Can the ultimate and all-sustaining secret of Freemasonry be found in Bessler's work?

[johannesbender]

I have no idea what (if it means something) it would be about , anyway I respect geometry because physics and geometry ties together , geometry in some cases serves as proof for some math and ideas , perhaps we are missing something about it but I would not know myself , too much of my own ideas perplexing me.

[killemaces]

So where does this lead to? A working wheel, with drawings of the mechanism? Is there a working model behind your theories? If not why?

[daxwc]

JC’s AP: than those poor souls who persisted, for example, in the search for an exact squaring of the circle, an exact ratio for the diagonal of a square, or an additional member to add to the set of five known regular solids

Me: "There are only five regular solids, also known as Platonic solids, and they are the cube, the tetrahedron, the octahedron, the dodecahedron, and the icosahedron" - what were men trying to make he 6th solid. What is close?

ChatGPT
The search for a sixth regular solid, often referred to as the "kepler-poinsot polyhedron," has historical roots in the exploration of geometric shapes and symmetry. The five regular solids you mentioned are known as the Platonic solids and were well-understood by the ancient Greeks. Kepler and Poinsot were later mathematicians who became interested in exploring additional regular polyhedra.
Johannes Kepler was a German mathematician and astronomer in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. He attempted to find a sixth regular solid but did not succeed. Instead, he identified two non-convex regular polyhedra, now known as the Kepler-Poinsot polyhedra:
1. The Small Stellated Dodecahedron.
2. The Great Stellated Dodecahedron.
These polyhedra have more complex and star-like shapes compared to the five Platonic solids. They are characterized by self-intersecting faces and are not convex like the Platonic solids.
The search for additional regular solids beyond the five Platonic solids and the Kepler-Poinsot polyhedra continued over the centuries. However, it wasn't until the mid-19th century that the concept of regular convex polyhedra was fully understood and classified. In 1852, Augustin-Louis Cauchy proved that there are only five convex regular polyhedra (the Platonic solids), and no more could exist.
While mathematicians have explored various shapes and symmetries in the quest for additional regular solids, these five Platonic solids, along with the Kepler-Poinsot polyhedra, represent the known regular polyhedra in three-dimensional space. The search for new regular solids is a fascinating aspect of geometry, but it has concluded that there are only these six known examples.

What does the Small Stellated Dodecahedron look like?
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ajaxserp=0

[WaltzCee]

Hello Øystein,

When the results are expressed in their simplest forms, the latter prove to be the same rudimentary geometrical figures that supply the structure of crystals, and all blend together into the marvelous triangle that caused old Pythagoras to cry “Eureka!” when its beauties burst upon him. - The 3-4-5 Triangle

I wonder if Pike realized Pythagoras wasn't running around naked saying, "eureka!" [*]a

It is common knowledge the Pythagorean theorem predates Pythagoras, bringing me 2 my question.

How much of the Pythagorean school/religion/worship cult was informed by the Phoenicians? Their alphabetes are identical.

[*]a Pythagoras didn't speak Hellenistic Greek.

[Oystein]

So where does this lead to? A working wheel, with drawings of the mechanism? Is there a working model behind your theories? If not why?

The question has no value. If I answer yes or no, the observed geometry and numbers does not change!

The most important message from me, at this stage, is to inform that maybe not all you see is there for one single reason. If you see a pendulum (that was never a part of the machine!!), I inform that it seems like it's not really just a pendulum but likely also another thing. If that's not important for individual researchers, please feel free to go on and build a wheel using pendulums. But I try to show, that maybe he ment something else! And I say not everything in MT is just drawings of PM attempts. It also hold another secret. (IMO) Namely how to square the circle by applying pythagoras formula. I believe the book was ment for teaching material in his Fortess of Wisdom school, and that it had add on value to the wheel's potential buyer..

So this was ment as a heads up, to researchers. Not everything is about the machine. The guy was a jack of all trades.. The more we learn, the easier it will be to see what is left to describe the machine itself.

I know people here just want to see a PM wheel, but what I present here is some things of what I have found with or without a perpetual motion machine.

Where it ultimately leads me, I keep for myself at this point. But a mechanical principle can be deduced. Now that we know what a kreuz may be. and we add zuge and gewicht etc it may become easier..

Best
ØR