Words of encouragement

[John Collins]

It seems to me that we here at Besslerwheel forum seems to have lost our way a bit, lately. Maybe we should return to what originally attracted our attention and caused us to consider the possibility that a method could be found of driving a revolving wheel by the use of gravity.

Remember that on 6th July 1712, Johann Bessler, also known as Orffyreus, claimed that he had invented a wheel which would turn continuously powered only by gravity. As proof, he exhibited a working model - something none of us has achieved to date.

I have provided as much information as I have been able to find in 30 year's research - the most complete biography of Bessler to date, books by Bessler with English translations, letters by him and about him and to him, drawings by him, descriptions of his encoded clues compete with my interpretations of what he meant. I have done this to draw attention to Bessler's claims and I have updated version of the original book almost ready for publication but I don't want to release it because I feel that the solution is about to appear and I would like to include any new information relating to the new discovery - however......

...it seems as if every year at this time we think, optimistically, that the answer will magically appear next year - but I have seen this written here every year for the last several years - I've posted such optimistic forecasts myself - but so far nothing. I think that there is a desire to believe that, with the 300th anniversary of the first announcement of his discovery looming, the time is ripe for the return of Bessler's wheel, and so it is, but it won't neccessarily happen just because the time is right.

Our thoughts need to return to basics, in my opinion. The more complex the design the more there is to go wrong. Bessler was hugely concerned that people would think his machine too simple to be worth what he was asking for it and argued strongly that despite its simplicity of design it was worth every penny.

So stick to basics, keep it simple and build a working model! Let's make the 300th anniversary a real celebration with a working model! Easy-peasy!

HAPPY CHRISTMAS ALL!

JC

[AB Hammer]

OK

Merry Christmas


Alan

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi JC,

its next year again then :)

I have just got back from Brazil and cannot wait to get building again after 3 month off.

I wish you all at Besslers Wheel a very happy Christmas and a fruitful new year, good luck to all!

Regards Trevor

[rasselas]

Thanks for the encouraging words JC, have a merry Christmas, and enjoy the spirit of the holidays all you faithful wheel-spinners. ~Rass

[getterdone]

Yup, we'll have to roll up our sleeves and get back to work.

Merry Christmas

[rlortie]

12 days of Christmas, Irish style. Good for a chuckle. da

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbejNNCTr7k

[JohnnyD]

Well, I know I don't post much on here, but that doesn't mean to say I'm not doing my bit in the background. I'll get an idea or two, WM2D it, watch it fail then think of something else. If I get something of interest, I'll certainly post it. But until then.....

So Merry Christmas and a productive New Year to all and maybe, just maybe next year will be the year.....(although there's still time this year)

JohnnyD

[ovyyus]

John, Bessler never said that his wheel was, "continuously powered only by gravity". If I've learned anything from my years of wheel research it's that I should always be wary when applying personal belief in search of truth :)

Have a great Christmas and New Year, John!

[pequaide]

I think the biggest clue to Bessler’s wheel was the time period in which he lived. He was contemporary to both Leibniz and Newton. And the greatest debate in the history of Physics was raging; ‘which of these two quantities (mv or mv²) is conserved’. They both knew that one or the other was not a conserved quantity.

Minds were still open to the subject at the time and one of the minds was Bessler’s. For many; making energy was something to be done not something to be ridiculed. I think the first step to solving Bessler’s riddle is to make energy.

Yes: Merry Christmas to all

[John Collins]

I take your point Bill, and perhaps I have included my personal belief that he said his wheel was powered by gravity, but then that is what I understand by his words.

I don't need to rehash the old quotes - they are in the wiki for all to see - but if he talks repeatedly about the action of weights inside his wheel one must assume that it is they that drive the wheel. Indeed he says quite clearly in DT, that his wheel depended entirely on the action of the weights. One can therefore assume, that without the action of gravity they won't operate as designed and the wheel will remain motionless.

Of course I understand the reluctance (I would put that more strongly only I can't think of the word right now) of you and others of similar knowledge and experience to accept that gravity alone can drive the wheel, but let us just say that without it the wheel won't spin.

This does not rule out gravity plus another force generated by the fall of a weight, and I have stated my case on another of my web sites.

Thanks Bill, and my best wishes for Christmas and the New Year to you and your family.

The search continues!

JC

[jim_mich]

perhaps I have included my personal belief that he said his wheel was powered by gravity, but then that is what I understand by his words.

I would like facts, not personal beliefs.

if he talks repeatedly about the action of weights inside his wheel one must assume that it is they that drive the wheel. Indeed he says quite clearly in DT, that his wheel depended entirely on the action of the weights. One can therefore assume, that without the action of gravity they won't operate as designed and the wheel will remain motionless.

What is the basis of this assumption? Does Bessler state that his wheels were turned by gravity? Or does he state that they were turned by the motions of the weights, and then you assume that he means by gravity?

Of course I understand the reluctance - snip - to accept that gravity alone can drive the wheel, but let us just say that without it the wheel won't spin.

Again, why the assumption? If the assumption is wrong, then we are barking up the wrong tree.

This does not rule out gravity plus another force generated by the fall of a weight,

The fall of a weight produces motion. If motion of weights can produce extra force to lift the weight back higher, then gravity is not an essential ingredient, for the extra force could just as easily be used directly to produce rotation rather than to lift weights.

[John Collins]

Good luck and a Happy Christmas Jim!

JC

[graham]

I believe that gravity may not have been the driving force.
This is why no one has yet to been able replicate the performance of a Bessler wheel using gravity.
Maybe everyone is looking in the wrong place.

I have been looking elsewhere lately and have had several ideas that employ "Barometric pressure"
A steady 14 psi is all around us ,we live in it. So for me it's worthy of serious investigation.

Graham

[Michael]

You know what would be neat? If, besides a voting system for how people like people, if there was a like button ( like facebook ) for individual posts. If Scott is inclined to do it. Maybe even an unlike one as well. I'd give yours Graham a like click. That's the way to do it; an opinion with data information backing up the opinion. 14 psi, interesting.

[path_finder]

I have been looking elsewhere lately and have had several ideas that employ "Barometric pressure"

In this post: http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 9495#79495

the weight don't change, but the COG is relocated

This could be an easy way for accelerating/braking the COG of an opposite couple of weights.
Why Bessler did hidden the ends of his weights under an handkerchief? any pipe, valve, hole?
If it was so simple that the son of the carpenter can replicate it, the reason could be:
there was noting particular inside the wheel, therefore it is easy to replicate nothing.
In that case only inside the weights could be the secret.