Theorising Bessler's `Excess Weight`

[Sam Peppiatt]

SHADOW, Right, I think it could be made to turn either direction-------------------------------------------Sam

[neuberlintourist1]

nice concept, also thought of this 2 part Wheel concept before myself.
An Animation is needed.

[Sam Peppiatt]

neuberlintourist1, It's not a new idea. But, what I'm suggesting is that it's the right idea. For it to be effective, the roller has to be very heavy. Which fits in with Gill's "Idea" of excess weight. The roller could drive / turn the wheel continuously in either direction. If I'm right; a way has to be found to drive the roller, it's as simple as that.

In the past I never liked this idea. Thinking that it simply deferred the problem from one wheel to the other. But, I just found out that its's easy to roll the roller from one side to the other and, then the weight of it; does nearly all of the work of turning the wheel----------------------------Sam

[agor95]

Principle....only able therefore to suggest a theory?

We all jump to an assumption when `excess weight` is mentioned....we immediately assume imbalance somewhere around the axle...

I generally break down a theory as an overview description, diagram, hypothesis, method of testing, results, conclusion and finally future study 'Therefore this could be true'.

So the Overview Description is the principle and the above makes up a theory.

That means you have a long way from theorizing.

Note.

Excess Weight does not invoke imbalance for me.
As mass does not invoke weight.

Weight is a resistance to acceleration. The direction (vector) of this weight does not need to be down. What we want is this weight to be perpendicular to the anchor point angle on a rotating frame. The imbalance is then a case of more weight/acceleration increasing the rotation of the device.

Regards

[Sam Peppiatt]

I find the mechanics quite fascinating! If the wheel makes one complete turn CW, the roller has to make two complete turns. To drive the roller, the pendulum has to make one complete turn CCW,( with respect to the wheel). With respect to the ground it is translating. I.E., it goes around and around in a circle but doesn't rotate. They would be connected to gether by roller chain and sprockets.

I think you should make one agor. Can't you build one on your computer? You know; save me the pleasurer of making one out of Iron-----------Sam

[agor95]

I think you should make one agor. Can't you build one on your computer? You know; save me the pleasurer of making one out of Iron-----------Sam

It would be interesting for you to download Glowsript zip file from the 'Tech Support' section within the 'Visual Python' thread.

After extracting the folder within the zip file and placing that on your desktop.
You will find a Glowscript.html file within the folder. That will open in your browser.

Note. do all the anti-virus checks etc. It is javascript so it runs within most internet browsers.

You are now in a position to create 3D models yourself.
Naturally help will be given when asked.

P.S. I find this application makes you think with more definition as to a real world device than a 2d simulator.

Regards

[Sam Peppiatt]

Agor, I think waltcy was right. You are a fucking whore------------------------------Sam Peppiatt

[Gill Simo]

Just want to apologise for appearing to have abandoned my own thread....Ill-health again I'm afraid.
Haven't as yet read a single reply but improving now so I'll hopefully be on the case very soon.
Gill

[justsomeone]

Prayers for better health Gill.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Gill, I was wondering where you were. Stay away from doctors-----------------------Sam

[Gill Simo]

Thank you justsomeone..appreciated ta.
And indeed Sam..daren't go near any medical services nowadays, what little there now is here.
I'm booked in for cataract surgery in two weeks from now...needs to be put out under a general.
My local hospital has quite recently recorded a near 500% increase in deaths whilst under a general, last two years compared to the previous two...
In patients over 65...
So I presumably qualify for the `Do Not Resuscitate` Death Camp super deal by a good 4yrs....seriously worried!!
Actually dropped by to catch up with the comments as I was feeling a bit brighter...but saw only your two comments & having now replied I'm too bloomin' tired out again to do what I came here to do.
Just before I go tho'...anyone else here, gazing upon humankind's mess right now & sensing both an urgency for what we seek to arrive and a calm knowing that it will, 'cos it must, when it must?
I must admit to a fear that it will come, not from the roots up as it naturally should but from `them`...from the top down, tightly controlled/choreographed to their very best advantage...& of course, our very worse :(
We'd better get our arses in gear & connect them to our minds/imaginations double quick I reckon.
Else little alternative to that...other than to resort to Bessler's desperate deeds...ask God, go to bed & have a reply come morning!
Gill

[Sam Peppiatt]

Gill, It's scary, really scary but, the odds are still 10s of thousands to one. You have to be brave-----------------------------------Sam

[WaltzCee]

Agor, I think waltcy was right. You are a fucking whore------------------------------Sam Peppiatt

wait a minute here, I never said fucking.

[Gill Simo]

A copy of my reply made in my alternative thread `Besslers `Excess Weight` Take Two.

Ok...let's give it another go.

If I suggest to you to consider six like spheres in the same plane, arranged uniformly around a central axle then you'll immediately envision a wheel, as such...a wheel that is balanced around that axle...something of no value to our quest unless said `wheel` can be constantly unbalanced by some unknown trickery or other.
As I've argued over nearly a quarter of a century now...there is no such trickery, it cannot be done. You are all well familiar with the Laws at play & you all, to a man, use those Laws to play... in some hapless attempt to deny them...that's a kinda sickness/insanity & you can only insist it is not purely because you have no other option to turn to.
I suggest that there is another option here...the six spheres are balanced around but, by being in the same plane, then they are also balanced along the axle.
And....as they are balanced both around/along, as per any regular wheel actually is...and around is, by all good reason, a lost cause, then the only sane aproach is to consider imbalance along.

