Besslers prime mover and its enabler.

[agor95]

But, your simple path doesn't lead to PM.

I agree this simple task has plague us for centuries. But the path is not a simple one.

Regards

[Tarsier79]

Once upon a time, I had MT printouts and Besslers "clues" printed out and on a "crazy wall". Ultimately, nothing on that wall was absolutely helpful, or pointed to a path forward. They did not absolutely close any doors and followig the clues only leads you to where you were probably going anyway.

[eccentrically1]

The best thing B. did to fool everyone was to show it like it was a gravity wheel, or a waterwheel.
The debate would be different if he had demonstrated it on its side.

[Sam Peppiatt]

For me the path hasn't been simple. In fact it has been very difficult and, as crooked as it can get. The clues are like a snare; perhaps best to be avoided.

It's been nearly impossible to figure out ecc1 but, that doesn't necessarily mean that it can't be a gravity wheel. I think you must be mistaken about it not being one------------------Sam

[thx4]

TMs represent interesting variables.
The question is, did B already have the solution before undertaking such sketches? which represent a great deal of research.
Were the comments added much later?
I know he wanted to create a school, but a school of what? and for what purpose?
I doubt I could set up a school with just a few sketches.
Something doesn't add up...

[johannesbender]

On June 1st, 1723, Christian Wolff penned a letter to Schumacher, the Czar's Librarian, which included a communication from Orffyresus:

"My perpetual motion machine remains unsold and is still available for purchase. I'm pleased that His Majesty the Czar has expressed interest in acquiring it, and I'm equally delighted that you have been designated to examine and research this invention. The price of the machine remains unchanged at 100,000 thalers.

I have ambitious plans for a comprehensive 'Treatise on Mechanics' that I intend to publish. This treatise will feature numerous machines and detailed drawings that can be produced at my residence. It will provide a comprehensive history of the development of my perpetual motion machine. Anyone acquiring this treatise will be able to select and construct any machine of their choice , incorporating my invention. The Treatise will be presented in two folio volumes and should be ready for publication in approximately two years from the start of the project. It promises to be both captivating and invaluable to the public. While I have much more to convey on this matter, I'll keep my remarks brief due to time constraints. Nevertheless, I propose the following arrangement, subject to your approval:

If His Majesty the Czar could provide an advance of 10,000 thalers for this work, it would significantly expedite the publication process. Within two years, he would possess a substantial number of these treatises. The content of this treatise will encompass my perpetual motion machine, revealing its construction in all stages comprehensively, eliminating the need for any additional contributions. I would like to emphasize that we will include sufficient guarantees to ensure the transaction's security.

In the event that my perpetual motion machine is sold before the treatise is published, rest assured that I will complete the project and publish the treatise as planned. However, the machine that has been sold will not be included in the treatise, as my intention is to sell only one specific type of machine, not all of them. I possess a variety of machines, each operating on distinct principles, including those driven by weights, balls, springs, internal gears, internal water, oil, alcohol, and wind." - PM 124

" Further demonstrations regarding the possibility and impossibility of perpetual motion
NB. May 1, 1733. Due to the arrest, I burned and buried all papers that prove the possibility. However, I have
left all demonstrations and experiments, since it would be difficult for anybody to see or learn anything about a
perpetual motion from them or to decide whether there was any truth in them because no illustration by itself
contains a description of the motion; however, taking various illustrations together and combining them with a
discerning mind, it will indeed be possible to look for a movement and, finally to find one in them. "
- Johann Bessler, cover page of Maschinen Tractate

The only mention of a treatise that were going to include the full history of his wheel design and the full details of it in case the wheel did not sell seems to line up with what we have as MT , it included a history of designs and his remarks on them , and the very first comment in MT states he had removed those papers that proved PM from it , so the logical conclusion is that the treatise he was talking about with the tsar was perhaps MT , however MT seemed to be still an unfinished draft .

The school thing i believe had nothing to do with MT , bessler could only build or start a school if his machine sold because he had no money , he wrote that if his machine sold he would exclude it from his treatise , i am unaware of bessler stating he was going to teach people in a school via his treatise ?

Either MT was suppose to be the treatise (unfinished) discussed with the tsar , or there is a missing work by bessler which he discussed with the tsar and MT is something else , we assume MT is the same thing mentioned .

[daxwc]

JB: Either MT was suppose to be the treatise (unfinished) discussed with the tsar , or there is a missing work by bessler which he discussed with the tsar and MT is something else , we assume MT is the same thing mentioned .

