What was Bessler’s most powerful machine design?

[Fletcher]

Bessler describes a genuine process of discovery and development:

1. Fruitless years attempting the classic overbalanced wheel...
2. Discovers a real energy source...
3. Invests time and resources searching for a way to harness it...
4. Finally builds something that turns a little...
5. Invests time and resources perfecting it...
6. Public demonstration of a working "true PM" in the form of the classic overbalanced wheel...
7. Offers the secret to anyone for a large sum of cash...

After step 2 success was inevitable.

Hi Bill .. I am not being a smart arse but for sake of accuracy where does Bessler describe [items 1 & 2] that he discovered a real energy source & that he invested time & resources searching for a way to harness it ?

Or is that a subjective inference, based on how you feel the logical discovery & development process of an engine must proceed ?

Bessler was interested in the smoke jack [roasting spit] early in his search - he was intrigued by the mechanics of the long turning devices once set in motion, & probably the fact for the heat driven ones at least, that they used the hot air & smoke rising from the fire pit to turn vanes geared to the spit shaft - this is an obvious thermal gradient that could be used to power an OOB wheel concept if a heat source were 'implanted' into the wheel though the method/application would be less obvious.

Burning a fuel to create rising hot expanded energetic air would not be a discovery of a real energy source, as it was in plain view, well known & already harnessed to do work.


What Bessler says is that he looked & he looked & finally found it where others had looked [i.e. the OOB principle] - but to find the self sustaining wheel he had to make a choice of alternative mechanics to trial - he finally chose well.

Besslers MT [John Collins publication] shows a compilation of his failed attempts at PM - there is a progression of sophistication as he learned more about why designs fail - there is also a move to 'enhanced gravity wheels' where he introduces additional components or materials in an attempt to supplement gravity - all accompanying notes end just before MT55 which has no comments though seems an important concept [re: John Collins research] - except for that the very next page MT56, is accompanied by the words Bellows, & wind machines & is a reoccurring theme thereafter - and toy page notations.

Just as valid as suggesting that a hot air turned smoke jack was his inspiration for his energy source [which may be incidental] is the concept that smoke jacks & forges were often assisted by ordinary bellows & forced bellows - and it was perhaps the bellows & their association with fires that finally inspired his choice of direction to go to find the perfect mechanical device to achieve PM ? - and additionally that he was well versed in organ's, wind boxes, forced air, & reeds in musical instruments.

[ovyyus]

Fletcher, those points are my subjective inference. What I should have said was, "Bessler seems to describe a genuine process of discovery and development". No confusion intended.

So, you and Jim think Bessler discovered a new never-before-seen energy source by stumbling upon it while building experimental gravity engines? Hmm, seems improbable even if possible.

Burning a fuel to create rising hot expanded energetic air would not be a discovery of a real energy source, as it was in plain view, well known & already harnessed to do work.

Yes, in plain view and yes, already well known. But something that had never been harnessed to do work. It would have felt like a discovery to Bessler. Bessler said he found it where everyone had looked. Karl seemed to react like it was already well known.

[Fletcher]

So, you and Jim think Bessler discovered a new never-before-seen energy source by stumbling upon it while building experimental gravity engines? Hmm, seems improbable even if possible.

I certainly do - he needed a way to lift weights into position for a self sustaining OOB wheel, gravity couldn't do it - he would trial almost any force he could think of to do that, as the MT's show - and finally he made the right choice having used it cleverly - improbable is better odds than impossible.

Fletcher wrote:

Burning a fuel to create rising hot expanded energetic air would not be a discovery of a real energy source, as it was in plain view, well known & already harnessed to do work.

Yes, in plain view and yes, already well known. But something that had never been harnessed to do work. It would have felt like a discovery to Bessler. Bessler said he found it where everyone had looked.

Karl seemed to react like it was already well known.

The smoke jack was turned by vanes geared to the spit axle, so it was already harnessed & a type of engine.

Karl, IMO, reacted like it was already familiar, but perhaps not as used in this context, which was why he was surprised that no one else had previously thought of it - presumably that means familiarity with components but not the application & arrangements that allowed OU via an OOB self sustaining wheel - the physics & math may have been beyond him, especially as he'd never seen it used in this way, & he knew the argument that PM was impossible, but it worked.

