Sam Peppiatt wrote: ↑Thu Mar 16, 2023 1:27 am
Hi Waltcy!!
Can't seam to let go of it.
. .. .. .
Thanks Waltcy; I shall try it and see-----------------------Sam
I really enjoy your tenacity, Sam. Inspiring. You started this thread July 4th, 2021 and still trucking. You're a great American!
929 Replies
28,243 Views
I think you inspire others also. You have a lot of followers! :)
I just put to paper a rough idea of a build I might attempt. Often when I get to this point, something glaring pops up and Noether's first theorem raises her ugly head
Hi Waltcy!!,
Maybe you should build your wheel. You have very good ideas. I know what you mean though. You get an idea, then after you work out all the details, it's full of flaws. I am an American, (some might say an ugly American).
No, you shouldn't follow me. All I've ever left behind me is a long trail of dead ducks-----------------------------Sam
Last edited by Sam Peppiatt on Tue Mar 28, 2023 1:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Everyone of us has dead ducks Sam .. some have more than others, and some are more dead than others lol .. all of them are still dead.
B. had at least 100 dead ducks (made up of ideas and real builds) before he had "a new enlightenment" from a rare dream .. he experimented and .. "I saw that I had finally made the right choice, and why the earlier ones had been wrong".
It is a right of passage to make wrong choices for our PM principles. It's also the story of the hare and the tortoise. If it was a road well traveled by B. then why should we be any different !
Fletcher,
Thanks for your response. This wheel has been very difficult to resolve. Persistence you say. That reminds me of an old Swed I worked for. He would tell me that with 'persistence', you can shove butter up a wild cats, ( I can't say bad words anymore right?), well you know where, with a knitting needle!
Maybe the wheel shouldn't be that much of a problem-----------------------Sam
I like your old Swede's saying lol. I will have to remember it.
"Maybe the wheel shouldn't be that much of a problem-----------------------Sam"
Fortunately Sam B. didn't leave us with zero to go on .. we are not automatically doomed to failure unless we give in .. we can achieve success if we study and understand B's. written words (see a good discussion this morning between Jubat at ST on the Roberval thread about B. comprehension re Springs, Leverage, PE and KE, Back-Torque etc. and the futility) .. B. was also making the same mistakes over and over - he didn't know there were other lessons to be learned so kept repeating them (tho he tried to be original) - then he had a moment of enlightenment, after which he eventually built his self-moving wheel.
Fortunately for us Sam he left us his written words AND the Toy's Page ( TP ) .. imo the TP is the most important record and key to replicating his success. He strongly suggests that some combination of "symbolic and/or physical elements and actions" in the TP leads to a favourable outcome (i.e. something physically extraordinary). And if thought about in combination with his written words in AP and DT etc. it may be possible to eventually unravel the mechanical mystery of his PM Principle and runners, IMO !
I have complete faith that it can be done, and that could be any one of us prepared to stay the course until the job is done.
Last edited by Fletcher on Tue Mar 28, 2023 8:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sam Peppiatt wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 1:02 am
Hi Waltcy!!,
Maybe you should build your wheel. You have very good ideas.
. .. .. .
-----------------------------Sam
I keep getting distracted however I've settled on a design. I call mechanical rectification.
The theory is no matter which direction the OOB would cause the wheel to rotate, it will only be able to rotate the wheel one way.
I have ideas, how to put this. I'm just not finished exploring them. They distract me.
Waltcy,
I don't think it's possible to resolve Bessler's wheel by insight alone, as Fletcher has recently suggested to me. That all, or most, of my mistakes could have been avoided; by simply deciphering the clues that are available, on the toy's page and else where. I agree; It would save a lot of work but, that idea will never succeed.
The only way is to reinvent it, which is mostly trial and error---------------------Sam
Sam Peppiatt wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 5:48 pm
Waltcy, I don't think it's possible to resolve Bessler's wheel by insight alone, as Fletcher has recently suggested to me. That all, or most, of my mistakes could have been avoided; by simply deciphering the clues that are available, on the toy's page and else where. I agree; It would save a lot of work but, that idea will never succeed.
The only way is to reinvent it, which is mostly trial and error---------------------Sam
Shouldn't the trial & error give one a little insight, Sam? Bessler was very clever with clues. For example
one side heavier than the other
The vector analysis of that clue would be special.
I do agree some trial & error is necessary. That exercise double checks the math & helps adjust any insights one might think they have.
Sure Waltcy, it's a combination of both. One compliments the other. A good example is the guy that worked out the system of 'bar codes' for fixing the price on almost every thing. IBM gave him the project to work on, to try and find a way to do it. He was getting no where with it.
Then, as the story goes, one day he was on a sandy beach some where laying back on his elbows and had scratched four parallel lines in the sand with his fingers. Suddenly, all the lights came on! That's how the bar code was invented.
The hands are the cutting edge of the brain--------------------Sam
Sam Peppiatt wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 2:16 pm
Perhaps, this is the main reason why computer simulations will never produced a working wheel----------Sam
Everyone has their ideas about that, Sam. A working wheel is a sort of computer, just not a digital one.
It is going to be interesting to see the first working wheel simulated. My bet is the simulation works.
I'm thinking you're leaving some clues in your short replies. Might your solution be akin to this neat work of art.
Trust me - Da Ewe didn't invent this so it actually does work in that it does what it was designed to do.
It's been an interesting read about torque amplification in analog computers - especially the sinusoidal ones. Pulling a wire on a pulley close to its center actually causes an increase in movement and torque directly on the perimeter of that same pulley. Evidently no need to "gear it down" so to speak with a chain or belt. The reduction is all done right there in one piece.
I might not be understanding it correctly, but something is odd about the arrangement - torque amplification with the reduction of travel. Actually the travel is increased when a small movement is imparted to the shaft.
