How Bessler's Wheel Works

[WaltzCee]

.
.
James monitized his channel & he's trying to drive traffic there. He has nothing & never will.

He should be banned & this thread moved to the fraud section where it belongs. Not my problem.

[UbWe]

.
.
James monitized his channel & he's trying to drive traffic there. He has nothing & never will.

He should be banned & this thread moved to the fraud section where it belongs. Not my problem.

Walt, when I'm about the only person who has work to show, why am I banned? Your friend identified with the guy
who molested 2 of my older brothers. And he's never been banned from this forum. He thought I'd do what he likes.
Search "joe pa the fall of Penn state". That's this forum in my opinion. I have work to show but will be banned.

[UbWe]

.
.
James monitized his channel & he's trying to drive traffic there. He has nothing & never will.

He should be banned & this thread moved to the fraud section where it belongs. Not my problem.

Alan says Jesus. The 3rd Reich required obedience. It is nice to know that saved christians learned from Hitler and learned to say "we are helping you".
That is what Nazis said. Saying no meant being banned. Only bad people get banned for not listening to the "right" people. My family in Norway knows this because they lived through it. And today I am banned for the same reason. Walt, just know that you and your friends are Nazis and getting people
banned isn't Auschwitz, right? Non-Jews died there. 37 million non-Jews died as a result of the 3rd Reich. I am aware of those people because I get
banned for wanting a life. And if my father was one of those people, you guys would be glad because then I never would've been born for you to hate me.
And yet you hate me because Hitler missed 1 person, my Father. The good news is they caught his friend who he was with. "Good" Germans caught them being "bad". Kind of where I learned my bad behavior from.

[UbWe]

>It's okay JUBAT. You see, since I am 1/2 Norwegian, the conduct in this forum is a hate crime.

Nobody here cares about your race or your heritage. The theme of this forum is the Bessler Wheel. You either have one built or you do not. For almost 2 decades you've belittled people online and claimed you have a runner when you don't. That is precisely why you are thought of as a fool because you make big claims and yet you still don't have a runner. All this other stuff you spout doesn't matter. Keeping with the theme of this forum, do you have a running wheel? If not, then go make a runner and come back. If you could just conduct yourself as a decent human being, then all would be well, but your demeanor when you just come barging in here with all this talk is shocking. It's not a hate crime to request that you watch your words and quit being controversial.

>We're not known for being nice people.

You yourself said it.

And Alan Bauldree has never been banned. What he built https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LeYYidRXlk
If I go to his home and be a "good little boy", will he like me like he said? He knows my 2 oldest brothers were sexually molested.
Why he asked if I will do what he wants. Search Penn State and Joe Paterno. Nothing happened.

[UbWe]

.
.

Hey Walt he's back with another failed invention!

He's a loser, but he's agor's loser.



Maybe agor and James can have a little bromance.

What you'll like is when I move out of the U.S. because of Kristallnacht.You'll be able tell your friends that you helped to terrorize me online
because I am 1/2 Norwegian. This will bring up AB Hammer liking the guy who molested 2 of my brothers because then I'd do what he wants.
And since I'll have Bessler's Wheel and AB Hammer refused to work with me or let me pursue it in a forum dedicated to Bessler's work, people
will find it odd that this forum isn't about Bessler's Wheel. And when people tell me I have to answer to AB Hammer, that is human trafficking.
I shouldn't hear I have to give him my work to him or do what he tells me to do. Myself, I think it's funny when you guys attack me because you want
me to belong to AB Hammer. People will find that strange that you actually try to force someone into being slave in this day and age. This is
because the only way the attacks against me will stop is if I become AB Hammer's willing slave.
And for fun there's also this which supports what I say; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-314
That's what I did when I was in the US Navy. We ran that submarine over because we could and I'm attacked because that's okay as well. That's
what it means to be an American, right? It is. Why 2 - 20 year long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to promote Israeli national security when a 2 State
solution would've prevented 2 wars. But why prevent wars when we have the power? And as an American do you care about any of the Veterans who
fought in those 2 wars for you? You don't. A lot of families lost a father or a mother fighting for Israel.
Also, building is a lot of work which too many people in here have absolutely no respect for. And what I'll be able to say is that I realized Bessler's work
when I was posting somewhere where I was not attacked but was allowed to work at it.
And those 2 discs are the actual Peacock's tails.

[UbWe]

And this is my own invention. I had to lengthen 96 tabs and am almost finished. Gears would be better but it's easier to align tabs like this.
https://youtube.com/shorts/JukjoI8C8vY?feature=share What can I say? Knowing a lot of math helps. Ever build 2 different designs
at the same time? Want to be called a failure and a loser? Then you build. And with my other "failed" build, after I have surgery I'll use my prototype
and see what happens when tapered roller bearings are used on all axles. Then if that works I'll be able to show 4 different builds in Utrecht. They
have an original Bessler book. And then it would PROVE that the people in here who have been openly hostile are the problem.

