The Bessler Curse

[Patrick]

Murilo;
I am going to send you three separate emails. I am hoping you will post your unbiased comments to the board as an independent observer.
Regards,
--Patrick

[murilo]

Patrick,
hi!
Thanks for your confidence, since you are showing me a part of your job, wich is a borning book, I guess.
As many others, it may have a beggining, a meadle and jump to the endless theme. A fine adventure, at least.
In fast reading, I can say it's fine, plenty of ideas and quite well written.
Anyhow, I'm afraid to break the confidence if I comment it to the board, as you asked.
Let's wait for the third msg... I'll writte in off, anyway.
I know you need opinions...
That Bessler's signature is amazing!
*I'm not the best one* to this mission, but I'll try. My general F-E culture is more personal...
Regs. M. SP dec/20th

''Will be thirsty who's not a fountain.''

[AgingYoung]

With the last wheel I attempted I learned a lot. I'm sure not going to try that sort of thing again! I'd give you the details but it's too embarrassing. The attached sketch is a part that I fabricated out of plumbers putty in that last wheel. It took two all nighters to make the forms from plaster to press the putty into. The marbles I used were gated and when the gate came around they would roll down that 5 degree incline of the cone. Although the putty forms were light I didn't think they were light enough. There was also a 10% difference in the weights away from the median. I took plastic drinking straws and slit them and wrapped them around one part of the form then pressed the cones down on that form pressing the straw between the two. I oiled the surfaces first. Then I put them on the stove and applied a little heat. I ended up with a very thin plastic cone that was very light yet strong enough to do what I intended for it to do. Also I couldn't measure the difference in their weights; it was so slight. I mention the details of how I fabricate these parts in the event anyone would like to attempt using the techniques.

I made 8 cones yet only fried 2 of them pressing 4 plastic drinking straw cones together. After seeing how 4 worked I didn't see a reason to put together another mechanism.

Well, I'm on the build again. This build isn't the wheel that is superior to Bessler's. I need to take a harder look at that one. The parts for that wheel also are going to be a tedious thing to fabricate.

In this next creation I intend to exchange vertical drop for horizontal distance. I know that some have learned this isn't a working idea. I'm attempting this in a manner that I think is unique. I've just finished making sliders and pivots and sliding pivots for the mechanism. I've fabricated them out of drinking straws, straight pins and hot melt glue. The build will be on a circle of double thick cardboard with a hot melt glue bearing surface for an axle of coat hanger. The cardboard is about 16 inches in diameter and the structure of the mechanism will be made from coat hanger. The weights will be marbles.

I can't imagine having too many more ideas of the principle that would cause a wheel to turn. I think I have 2 final ideas. As I mentioned the principle for the wheel superior to Bessler's needs a little more thought. What I've found in my tests of principles is that the weight of the mechanism effects the what I'm seeing. At times it's misleading. In this current build the principle isn't:

• exchanging vertical drop for horizontal distance.

The principle is how I intend to attempt that. Essentially the mechanism will move independently of the wheel while it's shifting and have little adverse reaction to the wheel's momentum. Once it shifts it will begin to add torque to the shaft.

A. Gene Young

[AgingYoung]

This is true:

I've investigated this in the past but to no avail. I think what you seek is an idea that has a problem with the word "opposite" in Newton's 3rd law of motion. If you could get "reaction" to overbalance and not counterbalance then I think you would have a PM machine.

....coylo, Posted: Tue May 03, 2005 6:51 pm

It's amazing how when you're searching the board for something you stumble on something that is precisely along the lines of thought you're looking at. I still haven't found what I was looking for yet I thought what Coylo posted was so significant that I'd repost it. Coylo, you have hit the nail on the head.

A. Gene Young

[AgingYoung]

Young's First Principle of antigravity:

Gravity has to cause an increase in acceleration for a constant mass to attain sufficient Force for that same mass to overcome the force of gravity.

From this principle I postulate that:

A mechanism that will work can't be in need of acceleration. The mechanism has to cause the acceleration.

A. Gene Young

Young's Second Principle of antigravity:

There needs to exist a resultant action of an action and a reaction having a greater angular force than the sum of the angular forces they orbit.

[Jonathan]

In response to the second to last post, isn't that what I've done here?:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... =7809#7809
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... =7835#7835

[AgingYoung]

Jonathan,

You posted: Tue Jan 04, 2005 7:41 pm. I'd suspect if that's what you had done you'd have a working wheel.

In response to the second to last post, isn't that what I've done here?:

Just as a guess I'd have to say, no, you haven't done that.

A. Gene Young

[AgingYoung]

If you're very observant you'll notice some characteristics of my posts. One characteristic is that I describe methods someone can use to test their ideas. I've done that from the very beginnings of my postings. That's why I describe the parts I make and how I make them. I'm not too quick though to share the ideas that I'm testing although I'll share how I test them. Now if you have no ideas to test I've explained how to get some ideas. I was lambasted for the idea of how to get ideas, namely: Ask God. I believe if you lack understanding you can ask the one that has all understanding. My reputation suffered quite a bit for sharing that idea.

Earlier in this thread I asked:

If anyone has heard of anyone that has distilled the ideas of perpetual motion and antigravity to the extent I have would you please make me aware of these ideas? Thank you.

I've made that appeal twice. Thank you for answering it, Jonathan. When I read the board I see things that cause me to think and give me ideas. In searching for something that I previously saw I noticed something that Coylo posted that was directly along the lines of my thought. That's why I reposted it. What Coylo posted wasn't the cause of what I'm now thinking yet I could see they independently came to the same conclusion I had. I expect that when 2 blind hogs (Coylo and me) are rooting around in the mud and find the same nut there must be something special about that nut. You might be a third blind hog, Jonathan, yet you didn't realize what a prize nut you found. If you think it's special I'd suggest you build a wheel using that principle.

