Hypothesis .. Raising GPE without using Law of Levers ? ..

[johannesbender]

Well if we are to believe that the weights drove the wheel (like he stated) , no matter by what function , then taking some of them or all of them out would by logic make the wheel either become non functional (no drive) or partly non function (insufficient drive).

Those who look in to fraud , say it opens up a window of opportunity for him to get his hands in the machine ,and twice too, before relocation when taking the weights out and after when putting them back again .

However whether or not he did something inside with his hands other than take out weights i would leave to those looking in to fraud .

If he took it out to cut down on weight , like he said , we don't really know how much he took out , as mentioned no one gave a number on how many he took out and put back in.

If it was to stop the wheel from functioning , then he lied , or perhaps it served both the purpose of stopping the wheel from functioning and making it easier to translocate , however the weights would have to be translocated anyway .

He had cylindrical shaped weights , there were some details of the weight he did not want people to see , and neither touch on the ends , but they were permitted to estimate the shape and weight .

I don't know , i cant say much for the function of the weights from all these details , apart from the fact that he had weights in the wheel (whatever purpose they served) , since there are no described details per their mechanical or physical function in detail (how they do what they do) .

[daxwc]

Fletcher: Short introduction since I brought it up .. for the Merseburg translocation tests Donald Simanek laments the lack of information on the estimated weight of the wheel translocated - he says ( as we do ) that there is no information on how far away the next supports were ( a few paces, probably only meters away ) - whether is was picked up and carried, or rolled across the floor, or a jack crane was used to swing it across - and exactly how the axle iron stubs we placed into the bronze bushings etc, how many B. assistants there were etc ..

We know the axle was about 6 feet in length, enough length available for 1 or 2 men each side of the axle to put it on their shoulders and walk/side-step with it across ( if they had a raised walkway arrangement, given its diameter and the average height of the men ) - probably just B. and his brother Gottfried did the job ..

I think if it were rolled or craned across then that would have been mentioned in the certificates - men carrying it a few paces was maybe not that unusual to be worth mentioning - however, why he took out cylindrical weights of about 4 pounds each and covered them so they could not be seen, before the actual translocations, is purely misdirection stage management imo - not of the theatrical kind, but of bona-fide necessity - and not for the reasons given by B. that the wheel would heavier than the devil himself if he didn't remove them ( even if there were enough to fill a small box - uncorroborated ) ..

It is commented somewhere Fletcher the men carried it. It doesn't say exactly how many men but sounds like around six.

[daxwc]

"the Wolffius Dietericum Bobfen, Frideri
with Hoffmann, the famous Medicus, Chriftianus Wolffus, and
Menckenius, among others, carried the wheel from the place of
the imalia, so that he might go round the walls adjoining the
wall and the uridic book.”"

There was 6 men or more that carried it was stated in “Acta Eruditorum. (1718) about the 1715 wheel”
https://besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopi ... um#p206350

I will see if I can re-translate it with the new AI.

[daxwc]

"brinee Uschemntum impetira, Julio Bernardo de Robr, Regi-
minis Ducalis Assessore, Secretario Ducali aliisque officialibus
necnon Viris generis, & munerum dignitate ac eruditione
praestantibus, quos inter Wolffium Dietericum a Bohsen- Frider-
icum item Mannun, Diedicum celeberrim Christianum Wolffum &
Nimitenium nostrum nominasse sufficiat, rotam de loco su-
in alium transtulit, ut nulli parieti contigua et undique li-
bera circumiret."

In the presence of Julius Bernard de Robr, Ducal Councilor, Ducal Secretary, and other officials, as well as men of high rank, dignity, and learning—among whom it suffices to name Wolff Dieterich von Bohsen, Friedrich, and our own well-known Christian Wolff and Nimitenius—[Orffyreus] moved the wheel from its place to another, so that it was not adjacent to any wall and could revolve freely on all sides.

I take it four people moved it.

[johannesbender]

(concerning Simanek's question)
Well it does not stipulate how many people moved it at all , however i don't think it matters at all because if it was fraud with clockwork and a lightweight balanced shell , then lifting a wheel and turning a balanced shell are two different unrelated things .

