution exists. If not, refrain from this kind of research.
Personally I have no doubt so if B did it we will do it again. Hallelujah... :)

A++

[mikeyned]

The plow isn't moving because the mules are pulling in different directions
mIKEY

[WaltzCee]

If you want to say what you see in that MT, go for it mikeyned.

If the arms were the length of the radius, the 2 masses could move around in the middle not being much of a load (wrt torque, c.f., or any force), yet produce a significantly larger torque at their pivot on the rim.

A prime mover? What do you think?

Eta: if this is a point any have made, please post a link. I study any here even less than I study Bessler.

No disrespect intended. Just stating a fact. I'm in my own little world.

[Fletcher]

And that B. did not 'tweak and guess' a non-runner to success by trial and error .. he made an inspired fundamental design change to his non-runner mechanics that gave a net positive directional force so that it could become a runner.
IMO !

You can't fight with B, his model fell from the sky in a dream... lol

Which reassures me, I believe we are all a piece of god, so I remain optimistic.

The physical experience is paramount, yesterday by doing a simple manipulation on an imbalance, with a witness, I solved a puzzle that I thought unsolvable. I think that proceeding by elimination is the only method, assuming "strongly" and without any doubt that a solution exists. If not, refrain from this kind of research.

Personally I have no doubt so if B did it we will do it again. Hallelujah... :)

A++

Totally agree ! I try to understand and remember why something doesn't work. I'm too lazy to do it all again ;7)