[ovyyus]

Fletcher, you know I want you to be right :)

[daxwc]

Fletcher Quote:

The physics & math may have been beyond him, especially as he'd never seen it used in this way,

My feeling is Bessler would never have called himself a great Mathematician if he didn’t know the math physics of how his wheel worked.

The truly wise man will
know (and I know he knows!) what artifice, labour, cost, industry,
all-night sittings, cogitation, meditation, drudgery, work with
compass, calculation, patience and time is demanded by my project. AP pg 287

Silence, idiots, stop mumbling, and listen to the truth of the
matter! It took a tremendous amount of calculation before I was
able to devise this machine! It took a great deal of time before it
was all properly figured out! AP 313

Further, I make my machines in such a way that, big or small, I
can make the resulting power small or big as I choose. I can get
the power to a perfectly calculated degree, multiplied up even as
much as fourfold. AP pg 345

I think Bill is right, although I easily jump the fence, but when you stand back and look at how he juggles his words, the manner in which he uses impetus (such as type of "excess impetus"). That he never says gravity is where the energy gain comes from, but continuously skirts the issue, leads one to believe something is not exactly as it seems. Just because Bessler says he found it where others have looked means nothing, people have looked everywhere and added every energy source to it.
Another problem is that physics and energy wasn’t clearly defined in Bessler’s time. So let’s say the wheel ran by solar power, would Bessler have said the impetus grows from within? How about using oxygen or temp differential from the air? Impossible to say due to semantics and an undefined system, which we are trying to insert into present day outlook.



tks

[Fletcher]

Bill .. ateotd we all want to be right but most of all we want to solve a perplexing mystery.

There is no way to prove that he wasn't a fraud, & most here hope he wasn't - but to prove a mechanical FE principle, which might or might not be Bessler's principle, would show that it was possible to do at least once, possibly twice, if that same principle could be connected to Bessler on balance of probabilities.

It is equally important to put up cases, using available tech of his time & matching his deeds, to show that at least it could be done, even if it wasn't 'true PM' as we would interpret it today - that would give equal weighting to the possibility of fraud [or at least gross misrepresentation for commercial gain] & also show it was an equally valid proposition.

My feeling is Bessler would never have called himself a great Mathematician if he didn’t know the math physics of how his wheel worked.

Did he really call himself a great mathematician ?

Is an engineer that designs your new house a great mathematician ?

Is somebody who puts forward a new explanation of physics principles, which is validated by numerous independent experiments, & then teams of forensic mathematicians break out the numbers following his lead, a great physicist or a great mathematician ?

If that same person never published any of his original math & physics is he a great mathematician ?

I think Bessler was a competent mathematician but a better engineer, able to calculate the variables & outputs based on experimental evidence.

Another problem is that physics and energy wasn’t clearly defined in Bessler’s time. So let’s say the wheel ran by solar power, would Bessler have said the impetus grows from within?

How about using oxygen or temp differential from the air?

Impossible to say due to semantics and an undefined system, which we are trying to insert into present day outlook.

That's why I was particularly interested in Bessler's & others definitions of 'true PM' which Bessler claimed his was - what was false PM ? What omissions did Bessler leave out ?

That's why I coined the term environmental PM [ePM] to account for ambient conditions that might drive the OU process, which might also be Bessler's 'true PM' & intrinsic motion - jim_mich's inertia theory or JC's gravity only theory or Bill's internalized thermal energy turned into mechanical energy might be Bessler's 'true PM' - but without trying to define what Bessler meant it is impossible to tell !

[jim_mich]

That's why I coined the term environmental PM [ePM] to account for ambient conditions that might drive the OU process, which might also be Bessler's 'true PM' & intrinsic motion - jim_mich's inertia theory or JC's gravity only theory or Bill's internalized thermal energy turned into mechanical energy might be Bessler's 'true PM' - but without trying to define what Bessler meant it is impossible to tell !