If it was not fraud then personally it still does not matter to me how many people it took to lift it , if the weight was such that one person would have the strength to lift it it would take more than 1 person because its too big , if it required the strength of 6 it still does not mean much to me since witnesses can be quoted stating it took little effort to rotate the wheel and a bit of a good push to set it in full motion , so lifting weight does not say much for rotation because there is no evidence of what was rotating except Bessler saying "everything must revolve together" , apart from inertia there is not much interesting about it to me personally .

[Roxaway59]

Basically you can make a cylinder measuring about 10cm long by 4.52cm in diameter out of a 4 pound lump of lead.

If you then take 8 of these weights and put them in a box the size might be 20cm x 10cm x 10cm in shape.

I don’t know about anyone else here but I would not call that a considerable box.

I think that this tells us three main things.

The first is that there was a lot more of the weights that Bessler exhibited than 8 inside the wheel.

The second is that the wheel contained a minimum of 16 weights but probably a lot more.

The third thing it tells us is that if the wheel consisted of 4 crossbars (based on the sound) then each of the 8 mechanisms contained at least 2 pieces of lead.

It is also reasonable to assume that if these weights (as part of one of these mechanisms) did not have some distance between them that Bessler had no reason not to just clump them together in the form of a bigger single weight.

Graham

[johannesbender]

Correct , Bessler never said there were 8 weights or an exact number , in fact he mentions many weights , the 8 weights is a theory some people came up because they heard 8 sounds per revolution , even if those were actually sounds from 8 weights it does not mean there are 8 weights in total .

[Fletcher]

Thanks dax - with the clearer translation you provided today I now have complete confidence that the wheel was moved to new supports by at least 4 men stepping it across - it reads like B. and the 3 named assistants did the lifting .. so we don't need to worry about it being rolled across on its rim or craned across - and that is why no detail is given of this in the official certificate ( about translocation ) or after the event in the personal witness letters from Wolff et al we are familiar with, because it wasn't anything note worthy ..

[MrTim]

It is also reasonable to assume that if these weights (as part of one of these mechanisms) did not have some distance between them that Bessler had no reason not to just clump them together in the form of a bigger single weight.

Having worked with lead weights, smaller weights would have been easier to move around (install/uninstall) inside the confines of a wheel, whereas a heavier weight would have been difficult to handle. That he didn't drop any of them inside the wheel (if he did, it wasn't reported, and it would have made quite a racket, plus the hassle of fishing it from the bottom of the wheel ;-) was a marvel in itself... ;-)

[Fletcher]

Hello, Fletcher!

What would be the magic, in your opinion, if the ends of the weights actually had a particular shape that could put on the track of his concept? In B's. wheels if they were rolled into position etc then a groove and track system like a sliding door would help maintain alignment .. in my system the weights are purely swinging weights bolted thru the middle to a short lever, so a groove or track is not essential or desired - so they can be disks or cylinders, it doesn't matter much ..

There is no better magician than the one who brings things to you, otherwise it’s a scammer!

Can we speculate on the shape that these tips could have to generate an oscillation? Personally Shadow, I think they were ordinary can shaped weights with a hole thru the length, whose job was to swing into overbalance after a resonant impulse is given to the whole wheel to make the whole wheel bob / bounce about - and the weights repositioning to overbalance created the excess weight / torque and excess impetus he talks about as the constituent PM itself - I think his not allowing any witnesses to see a naked weight, but they could hold one in the palm of their hands ( the length ) with a cloth over it to judge its weight, was a magicians distraction - he would NOT allow anyone to touch the ends - the ends could have had a hole in them to attach to a lever etc, and even if there was some grease on the ends etc that can be easily managed without an order to not touch the ends already completely hidden under a cloth covering - additionally, the cloth may have covered from sight and feel any wear, or knock, or rolling marks that otherwise might be visible and indicate a particular action as they were swung ..

Hi Shadow .. there is information about the shape and size of the removed weights from various eye witness reports - I'll give them below ..

Wagner’s Critiques 1716 ..

IX . .. at the experiment, before the wheel was set up at another place in different boards, he had taken an amount of weight out of the wheel which could have filled a considerable box, and in the received testimony he expressly admits that the weights are inside and are driven. ..