[JUBAT]

Because this deserves a potent response, by the powers vested in me, I hereby excuse WC' s offer of $12K to post before his wheel is complete.

You owe me something in return James.

[WaltzCee]

. .. .. .
And what I'll be able to say is that I realized Bessler's work
when I was posting somewhere where I was not attacked but was allowed to work at it.
. .. .. .

for instance, like the naked scientist, Jimmy boy? They miss your genius there.

• topic.
  
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Can This Work? No, it can not work
  « on: 29/08/2022 11:09:09 »
  Since I am not able to post an external link then I can't ask a question. The only answer I would receive would be an opinion and that's not very scientific.
  But I can go with stupid. I have to ask, do these numbers have any meaning? I can't say I discovered something but have to ask someone if they can find meaning in work I've done. I find that insulting. Since it is information not found in a textbook I cannot say I know this. Forum rules require me to ask what this is or means when I'll say I discovered something.
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^2.007 = 0.0067 bars
  Yet because it's not in a textbook the obvious relationship has to be ignored. And if my perpetual motion machine works, then it was invented in 1712 but would have to say it can't work today because someone said it's impossible. And that would be the same person who said that there is no relationship between the atmospheric pressure of Venus, Earth and Mars.
  Are you aware that both Newton and Einstein missed something? It's rather obvious like the math I posted. My question is why has this relationship between 3 rock type planets with atmospheres been missed?
  If my Bessler's Wheel build works as the prototype suggests then scientists will have missed it is possible, powered flight is possible and the relationship between the atmospheric pressures of Venus, Earth and Mars. Samuel Langley proved powered flight wasn't possible and he was America's foremost scientist. It's okay though. I was held back in school in the U.S. (am from Dayton, Ohio) because I had a Norwegian accent. I don't think people should be discouraged from doing something.
  I mention this because it will become well known that I've been attacked for over a decade because a scientist said that gravity has no energy so perpetual motion (conservation of the Earth's gravitational energy) is impossible. I accept what Einstein said and astronomers have supported.
  I have asked an astronomer to work with me on something. They have my notes, etc. to consider.
  
  * Almost Finished.png (450.74 kB, 540x720 - viewed 260 times.)
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 11:57:35 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #1 on: 29/08/2022 11:36:15 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 11:09:09
  do these numbers have any meaning?
  Not as far as I can tell.
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 11:09:09
  if my perpetual motion machine works
  It won't.
  Logged
  Please disregard all previous signatures.
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #2 on: 29/08/2022 17:29:17 »
  Search this;
  Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2014
  Chapter 5 Scientific Summary
  
  Then scroll down to where it says "Carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and methane (CH4)".
  I am pursuing an experiment to explain that. While it should be the IPCC's job or someone else who
  researches atmospheric chemistry, apparently I am the only who understood what it suggests.
  And a working Bessler's Wheel will allow me to pursue my experiment.
  Don't take this personally. This is how I remind myself why I'm tolerating what I'm going through. And with what the IPCC doesn't understand, it basically allows for a new field in science. If you noticed, I mentioned astrophysics (relative atmospheric pressures) and also atmospheric chemistry and physics
  (atmospheric forcings allowing for recovery of the ozone layer).
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 17:36:22 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #3 on: 29/08/2022 18:13:11 »
  With this;
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^2.007 = 0.0067 bars
  
  2.007 should've been squared so it is 4.03 like this;
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^4.03 = 0.0067 bars
  so the math is 100% correct. The global moderator did not realize the difference between
  the orbit of Venus and Mars. The 2.007 value is within the perigee and apogee of Mars' relationship
  to Venus's orbit. A little problem solving would've allowed for my mistake to have been realized
  because the atmospheric pressure of Mars is about 6 millibars.
  While this is rather basic, the Earth is about 1.38 times further from the Sun than Venus. The inverse
  square law is used and 1.38^2 = 1.91. The same is done for Mars. The further a planet is away from
  the Sun the less the Sun can influence it.
  Yet it is easier to ridicule someone rather than consider they forgot to factor one value in an equation properly. This is like when I read NOAA's report on ozone depletion. When I saw their quote about the IPCC's report, I realized that a process would allow for a common source. Yet neither photolytics or the halogen process allows for a common source.
  If they did, someone would've written a paper about it and would have made it known. This hasn't happened yet. It's kind of like considering atmospheric pressures having a mathematical relationship. We all have seen how that went and it didn't go well for me.
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 18:21:53 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #4 on: 29/08/2022 21:14:24 »
  Conservation of energy, and many of the other conservation laws, are in a somewhat unique position in physics in that they are supported by a mathematical proof called Noether's theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem
  
  Theorems, such as the Pythagorean theorem, are proofs that hold so long as their initial axioms hold. In the case of Noether's theorem, conservation laws are guaranteed to hold so long as certain symmetries in nature hold. In the case of energy, that symmetry is time symmetry. Unfortunately, I don't have a good grasp on exactly what all that means, but mathematicians seem to understand how it guarantees conservation of energy.
  