In his estate there is 219 wood blocks of carvings that was called the Great treatise.

Since those blocks are on that list they went back to his wife.

[daxwc]

Page 1746: Letter from Frederic to Malsburg, <> Feb. <>: The widow and the children made a petition to release the furniture and other legacy. Now we want you to seperate the letters, the machines and the apparatus from the rest, take good care of it untill you get anoter instruction and send me the inventory. But for the rest as the furniture and so on, we want you to restitute it immediately to the heirs."

“But for the rest” is the estate on the list which would have been handed back to his wife. The inventory documentation went to Sweden to the King.


We have the letters they are now binded in Orffyreana in the museum. Therefore I assume MT went with them and his wife gave them up to get her pension from the state.

We don’t have the machine because it was in another country out of Malsburgs hands.

/5

[agor95]

If you reduce the clues Bessler left then you end up with a simple path.

Have the mass of the right further out than the left. Thus lifting the left mass up.
As the right mass reach the bottom move it into the inner position.
While the top inner position mass moves out towards the outer position.

These movements use the power of their swing.

It is true there is so many ways of interpreting Bessler's clues and so much time used in trying to find out the historic time-line around him and what was within his head.

You see I used the word 'Mass' not weight or weight's. I also don't bother with justifying the cause of rotation.

However you notice the right mass is further out than the left. You can call that cause of motion what ever you want. The swinging results in the reset which naturally are pendulums and happens before the device reaches equilibrium.

Regards

[johannesbender]

There is so many prevalent interpretations of what he wrote , that there isn't a collected agreement on whether he said what to do or what not to do at times , for example :
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... in#p111081

The best we do is combine our understanding of what he wrote and what we know.

[agor95]

The best we do is combine our understanding of what he wrote and what we know.

Actually I found the clues useful for they help me know what I needed too understand.
So learning from the ground up too gain a better understanding.
This was done without direct use of the clues.

As you see historic 'getting in Besslers head' is not required getting understanding into your own head is what counts.

Regards

[thx4]

As you see historic 'getting in Besslers head' is not required getting understanding into your own head is what counts.
Regards

No I don't see anything !!! 😁

[agor95]

No I don't see anything !!! 😁

No I don't is a little problematic being a double negative.
Assuming 'I don't see anything' with emphasis is the meaning.

Then so true as I have not given a nice diagram here.

However I have given everything and some would say nothing.
But actually it would be better to say not enough.

Anyway back to understanding one of the clues for me and that needs
Geometric Algebra.

Regards

[eccentrically1]

There is so many prevalent interpretations of what he wrote , that there isn't a collected agreement on whether he said what to do or what not to do at times , for example :
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... in#p111081

The best we do is combine our understanding of what he wrote and what we know.

the relevant post from that thread:

If equal motion of two weights can be sorted/transferred so as to cause increased motion of one weight and decreased motion of the other weight, then this would be like a Mechanical Maxwell's Demon. Two weights moving at the same speed as each other and same speed as the wheel have no harnessable energy within the wheel. All harnessable motion energy requires weights to move at different speeds.

If we cause the two weights to change velocities within the wheel, then we can use their velocity difference to do work. And suppose this causes the two weights to revert back to moving at the same speed again. We simply repeat the process.

At first glance, this would seem to not work if we assume conservation of energy. Obviously for a PM wheel to work, one needs to break conservation of energy.

The CoE is one of the most fundamental observations we have. It's never been broken to anyone's knowledge.
Drawings and simulations aren't going to break it.
At the beginning of that thread, Jim tried to show that B. never claimed to have a gravity wheel.
So if you're going to break CoE, the question remains, how are you going to do that if we've never seen it done before?
A CoE violation isn't a question of finding extra force(s). It's a question of something - in this case a wheel- staying in motion forever by itself; without converting any type of energy for its motion.

[daxwc]

"The principle of Conservation of Energy (CoE) is indeed one of the most fundamental observations in physics. It’s a cornerstone of our understanding of the physical world, and to our knowledge, it has never been violated. However, one might argue that our affirmation of this principle is based on an incomplete ledger of energy accounting.

When we observe energy ‘disappearing’ in a system, we often attribute it to forms that are challenging to measure or observe directly, such as friction or heat. But how can we be certain that all the energy is accounted for? Could there be instances where energy is transformed into forms we have yet to discover or fully understand?

Conservation or Energy meets Conservation of Gravity; two different things.