Christian Wolff, letter to Leibniz, examination of Merseburg translocation wheel, 19th December, 1715

.. he did not disguise the fact that the mechanism is moved by weights. Several such weights, wrapped in his handkerchief, he let us weigh in our hands to estimate their weight. They were judged to be about four pounds each, and their shape was definitely cylindrical. I conclude, not only from this but also from other circumstantial evidence, that the weights are attached to some moveable or elastic arms on the periphery of the wheel. ..

.. When he put the wheel onto another support and reinstalled the weights in their previous positions, he pushed down on an iron spring that gave a loud noise as it expanded upwards.

Christian Wolff, letter to Johann Daniel Schumacher about the Merseburg translocation wheel, 3rd July, 1722

b) Before translocating the wheel, the Inventor who was performing the test for the officially appointed Commissioners, took out the weights and permitted one of them to be touched, wrapped in a handkerchief. He did not allow the weight to be touched on the end, but lengthwise, it felt cylindrical and not very thick. One could hear the weights landing on the overbalanced side, as though they were swinging ..

.............................

* Adding to Graham's information and speculations - 4 pounds of lead is about 160 cubic centimeters of volume ( not counting any hole drilled thru the length etc if there was one - only a small difference if so ) - if we take it as Graham estimates as 10 cm long cylinder ( to put in your hand ) the cylinder will look like a small soda can in shape at about 4.5 cm width - to give that some additional perspective that is the length of about my index finger to the third knuckle and 2 fingers wide ( large hand small cylinder ) - now imagine that is one weight ( of many to fill a considerable box ( Wagner ) ), and the wheel diameter is 4 meters !!!

There are a number of tiny weights of can shape and size - inside a huge 2 meter radius wheel ! - a visual metaphor might be like comparing a mouse size to an elephant sized wheel - but in my theory the mouse squeaks and the elephant jumps up and down ;7) ..

And then we have the Wolff observation of an iron spring-like sound heard when the weights were reinstalled - this would not have been a good look for B. because it opened the door wide open for a claim of potentially resetting a spring-wound mechanism at each translocation - he would have wanted that like a hole in the head at an official testing - what a nightmare to willingly risk, unless you had to - BUT - HE STILL stopped the wheel and got people to nibble on cucumber sandwiches and talk amongst themselves while he took the time to remove a considerable number of weights and then took the time gain to reinstall them ( his time might have been less valuable than theirs ), plus the damaging spring-like sound .. taking the weights out and putting them back in for the reasons he gave doesn't stack up for me ..

.............................

ETA .. Mr Tim makes a good point - you wouldn't want to drop one or a bolt or nut which would be easy to do ..

And .. of course on the back of that the Kassel long duration test was organized with a new wheel at a later date to counter any other claims of stored potential internal energy, even tho the bi-directionality of the Merseburg was supposed put that to bed - I'll bet the spring-like sound when weights were put back in wasn't just noticed and discussed by Wolff ..

[daxwc]

Another translation I think this is better I can't see royals and high society individuals doing the moving work themselves. Maybe it is just me:

"The [committee] included Julius Bernard von Rohr, ducal government assessor, ducal secretary, and other officials, among them men of noble birth, distinguished by their offices and learning, such as Wolff, Dieterich von Bohsen, Friedrich, Dieterich the famous, Christian Wolff, and our own Ninitenius.

It suffices to name them as witnesses who moved the wheel from one place to another, ensuring it was not adjacent to any wall and could revolve freely in all directions.

Orffyreus did not deny that the machine was animated by weights.

However, as could be inferred from certain circumstances, the weights were pierced in the middle and connected by some means.

This report was printed in the German language under the title: "Detailed Report on the Perpetual Motion Machine Successfully Invented by Mr. Orffyreus," in which the external structure was also illustrated in a table.

Indeed, since it was abundantly clear that the machine was not animated by any external sensible force, the possibility of perpetual motion was scarcely called into question.

For they said it was possible to construct devices which, for a certain time, could revolve due to an internal structure, but not absolutely, like the works of clocks and such mechanisms; and they trusted the accounts and believed the reports about wheels constructed in this manner.

But this objection was satisfied in the present year by Orffyreus, who now resides in Kassel, where he was recognized by the Most Serene

No idea why Wolff is listed twice though. Does it make sense people of high stature lifted it?

