How Difficult can it be?

[Tarsier79]

https://www.aqua-calc.com/calculate/weight-to-volume

So 4 pounds of lead is approx. 0.16 litre or about 1/2 a can of coke. I didn't see any mention of the actual size. "Thin" is a relative term. Although we assume the weights were made from lead, they were covered by a hankerchief as a form of misdirection. They could have been a container full of liquid (or fuel), or simply a larger iron weight pierced in the middle (or as we assume a smaller lead one).

The following figures are merely speculative:

The volume of a 12 pack of coke (24 weights in lead) will be about 43.5kg, which would ideally be a 2 man lift.

8 impacts per revolution could mean multiple weights slid onto a shaft to make a single heavier weight, or multiple weights per mechanism.

So lets list the facts we can inkle out of these texts.

There may have been more than one weight.
Bessler filled a box of unknown size with them without anyone reporting having seen or counting them.

[thx4]

Apparently the cylindrical weights were drilled in the center, so they didn't just drop down.
I thought I read somewhere that curved rods had been spotted. You'd think the weights could slide down the rods?

[Robinhood46]

I thought I read somewhere that curved rods had been spotted.

That was probably that idiot Robinwoood, he was going on about curved rods for a while.
It turned out that they weren't actually spotted, or that there wasn't any written records of them being spotted. It was just someone's interpretation of what they thought was seen by someone else who looked inside. Pure speculation.

[Tarsier79]

Also it was assumed holes were drilled in them "to attach springs" again pure speculation....both the springs and the holes.

[daxwc]

""Orffyreus did not attempt to conceal the fact that his machine is set in motion by weights. The author goes on to conclude from circumstantial evidence that the weights were pierced in the middle and attached by connecting springs." - PM 87 Merseburg witness Johann Mencke 1715"

Says he is an author. Maybe we can still find out what this circumstantial evidence is. Did he just see the hole? Did he see the spring? Did he see the connection?

[Robinhood46]

Says he is an author. Maybe we can still find out what this circumstantial evidence is.

He heard a noise that definitely could have been a spring, and the handkerchief definitely would have hidden the holes on the end, if they did exist.
I'm convinced.

[JUBAT]

Right on. He didn't want people to know the weight's orientation in the machine or how they hooked up. He didn't counter the eye-witnesses' observations so it appeared what they said was fact by him remaining silent on the issue.

If you focus on the sounds and eyewitness reports and then the key: keep the wheel and its mechanisms as simple grassroots barebones as possible and only add the bare essentials to get the weights to move then you'll be as close to the solution as anyone has ever been.

Without a couple key fundamental pieces of knowledge you'd be hard pressed to solve the wheel. I outright revealed one by blatantly stating as much in one of my posts on this forum. For the 1st time in my life i literally have 2 principles of perpetual motion tucked in my belt. They are the lines you can never cross in these builds.

For what it's worth in all my years of building I constantly violated both. No wonder they never worked.

[JUBAT]

I didn't make myself clear on my initial statement where I said: Right on. He didn't want people to know the weight's orientation in the machine or how they hooked up. He didn't counter the eye-witnesses' observations so it appeared what they said was fact by him remaining silent on the issue.

What I meant by that is that Bessler made their observations appear to be correct by neither confirming or denying their suppositions based on the sounds. Some of what they said is correct and some of what they said was wrong although the sounds they heard were correct. When analyzing the sounds and comparing them to the eyewitness accounts, when one figures out the solution, even the sounds match the device and you can understand why people thought the way they did. Their preconceived notions about how a wheel like this operates was actually their biggest hurdle to overcome when trying to figure out the solution.

Many years of errant thought put me squarely where I am today.

[Fletcher]

from JC's PMAAMS?

""Orffyreus did not attempt to conceal the fact that his machine is set in motion by weights. The author goes on to conclude from circumstantial evidence that the weights were pierced in the middle and attached by connecting springs." - PM 87 Merseburg witness Johann Mencke 1715"

Says he is an author. Maybe we can still find out what this circumstantial evidence is. Did he just see the hole? Did he see the spring? Did he see the connection?

Paraphrased .. Mencke was the editor and contributor to the local newspaper .. he had observed B's. wheels - his associate Wolff also contributed articles to the same newspaper .. we know Wolff retold an account to various people of what he had seen and heard - he wrote that the weights were handed around under a cloth covering to hide them - he could feel their shape as cylindrical, with a hole piercing them, and they weighed about 4 lbs - he also said that when B. reinstalled the weights an iron spring-like sound was heard .. he also said that he could see thru cracks in the Merseburg covering short curved boards in the vicinity of the rim - he speculated from that and the sounds he heard that something resembling extendable or moveable arms also occupied the outer space ..

It seems to me very unlikely to me that Wolff and Mencke would not have discussed the Merseburg wheel and Wolff's observations and speculations - additionally Mencke was the editor of the newspaper Wolff would publish in therefore would proof read and approve the articles - not exactly collaborators or conspiracy buddy's but I can't imagine Mencke not putting his own spin on what Wolff had said and written, because the phrasing seems to have a familiar tone .. imo ..

