Always enjoy your posts greendoor - your comments suggest to me that there may still be some subtle confusion - many mechanical principles can be turned to create an OOB gravity wheel - Bessler suggests this in MT & his later bi-directional wheels may have discarded this approach in favour of a balanced wheel able to produce torque, once dynamic - you could say he had many years to refine the prime-mover principle of operation, & of course the prime-mover itself must have had the capacity for OU & do work, so the rest of the wheel was ancillary or supplementary, so to speak, but this is where many get stuck - trying to get an OOB mechanism to reset itself without finding the prime-mover energy or force required to make it all possible - placing the cart before the horse, in fact, forgetting about the horse entirely in most cases.greendoor wrote:snip >> So isn't it more important to focus all attention onto the basic prime-mover? IMO - if the working principle is known, then making a working wheel becomes a simple engineering exercise, and some of these excellent mechanisms may or may not be useful.
Frankly, I believe the basic principle of free energy has been given to us, and has been largely dismissed. I can only speculate about why this is the case - misdirection certainly springs to mind.
If you really believe there has been active misdirection that can't simply be attributed to lack of insight about the problem at hand by many, or a lack of understanding of that which you seem so sure about, then illuminate the rest of us & spell it out, succinctly - I think you'll find that there are many receptive ears willing & able to stay focused following your lead, if they only knew where to concentrate their attentions - but hasn't that always been the vexing problem, to many will-o-the-wisp straws to grasp at & not enough viable candidates for a prime-mover to focus on ?
Many will wait myopically to read JC's up-coming book rather than strain the neurons an inch further - & who can blame them as this is such a frustrating challenge which can burn you out - & respectfully, there is no guarantee that JC has correctly lined up all his ducks to the final answer.
I would suggest that once a horse is found to be harnessed then even then its potential might not be obvious to all & sundry & so belief will not automatically follow - in fact, I would guess, that debate would rage & many would fixate on trying to explain why it appears to break CoE & the laws of thermodynamics [interesting intellectual down-track analysis opportunities nevertheless] & never able to bring themselves to believe unless fully demonstrated before their eyes, once all the hard work is done - but the debate would rage on until the theory was physically proven - that is the nature of largely anonymous discussion boards that require very little up-front stake !
P.S. IMO, a 'working principle' refers to a mechanical device that translates a theoretically useful force or energy into something tangible & Bessler alluded to using many principles, & that was a deliberate misdirection - a sort of 'look-over-there' distraction ! Principles are many, forces are few !
