Bessler's Secret Force

[daxwc]

I am voting " don't know," because I don't.


Deven said:

Maybe I'm digging a little too deep here, but, perhaps the "always summer" quote is in reference to the four quadrants of a circle.

If you start with spring in quadrant 1, summer in 2, fall in 3 and winter in 4, wouldn't it make sense that the wheel was overbalanced in the summer quadrant?

On this frame of mind... have you noticed of the four windows in drawings, three have the objects going through quadrant 1? He is trying to make a profound statement to say something as the water drain doesn't even have to be in the picture.

[graham]

Hi Fletcher, I voted "gravity force only" but with reservations because we all know that this is a zero sum game.
It's possible that as an organ maker he employed some sort of pneumatic system to get around the major obstacle of back torque when using weights and springs.(which were heard)

For all practical purposes air is weightless but when used in some sort of air damper it can mimic the inertial resistance to motion,of a weight.

Anythings possible and that's the problem. Interesting thread.

Graham

[Gregory]

Oh God... Don't take this hard guys as it is just my personal opinion, but I am quite disappointed how many believes in gravity, which in itself gives nothing and takes nothing... :(

I vote for don't know, because this is the truth. I have ideas, theories, but not facts so this is well qualifies for don't know. It's not the matter of belief.

[Deven]

I'm not saying I think its gravity, though I think it very well could be. I think Jim might be on to something, and with some tests and models that I have I think its very possible it is CFs/inertia.

I just honestly don't think its environmental, for the reasons I stated above.

The window reference is interesting. Maybe its some sort of clue?

[Gregory]

on the contrary these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself

Obviously he describes an overbalanced type wheel... But this quote is strange. It can as well refer to inertia, not just to gravity, you all can't reject it. Those are the words was being used by Bessler, hey...

(not just their path, but)
The weights themselves the PM device... Their innate virtue... They gain force from their own something...

Well, I don't mean and don't vote for anything... But this is strange, you should not ignore the way Bessler spoke about these things. He could easily say that it's powered by only gravity only, and only, and only, but he didn't. Why?
Why he used these fancy words instead?
He was quite accurate in describing this way, and constructing these sentences.

IMO It's just not a good idea to ignore his words, even after translated to English...

[graham]

I guess we should ALL vote don't know, because we really don't.
However the question was "what you currently believe".

If Fletcher had conducted his poll a couple of months ago I would have voted "other" because I was convinced at that time that C F was the key. I even built a small model of my idea because wm2d indicated that it was worth a build.

And Gregory:

Why he used these fancy words instead?

He used those words to ensure that whoever read them would be totally confused. It seems to be working .

Graham

[10x]

You folks know the same problem lies with magnetism as gravity?

No one so far has been able to use one or both( with exceprtion of posible Finsrud) that I have been able to find. Just rumors of such that have existed through out time.

I do not beilive a single directional force can be used for such.

Were as I can see sytems using the force of gravity once released from a wheel to cause a conservation of such, it will never be enough to carry it to full reset without other force from some were else.

Even the problem of using both gravity and magnetism is a difficult one. Yet I believe the problem of such should be able to be done.

[Fletcher]

daxwc .. on a similar note I once made an observation here about the Kassel Drawing - in essence it was this & it relates to the water out flow also.

Bessler shows a water recirculation system as an aid to demonstrating his wheels ability to do work - there should not be any losses of water from the system other than to splash & evaporation [it's a closed system] - yet he shows a continuous outflow of water from the system via the pipe bottom right - this imo was symbolic of extra energy being syphoned off the wheel system to do external work.

This observation was instrumental in turning me to environmental forces, starting with water pressure, which I explored & experimented with for quite a while - I think it was deliberate by Bessler.

[daxwc]

Graham:

I guess we should ALL vote don't know, because we really don't.
However the question was "what you currently believe".

Very true...How about then, I do not know what to believe, as I have more plates then forks.

[evgwheel]

The poll indicates that most of the voters’ belief gravity only may be the answer.
The posts also seem to indicate that most of the members are very open-minded.
IMO to get a result to find PM is to have two sub-folders in general discussion, one for posts, gravity only, and one for others.
This option would make the threads flow easier, without constant input from the other sides view. Most likely, many members would change from one heading to the other as we tend to change our minds often.
Off course, there are also many disadvantages to the above suggestion. It may be harder to monitor the site for the administrator, and the work to implement the change. Also browsing the topics may get confusing. In its present form, we come across posts we are not interested in, but we still learn from them. The only positive for change is single minded people (nothing wrong with that) could concentrate on the one goal. A suggestion only. (Why change a site what works perfectly) EVG

[Deven]

My first dabbling into PM actually had to do with water pressure and electrolysis. If you search my posts, I made one that had to do with an infinitely deep sea using gravity to power electrolysis to the point where gravity gave enough energy to electrolysize x amount of water in a closed system, and reset itself. I still, to this day believe that it is theoretically possible, though not possible on this earth. I have not seen anyone show anything that would refute that it would, indeed work. This was my basis for Bessler's gravity wheels when I first came to this board. I believe that it is possible to get gravity to do work, it just takes some creativity.

I, for one, am very open minded about exactly what it may be, however, I do think that ultimately gravity must play a key role, and that without it, the wheel would probably not work. This is not to say that I don't think something else could be the "prime mover". I just don't think that it would work without gravity.

[ssmyser]

If you were to look at an uncovered wheel while it was in motion, wouldn't it be easy to mistake gravity for CF or vise-versa? Did Karl see the weights in motion and make the easy assumption that it was gravity powered?

Personal opinion: I believe gravity 'starts' the wheel (Gera, Draschwitz), but another force comes into play as RPM's increase. I also believe that when it is stopped by hand, this same force loads up one side of the wheel as it slows. The next time it is started gravity starts it moving again.

This is why I can't go with 'gravity only'.

[Bessler007]

The Bessler wheel was simply a powerful clock. It might be that as it rotated it managed to rewind itself yet that very idea defies reason. When one attempts to put a tight boot on, the foot and boot are yanked toward you. This is possible with one foot but it's very hard to yank with enough force to pick both feet off the ground. On the average you're going to land on your butt.

If there was some mysterious force acting on Bessler's wheel (which is very unlikely) the only force able to reach through the walls of his wheel with enough fast acting power and rearrange anything would be the force of gravity.

Gravity would be the initial cause of anything else happening whether it was some exploitation of friction or centrifugal force or any other force we might not be aware of.

[graham]

ssmyser believes:

I also believe that when it is stopped by hand, this same force loads up one side of the wheel as it slows. The next time it is started gravity starts it moving again.

This is an interesting idea. I wonder if he had to preload the wheel in some way initially, and then when stopping it the inertia of the internal weights would carry them back to the preloaded condition ready for the next startup.

You've got me thinking.Thanks

Graham

[bluesgtr44]

Hey Graham....

I wonder if he had to preload the wheel in some way initially, and then when stopping it the inertia of the internal weights would carry them back to the preloaded condition ready for the next startup.

That is one approach I am investigating. Having the wheel under a load to start with. Basically, I think it could be 3 separate components at work: 1) the wheel itself that we can all see exteriorly...2) the part that is compressed within the wheel to one side and....3) the part that gets compressed between the two.


Steve