Are there any working wheels out there?

[Alfred Fibinger]

Dear path_finder thanks a lot for your accurate and fast answers.
Also thanks for the tips to find requested posts.
BTW You have spent quite a long time in researching and working on PM models! I saw your album and it's very impressive.
All the best for you, man.

[ruggerodk]

Dear Alfred,
Thanks for your compliments.
The simulations for my part, are created using Adobe Illustrator and Flash.

[Ealadha]

No i don't think so , if there was a working wheel the world may not know about it and may never find out about it , why tell anyone , i mean the governments would probably try to tax you for having it , if they found out , like they tried to tax Bessler's wheel .
If i ever get a wheel working , i am thinking of putting it against a wall and builing another wall in front of it , so no one will ever see it .

[Alfred Fibinger]

I appreciate your kind information, dear ruggerodk, thank a lot, man.

[ribby55]

So I have a simulation working. I partially built a design with only two spokes and it performs how I intended. I am waiting to get my papers signed so my colleagues can get to work on building a model with more then 2 spokes. I am working on perfecting my simulation to the point were I am satisfied and ready to build. I have two theories that I am working on. So I potentially have two different versions of a gravity wheel.

My question still remains: Are there any working wheels out there?

I see a lot theorists but has anyone succeeded? I am taking action but unfortunately time is not on my side. One of my runners will be posted one day.

R.

[Jim Williams]

Steven Hawking was asked what question about the universe would he most like answered. He said his quetion was, "Why is there something instead of nothing?". The answer to the question about working models is still no regardless. There is such a thing as nothing.

[Wubbly]

We all have working wheels ... in our heads. The problem being when they are built, the belief disagrees with the reality.

[DrWhat]

I believe Bessler hinted: "is it really a wheel?" So maybe we shouldn't be trying to invent a wheel at all. Being a wheel on the outside may have nothing to do with the form of the mechanism on the inside.

[Tarsier79]

I have an idea for a perpetual wheel, it runs on gasses produces during the breaking down of foods. The attachment pipe may be uncomfortable.

[Stewart]

I believe Bessler hinted: "is it really a wheel?"

That's not exactly what Bessler said but rather...

one sees a wheel, and also no wheel,
because it has rims and also none,

(from AP chapter 46)

We should also be careful not to just assume that the metaphors of chapter 46 have anything to do with his PM wheels. In my opinion that chapter is the least reliable source of information if you're looking for clues to recreate his wheels compared with all the other places in AP where we know he is definitely referring to his wheels.

Stewart

[Ed]

In my opinion that chapter is the least reliable source of information if you're looking for clues to recreate his wheels

I hope to prove you wrong, "Lord Whistlebritches"! ;-)

[ribby55]

What is a good Sim program that can be used? Phun is great to try some ideas. It is OK to post drawings but only a Sim (not really according to most) or a video or a working wheel will hold any validity.

So I gather that no one has successfully built a working PMM. Maybe one has been built but has been bought out or even killed. If that were the case then we humans have a long way to go before we come to grips with what is really going on here and where we stand as a species in the universe.

Gravity and magnetism are forces and it will only be a matter of time when we can figure out how to manipulate them into doing work for us. I am getting close. The race is on!


R. :o(])

[AB Hammer]

ribby55

Getting close you say? That is when the excitement comes and then we try the wheel/device and then, reality sets in. It may spin for awhile but it gets slower. Ever so gradually. Then our harts drop and we say to ourselves. OK? What went wrong? Maybe we add a heavier weight to the mover and try again. It slows down faster. Then we try a lighter weight and then is seems to flywheel but the shifts are not shifting like we think?

Us builders have been there, and done that. But with observation you are ready for the next step after you have exhausted what you were doing. But don't get rid of it yet. After a few more other builds another idea comes to mind and you go back and try again. Of course it is less work, for you already have most of the needed parts. Now you are becoming experienced at building and with hands on experience you can see problems building in the designs as you are drawing them and can correct them before you build again.

At this point the rest of us builders just say welcome to the club. ;)

[rlortie]

Agreeing with Alan, the best simulation can be found by dumpster diving at construction sites, recycle yards and inexpensive MDF from your local retail lumber yard.

You may have some initial investment, but no where near the price of a good 2 or 3D simulation program. Your design can be built in less time than it would take you to get a grip on using a simulation application.

My open face split axle test bed is nothing more than a salvaged clothes dryer drum. It cost me nothing, in fact I made a profit by selling what I did not retain for scrap iron.

Depending on how high off the floor you mount it, I can make disks up to 7 feet in diameter, it will handle up to fifty pounds of weights plus disk without stress. By installing idler wheels as Erick did it will handle 100 + pounds easily.

My through axle test bed is mounted in a frame 2' wide, 6' long and stands 6-10" tall it will handle up to a 73" diameter wheel. It currently is set up to handle a maximum of twelve divisions in 7.5 degree increments.

You may ask why 7.5 degrees? the answer is that it is the prime for dividing 360 degrees into any desired number of symmetrical units.

I have yet to receive a gravity wheel design that cannot be easily implemented on these two test beds.

More can be discovered accidentally by hands on building than you will ever learn from a simulation program.

Ralph

[Fletcher]

More can be discovered accidentally by hands on building than you will ever learn from a simulation program.

I disagree Ralph - in fact quite the opposite - more can be learned from a simulation program & far quicker - I have done both - it does not matter whether an accident of discovery happens in either context - the point is to reason & then make a discovery & not wait for an accident.

Therefore use what ever tools are available including software to quickly increase knowledge & confidence & then compare predicted behaviour to real world results if you have something interesting.

A crude but accurate example - grab a pen & paper, write a letter to someone & send it by snail mail v's email - I haven't hand written a letter in years & probably wouldn't dream of it unless my computer & email went down ... OR ... hand write a book with pen & paper v's typewriter or computer word processor.