  The only exception I can think of is the metric expansion of the Universe. As best as I understand it, that represents a violation of time symmetry because it means space now isn't the same as space later (it's larger at a later time). As such, light red-shifts as the Universe expands and that energy is just lost. However, perpetual motion machines (such as the type you speak of) don't involve manipulation of space-time in any way. As such, we know that Noether's theorem would apply to them and so they cannot violate conservation of energy.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Proof of Concept
  « Reply #5 on: 29/08/2022 21:50:56 »
  As far as perpetual motion goes, on YouTube, search James Lindgaard. That is my channel.
  You'll be able to see that my prototype rotates over 90º. I am now building a display model.
  I am not allowed to post a link to my work which shows that momentum can be conserved.
  
  Logged
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #6 on: 29/08/2022 21:58:35 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 21:50:56
  You'll be able to see that my prototype rotates over 90º.
  
  You mean this?
  
  
  What you show in the video is a long way off from perpetual motion. Noether's theorem won't allow it to work.
  Logged
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #7 on: 29/08/2022 22:58:44 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 18:13:11
  The global moderator did not realize the difference between the orbit of Venus and Mars.
  You can not expect the moderators to read minds.
  
  There are other planets in the solar system.
  Does your observation also work for them?
  If not, then what you have discovered is a coincidence.
  Logged
  Please disregard all previous signatures.
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #8 on: 29/08/2022 23:35:13 »
  I can't read minds either. I am hoping an astronomer at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln will be interested. I've made her aware of what I think. I'd like to give her a chance to think about it.
  The math I showed would support that all planets are influenced proportionally. I actually looked for that relationship to see if gravity or other attribute associated with the Sun allowed for it.
  
  p.s., the wheel rotated over 90º. The display model is designed to repeat that process. That concept
  can get complicated because it uses a "2nd wheel". The basic idea is that leverage is converted into torque. To get a little "funny"; Newton's First Law of Motion;
  every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force.
  
  The disc which is not a part of the wheel does not allow for symmetrical behavior. And I think it is a
  "trick" piece of engineering. And Gottfried Leibniz was a witness of Bessler's. And I think that was in court when Bessler was tried as a fraud and was found innocent.
  A guy published a paper at Cornell University about it. It was known in German language publications but not outside of a German speaking region.
  If you search Cornell University and this "The mechanical career of Councillor Orffyreus, confidence man"
  or Johann Bessler. And then you can see what other papers the author published. The person is Jenkins, A.
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 23:45:18 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline Origin
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #9 on: 30/08/2022 00:04:55 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 23:35:13
  I can't read minds either. I am hoping an astronomer at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln will be interested. I've made her aware of what I think. I'd like to give her a chance to think about it.
  I don't think she will be interested.
  Where did the number 0.9062 come from?
  By the way no where are you using the inverse square law, that would involve 1/x^2 not x^2.
  Did you exclude Mercury and Jupiter because they do not fit with your equation?
  
  This is basically just numerology without any physics.
  Logged
  Offline Origin
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #10 on: 30/08/2022 00:07:11 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 21:50:56
  You'll be able to see that my prototype rotates over 90º.
  A 90 degree rotation sure ain't perpetual motion...
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #11 on: 30/08/2022 01:00:52 »
  "A 90 degree rotation sure ain't perpetual motion..."
  
  Not a very intelligent comment. A 90º rotation shows that it can work. Kind of why I am building a display model as I mentioned.
  And the experiment that I'm pursuing. One of the reasons for pursuing Bessler's Wheel.
  https://climate-cycling.com/?page_id=33
  
  Possibly why I should stay offline while I work. Between Bessler's Wheel and my experiment, science doesn't allow for either one. And yet it's okay if scientists don't understand why 3 GHGs are helping the ozone layer to recover. With climate change, that should be made known so that a solution can be considered. But when the IPCC says "For many of the scenarios used in the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment (IPCC, 2013), global ozone will increase to above pre-1980 levels due to future trends in the gases."
  https://csl.noaa.gov/assessments/ozone/ ... y/ch5.html
  Scroll down to CO2, N2O and CH4 and you'll find the section.
  
  « Last Edit: 30/08/2022 01:21:49 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #12 on: 30/08/2022 01:07:23 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 23:35:13
  p.s., the wheel rotated over 90º. The display model is designed to repeat that process. That concept
  can get complicated because it uses a "2nd wheel". The basic idea is that leverage is converted into torque. To get a little "funny"; Newton's First Law of Motion;
  every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force.
  
  I predict that it will not work (because of Noether's theorem). Do feel free to post a video of it working when you get it finished, though.
  
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 18:13:11
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^4.03 = 0.0067 bars
  so the math is 100% correct.
  
