Bessler's Secret Force

[Fletcher]

The 'origin' of Bessler's Secret Prime Mover Force ?

Please indicate which option you currently believe to be correct - you can only select one option so be sure it is the one you are committed to.

The idea is to get a 'feel' for what percentage of respondents feel that 'Gravity Only' is the 100% the correct route to success for a self sustaining wheel v's the percentage who feel that 'Gravity Only' is 100% the wrong direction & a complete red hearing & misdirection.

This exercise will polarize the results clearly & force respondents to make a clear choice of option. If you feel very strongly about your choice add a post comment as well.

N.B. There is no need to elaborate on what "Gravity Only" means as it has been discussed previously at length in recent threads. Also "origin" is taken to mean at the local level.

In each case it is assumed that the Prime Mover Force of choice is or can be coupled to a Gravity OOB system as a matter of course.

[Fletcher]

Selected Environmental for well known reasons.

P.S. Scott - could you add another option "Other" for people like jim_mich investigating CF's as the Force ?

[Deven]

I have been thinking CFs for a while, but I'm starting to lean back towards gravity. Environmental could power a wheel, as it does in many situations already, but Bessler's statements that it was gravity that powered his machine can't be ignored!

[ovyyus]

That makes two of us so far Fletcher :) As you already stated, Jim needs an extra category for his proposed CF energy source.

...Bessler's statements that it was gravity that powered his machine can't be ignored!

Which statements?

[evgwheel]

Great post/thread Thanks Fletcher and Scott
Gravity IMO is the answer. A permanent overbalanced wheel will be possible. I do think that most members started out, with the belief that gravity and the oob is the answer and then sidetrack to other solutions. Most of us seem to come back to our original feelings To have a vote at the top of the thread is fantastic. . EVG

[Deven]

...on the contrary these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself; as from them is received the universal movement which they must exercise so long as they remain out of the centre of gravity;...

This one.

[10x]

Not as simple as gravity by itsself. Inertia is a problem with mass, and would also have to be used.

CF may also have been used in relation to a mechanical oscillator. I believe gravity was the primary force used to drive a mechanical oscillator, but inertia and cf would have to be used for drive force transfered back to for reset of oscillator.

Using wind itself could be used for reset of a mechanical oscillator, though makes for more friction.

[Fletcher]

Yeah .. sorry about that - I went to edit the original post as soon as I'd done it but the poll options don't come up for editing to add it in :(

evg .. you are probably correct there except it probably not so much sidetracked as focus permanently shifted to another avenue - one prompted by a spectacular lack of results [by me & others] investigating gravity to see if it could be non-conservative in some circumstances ;)

Don't let me stop you turning over every stone in that particular quarry though - watch for other well beaten footsteps so you can find a new stone ;)

[ovyyus]

Deven, Bessler is simply describing the weights that effect the overbalancing condition of his wheel. He is not describing the prime mover which is driving and lifting those weights. He never mentions one word about the prime mover - that is his secret.

[docfeelsgood]

Boiler Bill ; in all your investigation of thermal stuff did you ever do an in depth study of those "perpetual lamps" supposedly found in some ancient tombs still burning after 1000 years or more without being replenished ??? that yarn was told me when i was a little kid by a very old timer . i was always curious about it . Doc.

[ovyyus]

Doc, I know the stories but I've not come across anything which might substantiate them. That does bring up an interesting point though - if Bessler somehow discovered a 'perpetual flame' and then applied it to drive his wheel, wouldn't he still call his wheel a "true perpetual motion"?

[Deven]

I have to disagree! Bessler never really said that there was a prime mover. I vaguely remember him saying in one of his MT drawings that it wouldn't work without the prime mover, but this is iffy in thinking that he meant a separate system. Perhaps his prime mover was simply the principle behind his entire process.

He stated, as below, that the weights themselves constituted the PM, not something else. He states that the reason they continue on their paths is because they can never reach equilibrium because of the way they are aranged. Doesn't this point to gravity?

'Inward structure of the wheel is of a nature according to the laws of perpetual motion, so arranged that certain disposed weights once in rotation, gain force from their own swinging, and must continue their movement as long as their structure does not lose its position and arrangement. Unlike all other automata, such as clocks or springs or other hanging weights which require winding up or whose duration depends on the chain which attaches them, on the contrary these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself; as from them is received the universal movement which they must exercise so long as they remain out of the centre of gravity; and when they come to be placed together, so arranged that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wonderfully speedy flight, one or another of them must apply its weight vertically to the axis, which in its turn must also move.' - Das Triumphirende Perpetuum Mobile, Bessler, 1719.

[ovyyus]

He states that the reason they continue on their paths is because they can never reach equilibrium because of the way they are aranged. Doesn't this point to gravity?

If I built one of the MT designs, say MT9, and added a power supply which is timed and coordinated by the movement of the weights, and then restricted my description of it to only that of the function and purpose of the weights, then I think I would end up with something along the lines of what Bessler describes.

[evgwheel]

Deven
Is their actually a “law of perpetual motion� and who was it written by?

[jim_mich]

... on the contrary these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself; as from them is received the universal movement which ...

Bessler is simply describing the weights that effect the overbalancing condition of his wheel. He is not describing the prime mover which is driving and lifting those weights. He never mentions one word about the prime mover - that is his secret.

I think Bessler is describing his secret here. He says quite plainly that the weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself. I really don't see how anyone can think otherwise. He goes on to give more details as he says from them is received the universal movement. Guys, listen to what Bessler is saying! It is the movement of the weights that is the secret. The weights are the essential part. The weights constitute perpetual motion. As long as they remain out of the center of gravity they receive the universal movement that keeps them moving. Bessler is not talking specifically about the wheel remaining out of the center of gravity; he's talking about the weights themselves remaining out of the center of gravity.

Of course this is just my opinion. Everyone if free to reject what I say. But do you guys reject what Bessler says?