Another characteristic of my posts is to state as simply as I can what I believe the truth is. Sometimes I go on a little too much. I'm about to put the parts I constructed last night on to that double thickness of cardboard.

A. Gene Young

[AgingYoung]

As I was assembling the parts I had made to the double thickness of cardboard I felt they were a little too big (too much length). I made the parts over and finally assembled the mechanism. It failed. I have to say it was a very cool mechanism yet there wasn't enough torque from the wheel to cause it to move. It was cool looking though. I should have taken a picture.

I've removed that mechanism and I'm looking at something a little different. I will continue to think about the idea of trading a vertical drop for an accelerated horizontal distance.

Gene

ps edit: I've looked at something a little different and I come back to that same idea. I need to figure out how to make it happen. When the mechanisms are shifted the center of gravity is 1/2 inch away from the center at the top of the axis (on a 16 inch diameter). That's sufficient to cause a 270 degree rotation. How to make it fall up hill. :)

[Patrick]

Hi Gene;
I think Scott posted about that topic before under the heading 'uphill battle'.

http://wings.avkids.com/Curriculums/For ... owto.html

--Patrick

[AgingYoung]

Patrick,

It's an interesting idea. I just finished reading that thread, uphill battle. It's a good read and chocked full of ideas. Of all folks, hartiberlin, shared an idea that I've considered. It seems that every possible idea about a wheel has been considered. What is lacking is to find the right ones and put them together into a working wheel. I think it's so amazing that it hasn't been done yet.

I was going to check the board then crash. I was up all night putting together some parts. Now I think I'll skip a nights sleep and look at that dang wheel some more. :)

[AgingYoung]

I thought I only had 2 more ideas about a principle that might make a wheel turn. Maybe the one I'm looking at now is a variation but it seems very promising. I've been drawing a mechanism that changes velocity that could be it. So I'm on a build again yet not tonight. I just wanted to put it on the record that the idea came to me in 2005; in the midnight hour.

I was trying to enjoy the approaching new year but I noticed that it's already slightly used. I suspect those rascals down under. I noticed it had a faint whiff of monkey on it also. What can you do?

I don't think a solution to the Bessler riddle will take another year. I does seem the more you look at it the more frustrated you get. It is also a bit of a curse to even begin to think about it. Something like, 'bet you can't build just one.'

Well ladies and gentleman, I'm going to clean up and go spend a little time with my partner in the curse. Best wishes in the new year. My new years resolution is to be a little nicer. It isn't going to be easy. I hope you noticed I said 'a little.' Don't get your hopes up too high. God bless the household of faith.

A. Gene Young

[AgingYoung]

A method I use to look at a mechanism is a circle of cardboard. I calculate the center's of gravity of the weights I have as they move as they rotate around 360 degrees. As I spin the mechanism (around a straight pin) I punch thru the cardboard (with a straight pin onto a piece of paper) where the resultant center of gravity would be. If you had a single stationary weight and rotated around 360 degrees the center of gravity would describe a circle and there would be no difference between the ascending and descending sides.

The current mechanism I'm building makes a very interesting graph.


A. Gene Young

ps edit: I'm exchanging vertical drop for horizontal travel. If you have learned and know that this isn't viable I'd suggest you think again.

[AgingYoung]

The following is a current post at the randi site:

Simon Bridge,
Earlier I said:

The current idea that I'm looking at is rather interesting. If you were to take a single weight and rotate it 360 degrees you'd find that the center of gravity between 1-179 minus the cog between 181-359 would be zero. It would be balanced. At every moment the cog on the left side of the wheel would have a corresponding cog on the right that is equidistant from a perpendicular thru the center. The idea that I'm looking at has a net difference on the descending side of the wheel (1-179) as the moment arm rotates clockwise. The difference between the cog's moves very slightly to the right of center at about 3 degrees (maybe about 2%) then at 90 degrees extends to the right by about 50% for about 20 degrees. After that the cog's are balanced. I think that's a significant amount and quite possibly able to cause the wheel to accelerate.

I constructed a model of this on a disc of cardboard with weights of marbles. The mechanism is hot melt glued to drinking straws and everything that pivots does so on straight pins. My initial assessment of where the centers of gravity were was incorrect. I more accurately looked at them and the following is closer to what's going on:

1. 80.......10%
2. 90.......10%
3. 91.......18%
4. 95.......36%
5. 100.......50%
6. 110.......72%

I'll try and describe what I've measured and maybe someone that's good at math can give me their assessment of what it means. There is a center of gravity between the two weights (marbles) when they're closest to the center. As the weights rotate around the axis clockwise when they arrive at 80 degrees that center of gravity is displaced away from the center 10% of the original distance. There's no significant change in the cog until 91 degrees where the difference doubles. Then at 110 degrees the difference doubles again.

That accelerated change in the shift of cog remains there until it rotates to 250 degrees at which point it rapidly returns to its rest position. If I have another mechanism like this one 180 degrees out of phase with it, it will be at 70 degrees. And if the momentum of that initial accelerated pulse will carry the rotation another 10 degrees that out of phase mechanism will begin to pulse the wheel. It might be that I haven't given enough information to come to any conclusion one way or another. If you think I've lost a marble ....

I'd appreciate any comments except for maybe the ones about a lost marble.

A. Gene Young

A question I had was would the momentum carry the wheel another 10 degrees. I glued a marble on to the cardboard at that point and positioned it there without momentum to see what would happen. It's kind of iffy.

Gene

[ken_behrendt]

Gene...

Instead of making these constructions from cardboard and such, have you considered downloading the free version of WM2D and then making your models on that? I think you will find it is a lot easier than the approach you are using.


ken