  As distances from the Sun increase, the exponent will increase as well. This means that your equation predicts thinner and thinner atmospheres for planets as you get further from the Sun. However, the gas giants have thicker atmospheres than Mars, so it doesn't work for them. It also doesn't work for Venus itself:
  
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1
  93.079 bars * (0.0938)^1
  93.079 bars * 0.0938
  = 8.731 bars
  
  Mercury, with an even smaller exponent, would be predicted by your equation to have a thicker atmosphere than its (already incorrect) prediction for Venus. But Mercury's atmospheric pressure is far, far less than 8.731 bars. So the fact that your equation works for just two planets and fails for the rest of them strongly suggests that it is a coincidence.
  
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:00:52
  A 90º shows that it can work
  
  It doesn't, actually. It's easy enough to build a wheel that will turn only 90 degrees by mounting a weight on one side. What your wheel has to do in order to actually qualify for perpetual motion is to keep that going over and over again without end and without external energy input. Noether's theorem won't allow it to work.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #13 on: 30/08/2022 01:58:46 »
  Just a quick question. Is it possible that Mercury is too hot to have much of an atmosphere?
  I have taken time to consider things but then I am primarily about my atmospheric chemistry experiment.
  I think that is actually what matters.
  Logged
  Offline Origin
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #14 on: 30/08/2022 02:52:00 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:00:52
  Not a very intelligent comment. A 90º rotation shows that it can work.
  Nope, not even close.
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:58:46
  Is it possible that Mercury is too hot to have much of an atmosphere?
  Could be, what is absolutely clear however is that your equation doesn't work.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #15 on: 30/08/2022 03:10:40 »
  I'm going to take it easy and enjoy my work. If I am in the position to say that the IPCC did not make it known about
  GHGs role in the recovery of the ozone layer, that would change the climate change debate. The preservation of the ozone layer has not been a part of that discussion.
  Logged
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #16 on: 30/08/2022 08:53:31 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:00:52
  Not a very intelligent comment. A 90º rotation shows that it can work.
  A rock falling over moves through 90 degrees, but nobody would claim that it's a perpetual motion machine.
  
  More importantly, you are missing the fact that perpetual motion machines are impossible. We have the maths to prove it.
  You should, at least, stop pretending that you are doing science.
  You should probably also stop wasting your time.
  
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:58:46
  I am primarily about my atmospheric chemistry
  The atmospheres of the planets are made from different materials.
  Prior to the evolution of photosynthetic life on Earth the atmosphere would have contained much more CO2 and no O2 so it would have been denser. We are currently changing it too.
  So, the density you are calculating from is set pretty arbitrarily by life
  Logged
  Please disregard all previous signatures.
  
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #17 on: 30/08/2022 16:17:46 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:58:46
  Just a quick question. Is it possible that Mercury is too hot to have much of an atmosphere?
  
  Venus is hotter than Mercury and still has an atmosphere.
  
  The reason most likely has to do with its low gravity and the strong solar wind that would blow an atmosphere off over time.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #18 on: 30/08/2022 16:52:27 »
  The reply I received from the astronomer I have been in contact with.
  Rebecca Harbison
  
  Mon, Aug 29, 9:04 PM (14 hours ago)
  
  to me
  Just a heads up. The term just started here, so going through emails is going to be slow for things not work related. So if I don't respond, it's because I had to get to my students first.
  
  -----------------------------
  "I may have sent this e-mail outside of my normal working hours. I never expect an answer outside of yours."
  
  Dr. Rebecca Harbison
  
  I made her aware of your concerns regarding Mercury. She will need to confer with her colleagues. Since she is an astronomer then she will be aware of the references I made. And this includes Einstein's 1915 paper on general relativity and how astronomers verified Einstein's hypothesis.
  What does that mean exactly? We are discussing science, right? And since she and her colleagues are astronomers,
  it would be best for them to consider things first before I say anything more. It would be rude on my part to ask her to consider something and then for me to go and discuss it with other people.
  With atmospheric pressures having what I believe to be a relationship I would say impacts the experiment that I am pursuing in atmospheric chemistry. This is where I need to be patient and finish my build. Then I can pursue my own work.
  Logged
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #19 on: 30/08/2022 18:32:29 »
  Before you discuss it with someone who is clearly busy, you should answer the points made by those of us with time on our hands. topic.
  