[daxwc]

Me: Johann Mencke 1715
Mencke was the editor and contributor to the local newspaper - elaborate.

Bing AI:
Johann Burkhard Mencke (1674–1732) was a significant figure in the early 18th century. He was known for his work "The Charlatanry of the Learned" (De Charlataneria Eruditorum), which was published in 1715³. In this work, Mencke subjected the scholars of the Holy Roman Empire to a searching examination¹. He ridiculed the minds and the mores of the polyhistors with equal zest¹.

Mencke belonged to a family of distinguished scholars. His father, Otto Mencke, a native of the town of Oldenburg, had founded the Acta Eruditorum, the first scientific journal in Germany, in 1682². Johann Burchard Mencke was born at Leipzig and was educated privately by eminent scholars². He was exceptionally gifted and became a professor of divinity, historian, and editor-in-chief of the Acta².

It's worth noting that Mencke did more than anyone else to spread the knowledge of English science, English history, and the English way of life in Central Europe in the hey-day of continental absolutism². His contributions were significant in the field of academia during his time.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 2024-01-10
(1) Editor's Preface to Charlatanry of the Learned - Mencken. http://www.mencken.org/mencken-society/ ... reface.pdf.
(2) IN 1713 and 1715 Johann Burkhard Mencke subjected the scholars of - JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4546034.
(3) Professor Johann Burchard Mencke, F.R.S. (1674-1732) - JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/531222.

What is the Acta Eruditorum?

The **Acta Eruditorum** was the first scientific journal of the German-speaking lands of Europe, published from 1682 to 1782¹. It was founded in Leipzig by Otto Mencke, who became its first editor, with support from Gottfried Leibniz in Hanover¹. The journal was published monthly, entirely in Latin, and contained excerpts from new writings, reviews, small essays, and notes¹.

Most of the articles were devoted to the natural sciences and mathematics, including contributions from notable figures such as Jakob Bernoulli, Humphry Ditton, Leonhard Euler, Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus, Pierre-Simon Laplace, and Jérôme Lalande¹. It also featured works from humanists and philosophers such as Veit Ludwig von Seckendorff, Stephan Bergler, Christian Thomasius, and Christian Wolff¹.

After Otto Mencke's death in 1707, the Acta Eruditorum was directed by his son, Johann Burckhardt Mencke, until 1732¹. The journal had changed its name by then to Nova Acta Eruditorum¹. Beginning in 1756, it was led by Karl Andreas Bel¹.

The Acta Eruditorum played a significant role in the dispute between Isaac Newton and Leibniz over the credit for the development of differential calculus¹. This dispute also influenced the Acta to express the feelings of national cohesion and defining German scholarship within the international field of influence¹..

Source: Conversation with Bing, 2024-01-10
(1) Acta Eruditorum - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acta_Eruditorum.
(2) Acta eruditorum. 1684 : Acta eruditorum. : Free Download, Borrow, and .... https://archive.org/details/s1id13206500.
(3) Acta eruditorum | Lens on Leeuwenhoek. https://lensonleeuwenhoek.net/content/acta-eruditorum.
(4) Acta Eruditorum - Wikipedia. https://static.hlt.bme.hu/semantics/ext ... torum.html.
(5) en.wikipedia.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acta_Eruditorum.

[rasselasss]

This is my opinion of Besslers weights ,to me he knew how to send witness's on the wrong way of guessing how his wheel worked...think on this a number of weights in pockets round the inner circumference of his wheel,equal spaced ,to keep wheel balanced and create a very heavy wheel....puts his hand through canvas covered gap takes out and shows one or more of the weights....as these revolve inside the turning wheel/disc this makes the noise they all note down assuming these turn the wheel as falling weights....now look at the axle ...why wrapped in boards...some say to beef it up ...cant go with that ...wagon axles of that time had proper axles...blacksmiths knew how...to me it was to camoflage the hub connection to the wheel and the true function of the axle and simple mech...as stated just my opinion any other option has too much complication to make it work..all i ask is try and look at this in a different manner...

[John Collins]

The author was Christian Wolff and Mencke was simply publishing his letter.
From my book, PMAAMS?

“ Professor Wolff obliged, with an account of the proceedings on the 19th December 1715. This letter, one of many between Wolff and Leibniz, seems to have been ignored by the publishers because of its subject matter. Wolff wrote from Halle.”
Page 70.

JC

[rasselasss]

I have to say there is some terrific interesting reading on the forum lately,there seems to be more openness by the members discussing where they're at and what they're doing,the input makes excellent reading and generating more interest on what we're about...truthfully reading these blogs make very interesting reading...Good Luck to all with your endeavours..keep it up..

[rasselasss]

Fletcher,apologies for not getting back to you on this subject...the best description of this design..just like the childrens hoop and stick to keep the hoop rolling a touch with the stick now and again....the free heavy wheel free to rotate on the axle retained by collars)...the axle heavily weighted arm(working indepentatly to the heavy wheel) pushing against a fixed block and timed just before it starts its return stroke thus the weighted free wheel carrys it over the 12 o clock position to repeat the cycle...difficult to explain in words ...catch and push mech.....hope makes this clearer...good luck..