[daxwc]

It is having problems reading it on the noisy and same colored page. Another version from a negative clean up. It just says the wheel was moved:

ACTA ERUDITORUM

bri nec — Mathematicians inexperienced,
imperito — unskilled,
Julio Bernhardo de Rohr — Julius Bernhard of Rohr,
Regiminis Ducalis Assessore — Assessor of the Ducal Government,
Secretario Ducali aliisque officialibus — Ducal Secretary and other officials,
itemq; Viris & generis, & munerum dignitate ac eruditione — likewise to men of kind, of dignity of offices, and of learning,
praestantibus, quos inter Wolffium Dietericum a Bohsen — distinguished, among whom Wolff Dieterich of Bohsen,
Fridericum Hoffmannum — Friedrich Hoffmann,
Medicum celeberem — a celebrated physician,
Christianum Wolfium — Christian Wolff,
& Menckenium nostrum — and our Mencken,
nominasse sufficiat — to have named is sufficient,
rotam de loco suo in alium transtulit — transferred the wheel from its place to another,
ut nulli parieti contigua & undique libera circumiret — so that it touched no wall and freely moved around everywhere.

Non dissimulabat Orffyreus — Orffyreus did not conceal,
ponderibus machinam animari — that the machine was animated by weights.

Quantum vero ex quibusdam circumstantiis conjicere licuit — However, as far as could be inferred from certain circumstances,
pondera erant in medio perforata & eleutheribus juncta — the weights were perforated in the middle and joined by (something uncertain).

Typis hac de re exciprita est Relatio idiomate Germanico sub titulo — A report about this matter was printed in the German language under the title:
gründlicher Bericht von dem durch den Herrn Orffyreum glücklich inventirten Perpetuo ac per se mobili — Thorough report of the perpetual and self-moving machine successfully invented by Mr. Orffyreus,
ubi simul structura ejus externa in Tabulis exhibetur — where at the same time its external structure is displayed in tables

.

[Gregory]

Hi Fletcher,

I did some wm2d experiment and analysis of the swinger carts. Nevertheless, it's confusing...

Experiment 1a:
I set up 2 identical carts, except the first with a moveable swinger bob, the second is with a fixed one.
The first cart receives a starting velocity, which I thought about as a simplified version of a collision. As the cart moves, kinetic energy starts to distribute between the cart and the swinger weight based on the sine of the angle... So at the end the swinger is lifted and the cart is slowed down. Some of the KE is converted to rotational KE of the swinger arm. I would say this RKE is permanently lost as gravity stops the rotation, however PE is gained in exchange.
Reading the numbers, it looks like 0.3923 J is lost, but 4.41305 J is gained as GPE. From one standpoint much more is gained then lost... on the other hand, compared to the full amount of the starting energy, we are short with exactly this 0.3923 joules.

Now, the first cart collides into the second (with the fixed arm). Best case scenario, ideal elastic collision. The first cart stops moving, motion is fully transferred to the second cart. Momentum is still conserved up to this point, so momentum equals the starting conditions... Except KE is diluted due to the slowdown/distribution effect of the moveable arm in the first cart, which slowed down the cart as GPE was gained.
This is kind of a seesaw with a moving mass aka momentum at one end (the cart), and inertia or resistance at the other end (swinger bob), accompanied with a little bit of gravity play.

And at this point I went a step further... I wanted to see what happens when the gained GPE is used to accelerate the output cart. So, I enchanted our familiar red synthetic force with exactly the amount of Joules which is represented by the gained GPE, and I pushed the second cart with this amount of Force across distance combination.

The end result is...
Total Energy is conserved, except for the lost amount, so we're still 0.3923 J short compared to the starting conditions.
However, Momentum is increased from 5.66 to 8.72705 kg m/s, whatever that means…


Experiment 1b:
Somehow I felt weird about this... and I repeated the exact same experiment, only changed the starting conditions. Instead of the starting velocity for the first cart, I added a starter dummy cart to collide with and set the first cart into motion. I thought this is identical and everything should be the same as in the first experiment. But didn't! Which is... I dunno, I don't get it...