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Can This Work?
  « on: 29/08/2022 11:09:09 »
  Since I am not able to post an external link then I can't ask a question. The only answer I would receive would be an opinion and that's not very scientific.
  But I can go with stupid. I have to ask, do these numbers have any meaning? I can't say I discovered something but have to ask someone if they can find meaning in work I've done. I find that insulting. Since it is information not found in a textbook I cannot say I know this. Forum rules require me to ask what this is or means when I'll say I discovered something.
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^2.007 = 0.0067 bars
  Yet because it's not in a textbook the obvious relationship has to be ignored. And if my perpetual motion machine works, then it was invented in 1712 but would have to say it can't work today because someone said it's impossible. And that would be the same person who said that there is no relationship between the atmospheric pressure of Venus, Earth and Mars.
  Are you aware that both Newton and Einstein missed something? It's rather obvious like the math I posted. My question is why has this relationship between 3 rock type planets with atmospheres been missed?
  If my Bessler's Wheel build works as the prototype suggests then scientists will have missed it is possible, powered flight is possible and the relationship between the atmospheric pressures of Venus, Earth and Mars. Samuel Langley proved powered flight wasn't possible and he was America's foremost scientist. It's okay though. I was held back in school in the U.S. (am from Dayton, Ohio) because I had a Norwegian accent. I don't think people should be discouraged from doing something.
  I mention this because it will become well known that I've been attacked for over a decade because a scientist said that gravity has no energy so perpetual motion (conservation of the Earth's gravitational energy) is impossible. I accept what Einstein said and astronomers have supported.
  I have asked an astronomer to work with me on something. They have my notes, etc. to consider.
  
  * Almost Finished.png (450.74 kB, 540x720 - viewed 260 times.)
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 11:57:35 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #1 on: 29/08/2022 11:36:15 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 11:09:09
  do these numbers have any meaning?
  Not as far as I can tell.
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 11:09:09
  if my perpetual motion machine works
  It won't.
  Logged
  Please disregard all previous signatures.
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #2 on: 29/08/2022 17:29:17 »
  Search this;
  Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2014
  Chapter 5 Scientific Summary
  
  Then scroll down to where it says "Carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O), and methane (CH4)".
  I am pursuing an experiment to explain that. While it should be the IPCC's job or someone else who
  researches atmospheric chemistry, apparently I am the only who understood what it suggests.
  And a working Bessler's Wheel will allow me to pursue my experiment.
  Don't take this personally. This is how I remind myself why I'm tolerating what I'm going through. And with what the IPCC doesn't understand, it basically allows for a new field in science. If you noticed, I mentioned astrophysics (relative atmospheric pressures) and also atmospheric chemistry and physics
  (atmospheric forcings allowing for recovery of the ozone layer).
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 17:36:22 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #3 on: 29/08/2022 18:13:11 »
  With this;
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^2.007 = 0.0067 bars
  
  2.007 should've been squared so it is 4.03 like this;
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^4.03 = 0.0067 bars
  so the math is 100% correct. The global moderator did not realize the difference between
  the orbit of Venus and Mars. The 2.007 value is within the perigee and apogee of Mars' relationship
  to Venus's orbit. A little problem solving would've allowed for my mistake to have been realized
  because the atmospheric pressure of Mars is about 6 millibars.
  While this is rather basic, the Earth is about 1.38 times further from the Sun than Venus. The inverse
  square law is used and 1.38^2 = 1.91. The same is done for Mars. The further a planet is away from
  the Sun the less the Sun can influence it.
  Yet it is easier to ridicule someone rather than consider they forgot to factor one value in an equation properly. This is like when I read NOAA's report on ozone depletion. When I saw their quote about the IPCC's report, I realized that a process would allow for a common source. Yet neither photolytics or the halogen process allows for a common source.
  If they did, someone would've written a paper about it and would have made it known. This hasn't happened yet. It's kind of like considering atmospheric pressures having a mathematical relationship. We all have seen how that went and it didn't go well for me.
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 18:21:53 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #4 on: 29/08/2022 21:14:24 »
  Conservation of energy, and many of the other conservation laws, are in a somewhat unique position in physics in that they are supported by a mathematical proof called Noether's theorem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem
  
  Theorems, such as the Pythagorean theorem, are proofs that hold so long as their initial axioms hold. In the case of Noether's theorem, conservation laws are guaranteed to hold so long as certain symmetries in nature hold. In the case of energy, that symmetry is time symmetry. Unfortunately, I don't have a good grasp on exactly what all that means, but mathematicians seem to understand how it guarantees conservation of energy.
  
  The only exception I can think of is the metric expansion of the Universe. As best as I understand it, that represents a violation of time symmetry because it means space now isn't the same as space later (it's larger at a later time). As such, light red-shifts as the Universe expands and that energy is just lost. However, perpetual motion machines (such as the type you speak of) don't involve manipulation of space-time in any way. As such, we know that Noether's theorem would apply to them and so they cannot violate conservation of energy.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Proof of Concept
  « Reply #5 on: 29/08/2022 21:50:56 »
  As far as perpetual motion goes, on YouTube, search James Lindgaard. That is my channel.
  You'll be able to see that my prototype rotates over 90º. I am now building a display model.
  I am not allowed to post a link to my work which shows that momentum can be conserved.
  
  Logged
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #6 on: 29/08/2022 21:58:35 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 21:50:56
  You'll be able to see that my prototype rotates over 90º.
  
  You mean this?
  
  
  What you show in the video is a long way off from perpetual motion. Noether's theorem won't allow it to work.
  Logged
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #7 on: 29/08/2022 22:58:44 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 18:13:11
  The global moderator did not realize the difference between the orbit of Venus and Mars.
  You can not expect the moderators to read minds.
  