In other words...Bessler's wheel, happily turning around its axle indefinitely, must surely be being driven by an indefinite motion along its axle...that his wheel is a wheel exactly as we understand a wheel, doing exactly as we understand a wheel to do. His wheel is balanced around its axle...perfectly so...at all times. But the PM within is quite the opposite...perfectly imbalanced , at all times....along the axle.

The simple proposal I attempt to convey is, possibly, an example of this principle?
I'm not going to do my usual & attempt to make it even more simple...this time I'll attempt the opposite & attempt to take you's right down this rabbit hole!

In doing so I will bullet/number along the way so's that you might then refer back to any section that confuses.

1) Here I can only repeat...take 3 spheres, bunched together...through the centre of which is placed an axle that fits that centre perfectly. Thread a second bunch of 3 on that same axle. Bring both sets together until they `lock` into each other.

2) Now apply a force, along the axle, pushing these two sets into each other further. In doing so then both sets of three start to expand from their bunched situation as they are forced into each other...the more the force applied, so the more the two sets of three push into each other, so the more both sets of three expand around the axle, each of its three spreading, no longer bunched but all three spheres growing apart from each other the more the force applied.

3) A maximum force exists...whereby the two sets have been fully pushed/squeezed into each other, each set fully expanded around the axle, each set of three having drifted apart from each other such that the gap between each is now equal to a gap equal to one sphere's diameter.

4)The result here is six spheres, now in a circle around the axle, all spheres in the same plane...a regular balanced wheel of six straight around. Going around that circle we have one sphere originally from one set of three, next to it one sphere from the other set, then one from the first set, one from the second, one from the first, one from the second.

5)As mentioned at the start...we view this ring of six as no more than a wheel of six spheres balanced around the axle. But...you will hopefully agree that it has been arrived at be applying a force to two sets of three originally both bunched around that axle...that that force applied now exists as a potential energy in both sets of three...a potential locked in & of no use around the axe...but both sets of three can contract, back along the axle, releasing the potential in them by removing the force that was being exerted upon them. No difference, as such, to forcing a spring together...it shortens along its axis, expands around that axis & springs back to its original state if the force upon it is removed.

6) Rather than apply enough force to compress our two sets of three into a ring of six around, apply such force as to reach the half way point...so, still two sets of three where each set has three spheres spread apart from each other, the gap between them being one half of a sphere diameter.

7) Assuming the applied force to be applied by way of two plates/discs...pushing/forcing the two sets together, then set these two plates/discs at this distance apart, thus locking the six spheres between them in this half way position.

8) Now...if one were to squeeze either set back to three bunched around then the other set will have to expand in response.

9) Refering back to those two plates/discs...cut slots into each such that we have, in essence, two Bessler wheel engravings, whereby the three white sections have been cut out from our discs. If a set of three, bunched around the axle, were pushing against this plate then each of those three spheres would rest...just...in the tapered end of each of the three cut out sections. if expanded outwards then each sphere would go deeper into its cut out section.

10) So...to recap...we have forced these two cut out plates.discs together & set them at a distance from each other whereby the six spheres between them have been half expanded out from the axle, each of the six half way imbedded in its own cut out. The force that drove the original two bunched sets of three around is now a potential held in these six spheres half way spread around.

11) Hopefully you've a good grasp thus far 'cos now comes the smartarse bit!... the two cut out discs are not flat...Besslers engraving is conical. Each cone is of such a dimension that the following is able to occur....each sphere in falling deeper into its cut out the more it expands away from the axle, would be expanding outwards, along the axle, should the discs be flat. But now, in a cone of the correct proportion, each sphere, although it digs deeper into its cut out the more it expands away from the axle, this sphere moves inwards..towards the rim of its cone. As we have two cones facing each other, rim to rim, then that means that a sphere, fully expanded out. will now rest precisely half way out of its cone's rim....in other words, when fully expanded outwards a sphere will sit half in the cut out of one cone, half in the cut out of the other cone...fully out & centrally around between the two cones.

12) Now...if, from the half way position set as previously mentioned, one set of three is squeezed back to being bunched around then that set will move out of its three cut outs & take up a position centrally between the two cones....the other set of three will have extended outwards & themselves also be positioned centrally between the two cones.

13) In other words...there sits a bunched set of three, centrally & a spread three, also centrally, sat around those bunched three.

14) In motion therefore...one set of three bunches within/under a spread set of three...that bunched three moves over/across...the spread three move over/across in opposition, resulting in the original half way position but now the three on the left have moved to the right & likewise the three of the right have moved over to the left. This situation continues/repeats...from the half way set position, a set of three will bunch & sit centrally beneath a central three spread around them. This `balanced position cannot be maintained...the three bunched will be `rolled over` by the three spread around them & so it goes..on & on....because there is a potential energy squeezed into the six spheres & once set into motion that potential attempts to release, causing the said motion. Whereby that potential can never actually be released...resulting only in a balance point...along the axle...of three spread centrally around three that cannot be held.

15) Got it?....an imbalance along the axle, perpetuated by a potential energy forced along the axle....no imbalance around the axle at any point.
I'll assume most will now question bullet 15...with a resounding NO!

Gill

[Gill Simo]

All that said...still seems to need some input to move the thing from its balanced, half way, position.
Perhaps a simple cranked axle arrangement?