I noticed, that in this second version of the experiment, compared to starting conditions the Total Energy looks conserved, and Momentum is increased, and even the swinger bob was swung to a little bit higher position.
So, I have this spooky feeling that something is wrong... I thought the two experiment should have to be identical, but they aren't. Why? What's the difference, and how? Which is right? Is it just some wm2d glitch or something else?

I wish that ME just came here and set things right with a single post, putting all these carts where they belong, arghh! :D

So yeah, this experiment is confusing, I feel strange about it.
I think it would be good and interesting to have a complete analytical math walkthrough with this. Especially for the momentum vs inertia lever part, and the energy conversion / RKE lost ? there...

Swinger carts, loose my number! 8]


P.S.:
Sims attached, and I updated the ratchet/latching formula:
And(Body[6].p.r > 0.05, Body[6].v.r <= Body[1].v.r + 0.01)

I noticed if you don't put the +0.01 (something arbitrary tiny) at the end, then it can slowly/randomly leak and loose GPE. Which makes absolutely no sense, but hey… don't hurt to put it there.

[Fletcher]

Hey thanks Gregory for taking the time to design and build these experiments as an independent cross check - because I sympathize and know the amount of brain power its going to soak up, and the restless nights, as we keep thinking it thru over and over, and what it means - if we bash away at it together we should be able to nail it down I would say .. tho as you say ME would be all over it like a rash and make it his mission to get to the bottom of it if he were still here lol .. will have to do our best without him ..

fwiw ( bad timing ) I'm gonna have to leave you at the coal face for a few days - last minute packing before heading away today for the next 4 days out of town ( and no devices lol ) - we are off on a pre-planned visit to some old friends up-country to shoot the breeze ( no physics ) and relax and recharge etc ..

Anyhoo .. when I designed these original sim experiments I instinctively knew that if the carts were given their impetus from an energy input standpoint then COE would rule the roost, and there'd be no surprises - but I wanted to explore what I thought might be a chink in the armour wrt Conservation of Momentum .. to explain, if I get the carts moving by a known weight falling ( losing GPE ) but connected via a pulley and rope to the carts to pull them along then Energy would be conserved ( you can try it ) ..

But, if I gave it some synthetic momentum transfer ( pseudo energy ) the gates might open for a different result - and that's what I believe the sims showed - Momentum was Conserved and not Energy ( at local level ) IINM !

This forced me to really try hard to balance the Energy budget from the position of different input energy/momentum start conditions - and fully appreciate that Total Energy = Kinetic Energy + Potential Energy .. it is easy to forget about the gain or loss in PE ( right it off as anomalous ) but it is there, and real, in these experiments ..

So for me it all came down to what was the original source of movement given to the carts - and if idealized momentum transfer gave an increase in Total Energy then where did it get this local increase from ?

Obviously it was harvesting momentum from a source ( the earth connection I reasoned - bigger frame of reference needed ) and harnessing it and repurposing it into Energy equivalent - if correct, making Conservation of Momentum the fundamental Law at that local level because the Total Energy was not conserved in the strict sense ..

ETA .. for me the hole in the Energy budget ( WEEP ) became likely when I ran the numbers on a combined ( summed ) 2 legs of equal but opposite impulse given to the swinger cart - leg 1 followed by leg 2 back to stationary - fwiw for me the violation stood out in the summed totals of legs 1 and 2 ..

Bottom lining it - it appears that momentum can be conserved and energy not - if the swinger carts pendulum can swing and gain vertical height ( gain GPE ) - and this must be due to the split reaction inertias at time of momentum impulse ( ft = mv ) originally given .. IOW's the Work Energy Equivalence Principle appears to be violated under these conditions ( at the local level but not at the cosmos level ) ..

......................

I'll carefully study your sims later next week and offer my thoughts then - it may take some time - in the mean time we can both have the weekend off lol ..

[Gregory]

fwiw ( bad timing ) I'm gonna have to leave you at the coal face for a few days - last minute packing before heading away today for the next 4 days out of town ( and no devices lol ) - we are off on a pre-planned visit to some old friends up-country to shoot the breeze ( no physics ) and relax and recharge etc ..

Have a great weekend Fletcher, chill and relax!
I will do the same, those carts can wait...