  There are other planets in the solar system.
  Does your observation also work for them?
  If not, then what you have discovered is a coincidence.
  Logged
  Please disregard all previous signatures.
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #8 on: 29/08/2022 23:35:13 »
  I can't read minds either. I am hoping an astronomer at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln will be interested. I've made her aware of what I think. I'd like to give her a chance to think about it.
  The math I showed would support that all planets are influenced proportionally. I actually looked for that relationship to see if gravity or other attribute associated with the Sun allowed for it.
  
  p.s., the wheel rotated over 90º. The display model is designed to repeat that process. That concept
  can get complicated because it uses a "2nd wheel". The basic idea is that leverage is converted into torque. To get a little "funny"; Newton's First Law of Motion;
  every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force.
  
  The disc which is not a part of the wheel does not allow for symmetrical behavior. And I think it is a
  "trick" piece of engineering. And Gottfried Leibniz was a witness of Bessler's. And I think that was in court when Bessler was tried as a fraud and was found innocent.
  A guy published a paper at Cornell University about it. It was known in German language publications but not outside of a German speaking region.
  If you search Cornell University and this "The mechanical career of Councillor Orffyreus, confidence man"
  or Johann Bessler. And then you can see what other papers the author published. The person is Jenkins, A.
  « Last Edit: 29/08/2022 23:45:18 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline Origin
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #9 on: 30/08/2022 00:04:55 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 23:35:13
  I can't read minds either. I am hoping an astronomer at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln will be interested. I've made her aware of what I think. I'd like to give her a chance to think about it.
  I don't think she will be interested.
  Where did the number 0.9062 come from?
  By the way no where are you using the inverse square law, that would involve 1/x^2 not x^2.
  Did you exclude Mercury and Jupiter because they do not fit with your equation?
  
  This is basically just numerology without any physics.
  Logged
  Offline Origin
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #10 on: 30/08/2022 00:07:11 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 21:50:56
  You'll be able to see that my prototype rotates over 90º.
  A 90 degree rotation sure ain't perpetual motion...
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #11 on: 30/08/2022 01:00:52 »
  "A 90 degree rotation sure ain't perpetual motion..."
  
  Not a very intelligent comment. A 90º rotation shows that it can work. Kind of why I am building a display model as I mentioned.
  And the experiment that I'm pursuing. One of the reasons for pursuing Bessler's Wheel.
  https://climate-cycling.com/?page_id=33
  
  Possibly why I should stay offline while I work. Between Bessler's Wheel and my experiment, science doesn't allow for either one. And yet it's okay if scientists don't understand why 3 GHGs are helping the ozone layer to recover. With climate change, that should be made known so that a solution can be considered. But when the IPCC says "For many of the scenarios used in the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment (IPCC, 2013), global ozone will increase to above pre-1980 levels due to future trends in the gases."
  https://csl.noaa.gov/assessments/ozone/ ... y/ch5.html
  Scroll down to CO2, N2O and CH4 and you'll find the section.
  
  « Last Edit: 30/08/2022 01:21:49 by JLindgaard »
  Logged
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #12 on: 30/08/2022 01:07:23 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 23:35:13
  p.s., the wheel rotated over 90º. The display model is designed to repeat that process. That concept
  can get complicated because it uses a "2nd wheel". The basic idea is that leverage is converted into torque. To get a little "funny"; Newton's First Law of Motion;
  every object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless compelled to change its state by the action of an external force.
  
  I predict that it will not work (because of Noether's theorem). Do feel free to post a video of it working when you get it finished, though.
  
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 29/08/2022 18:13:11
  Venus is 93.079 bars if its atmospheric pressure is 1,350 psi.
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1.91 = 1.013 bars
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^4.03 = 0.0067 bars
  so the math is 100% correct.
  
  As distances from the Sun increase, the exponent will increase as well. This means that your equation predicts thinner and thinner atmospheres for planets as you get further from the Sun. However, the gas giants have thicker atmospheres than Mars, so it doesn't work for them. It also doesn't work for Venus itself:
  
  93.079 bars * (1-0.9062)^1
  93.079 bars * (0.0938)^1
  93.079 bars * 0.0938
  = 8.731 bars
  
  Mercury, with an even smaller exponent, would be predicted by your equation to have a thicker atmosphere than its (already incorrect) prediction for Venus. But Mercury's atmospheric pressure is far, far less than 8.731 bars. So the fact that your equation works for just two planets and fails for the rest of them strongly suggests that it is a coincidence.
  
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:00:52
  A 90º shows that it can work
  
  It doesn't, actually. It's easy enough to build a wheel that will turn only 90 degrees by mounting a weight on one side. What your wheel has to do in order to actually qualify for perpetual motion is to keep that going over and over again without end and without external energy input. Noether's theorem won't allow it to work.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #13 on: 30/08/2022 01:58:46 »
  Just a quick question. Is it possible that Mercury is too hot to have much of an atmosphere?
  I have taken time to consider things but then I am primarily about my atmospheric chemistry experiment.
  I think that is actually what matters.
  Logged
  Offline Origin
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #14 on: 30/08/2022 02:52:00 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:00:52
  Not a very intelligent comment. A 90º rotation shows that it can work.
  Nope, not even close.
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:58:46
  Is it possible that Mercury is too hot to have much of an atmosphere?
  Could be, what is absolutely clear however is that your equation doesn't work.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #15 on: 30/08/2022 03:10:40 »
  I'm going to take it easy and enjoy my work. If I am in the position to say that the IPCC did not make it known about
  GHGs role in the recovery of the ozone layer, that would change the climate change debate. The preservation of the ozone layer has not been a part of that discussion.
  Logged
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #16 on: 30/08/2022 08:53:31 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:00:52
  Not a very intelligent comment. A 90º rotation shows that it can work.
  A rock falling over moves through 90 degrees, but nobody would claim that it's a perpetual motion machine.
  
  More importantly, you are missing the fact that perpetual motion machines are impossible. We have the maths to prove it.
  You should, at least, stop pretending that you are doing science.
  You should probably also stop wasting your time.
  
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:58:46
  I am primarily about my atmospheric chemistry
  The atmospheres of the planets are made from different materials.
  Prior to the evolution of photosynthetic life on Earth the atmosphere would have contained much more CO2 and no O2 so it would have been denser. We are currently changing it too.
  So, the density you are calculating from is set pretty arbitrarily by life
  Logged
  Please disregard all previous signatures.
  
  Offline Kryptid
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #17 on: 30/08/2022 16:17:46 »
  Quote from: JLindgaard on 30/08/2022 01:58:46
  Just a quick question. Is it possible that Mercury is too hot to have much of an atmosphere?
  
  Venus is hotter than Mercury and still has an atmosphere.
  
  The reason most likely has to do with its low gravity and the strong solar wind that would blow an atmosphere off over time.
  Logged
  Offline JLindgaard (OP)
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #18 on: 30/08/2022 16:52:27 »
  The reply I received from the astronomer I have been in contact with.
  Rebecca Harbison
  
  Mon, Aug 29, 9:04 PM (14 hours ago)
  
  to me
  Just a heads up. The term just started here, so going through emails is going to be slow for things not work related. So if I don't respond, it's because I had to get to my students first.
  
  -----------------------------
  "I may have sent this e-mail outside of my normal working hours. I never expect an answer outside of yours."
  
  Dr. Rebecca Harbison
  
  I made her aware of your concerns regarding Mercury. She will need to confer with her colleagues. Since she is an astronomer then she will be aware of the references I made. And this includes Einstein's 1915 paper on general relativity and how astronomers verified Einstein's hypothesis.
  What does that mean exactly? We are discussing science, right? And since she and her colleagues are astronomers,
  it would be best for them to consider things first before I say anything more. It would be rude on my part to ask her to consider something and then for me to go and discuss it with other people.
  With atmospheric pressures having what I believe to be a relationship I would say impacts the experiment that I am pursuing in atmospheric chemistry. This is where I need to be patient and finish my build. Then I can pursue my own work.
  Logged
  Offline Bored chemist
  
  Re: Can This Work?
  « Reply #19 on: 30/08/2022 18:32:29 »
  Before you discuss it with someone who is clearly busy, you should answer the points made by those of us with time on our hands.

You are a total pompous ass anywhere & everywhere you go, and are treated like one.

[WaltzCee]

And this is my own invention.
. .. .. .

You are a turd, in the form of a boomerang. I thought this was your invention!
Tue Apr 11, 2023 10:50 am
https://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopi ... 87#p194587

Oh now I understand! Can you show us how your wheel works? You know we'd all love to see it running!

It takes time to build something. It takes less time to break it. I'll create a "playlist" of what the wheel requires to work
and what the status of those items are.

• Frame; Completed

• Weighted Levers; Completed

• Lockout Mechanisms; Completed

• Stand; Under Construction

• Final Assembly; No Stand To Support Final Assembly

• Paint it (*_*)

It's possible it will be finished by next
weekend. *
me, I can just enjoy the headache math and science teachers will have.
It won't change the laws of physics as predicted. It will change how Newton's laws of motion are considered. Could you imagine
making 336 year old laws of motion relevant again? I can very much and very easily get into the history of science.
You'll find this difficult to believe but I am descended from Vikings and in 7th grade I was required to take a music appreciation
class. . .. .. .

*should we christen it the spruce goose or the flying pig, Orvie?

[WaltzCee]

It's being built. I'll also need to move out of the U.S. In November 1938 in Berlin, they called it a Kristallnacht.
. .. . .

We know it's being built. You've been telling us for the last 20 years!!

Is this how Bessler's wheel works? That being the case, it appears Bessler's wheel doesn't.

[JUBAT]

He comes on here landblasting people - some of which haven't posted in years now - digging up old grudges and past hates, and still doesn't have a working wheel.

What is it called when someone perceives reality different than what it really is?

He acts like he's had the solution all these years, but has absolutely no working wheel to show for it.

My dad is still alive and he has dreams and then believes them and he can't tell the difference between a dream and reality. A fellow I know has an Aunt in her 90s and she's the same way. Something in the brain doesn't register the difference between fantasy and reality.

Is anyone good at diagnosing psychiatric disorders? I suppose either no one or everyone will respond on a forum such as this lol.

[Fcdriver]

How Bessler’s wheel works,, a question or a solution?

The effects of a weight, at 6:00, south, the bottom of rotation, compared to wind on a windmill, or a balanced wheel?
A extreme example, is a whip, with additional leverage, causes enough energy for a portion of the whip to break the sound barrier, making a crack noise!
The energy, at the change of direction of each weight, between 6:00 and 7:00, but one at a time, has to be used, to shift the center of gravity, of the total set of weights. By the third rotation, shifts this force, 6:00-7:00,, to 7:00-8:00.
Stationary balance, vs rotation effects, greatly change, within the wheel, as with the whip can cause a violent reaction. Ramps and cams, can but do not work due to the violence created.
Respect to the possible energy relationship or release, as the weights shift from drop to lift, happens as a dance of coordination, which equals a ice skater, increasing rotation.

A shift of weight, with a 65 inch of leverage, only creating 1/10 of a horsepower, becomes concerning!
Meaning the efficiency, of the dance of weights, in the Bessler Wheel was low, and power of the Bessler wheel should have been more! A efficient wheel while at designed speed will not be noisy, but a quiet dance of shifting weights.

[JUBAT]

One thing I've noticed about all MTs is the weights were not free to move circumferentially along with their radial requirement. That is probably a critical part to why so many wheels fail.

They also tend to freeze up in Norway although it isn't too big of a deal since they don't rotate on their own anyway.

[UbWe]

How Bessler’s wheel works,, a question or a solution?

The effects of a weight, at 6:00, south, the bottom of rotation, compared to wind on a windmill, or a balanced wheel?
A extreme example, is a whip, with additional leverage, causes enough energy for a portion of the whip to break the sound barrier, making a crack noise!
The energy, at the change of direction of each weight, between 6:00 and 7:00, but one at a time, has to be used, to shift the center of gravity, of the total set of weights. By the third rotation, shifts this force, 6:00-7:00,, to 7:00-8:00.
Stationary balance, vs rotation effects, greatly change, within the wheel, as with the whip can cause a violent reaction. Ramps and cams, can but do not work due to the violence created.
Respect to the possible energy relationship or release, as the weights shift from drop to lift, happens as a dance of coordination, which equals a ice skater, increasing rotation.

A shift of weight, with a 65 inch of leverage, only creating 1/10 of a horsepower, becomes concerning!
Meaning the efficiency, of the dance of weights, in the Bessler Wheel was low, and power of the Bessler wheel should have been more! A efficient wheel while at designed speed will not be noisy, but a quiet dance of shifting weights.

With this, as the wheel rotates, the Peacock's Tail causes the lever to rotate 90º. This makes the pulley a hoist or winch for lifting weights. At a 4 to 1
ratio, 1/2 of the torque generated by the weight moving from above to below the axle is used to lift both the top and bottom weights. With the frame, that would be the arm going out to the right.
"As is", this will not work. Math told me what is missing. At the moment I am working on assembling the discs for the pulley. Dr. Jaski of Utrecht University has this book of Bessler's; https://www.uu.nl/en/special-collection ... nn-bessler
With the build before this one that I built, tapered roller bearings might allow it to work as well. With the peacock's tail, think of a cam and how it moves lifters in a car's engine.
It will be funny how many people in here claim that Bessler was a fraud. You know, if you don't have a working wheel then you're a loser, you have to "prove" yourself, etc. and yet they are following forum rules.

@WaltzCee, I think other countries will find it strange when "real" Americans say they cannot let a disabled Veteran have a life in the U.S. and that I am attacked for working at something while 100% disabled. All you and your friends are proving is that America is a toxic country. Why it went to war in
Iraq (a pre-emptive strike) and Afghanistan to promote Israeli national security. It's possible that if 1 search warrant was allowed to be pursued that the attacks of 9/11 would've been prevented. https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/f ... sanctuary.

[JUBAT]

It's only toxic because you belittle others, claim you know how the wheel worked, and yet you do not have a working wheel nor know how it worked. When you get heckled for that, you say you're getting picked on for being Norwegian? What the hell?

I have several predictions: you will never leave the usa, you will never have a working provable wheel, you will continue to fail to take personal responsibility for your failed wheel.

To save you the hassle I know you're a Norwegian disabled vet.