And that is also why I have at times used the term "Classical Perpetual Motion" [cpm] because modern day science and lexicographers define perpetual motion as being impossible because all energy output must have a source. If the source of energy gain is my inertia concept or JC's gravity or Bill's thermal concept then the wheel no longer meets the strict modern definition of perpetual motion having no energy input.

[winkle]

can gravity be considered an energy source

if John's gravity wheel were to suddenly start running would that cause gravity to be called an energy source

or would it be the novel movements of the weights that would be called the energy source

a real nice energy source would be like a down hill slope without beginning without end which can not exist

gravity seems to me to be a great substitute for that endless hill

would it be the gravity or the weights

i would appreciate you're thoughts

[Stewart]

Sorry, I've been struggling to keep up! I've just put draft translations of Wagner's and Bessler's chapter 21 in my forum (AP - Part II, Chapter XXI.§. (21)) for reference and so now I can answer some of the questions...

You've all been talking a lot about "excess impetus", but the word used by Bessler is 'Uberwucht' which is generally a word used to refer to excess weight or overbalance. Dictionary terms given are: preponderance, overweight, excess (of) weight, overbalance etc. However I'm still looking into the use of this word across Bessler's writings and those of others.

So, does anyone have any Ideas on this part. Any specific lines in AP1 where it points to the type of "excess impetus"?

He's referring to chapter 43. I've got a draft translation of it my forum (AP - Part I, Chapter XLIII (43)).

... in Wagner's critique he says that Bessler said that it could be seen by children playing in the street, or words to that effect.

Bessler said that it could be seen by children playing in the street, not demonstrated by children playing in the street.

In the following document...

[KU] Kurtze doch gründliche Untersuchung (Brief yet thorough investigation), Wagner, 1715

...Wagner says...

"Endlich aber vermeynet Herr Orffreus näher zur Sache zu kommen, wenn er vorgiebet, die Kinder auf der Gasse spielten mit seinem motu Perpetuo oder so genannten Uberwucht."
"Finally however Mister Orffreus alleges to come closer to the point/matter when he professes that children on the street would play with his Perpetual Motion or so called 'Uberwucht'."

(also see the following post of mine: http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=76771)

There's that word 'Uberwucht' again. We need to be careful here though as this is Wagner apparently quoting Bessler, so really we need to see the source of Wagner's information which for this I think was a newspaper article, but I'll have to check. I like to think it refers to children playing with flipping tops like the one Bessler drew on the MT toy page. It seems everyone has a favourite toy in mind, probably based on their latest theory.

Back to impetus: in the description of the inner structure of the wheel that Bessler gives in DT (pages 19, 20 & 21), he uses a Latin term 'nisum progrediendi' in both the Latin and German text. This translates as 'impetus'/'momentum' and the literal translation of the words is the tendency to progress or move forwards.

"...but rather these weights themselves are the perpetuum mobile, or essential and constituent parts of it, which have within themselves and must endlessly exercise (as long as they remain outside the centre of gravity that is) their power and impetus, received from the universal motion, ..."

I must get around to finishing my translation of the Latin version of that text so I can discuss the whole passage properly. I posted my translation of the German text this time last year but haven't managed to discuss or explain it yet! There's just not enough time in the day, or night for that matter!

Speaking of which, I must stop for now...

All the best
Stewart

[Fletcher]

Thank you as always Stewart.

I read your translations with interest !

There's that word 'Uberwucht' again. We need to be careful here though as this is Wagner apparently quoting Bessler, so really we need to see the source of Wagner's information which for this I think was a newspaper article, but I'll have to check.

Re Playing Street : I like to think it refers to children playing with flipping tops like the one Bessler drew on the MT toy page. It seems everyone has a favourite toy in mind, probably based on their latest theory.

Back to impetus: in the description of the inner structure of the wheel that Bessler gives in DT (pages 19, 20 & 21), he uses a Latin term 'nisum progrediendi' in both the Latin and German text. This translates as 'impetus'/'momentum' and the literal translation of the words is the tendency to progress or move forwards.

"...but rather these weights themselves are the perpetuum mobile, or essential and constituent parts of it, which have within themselves and must endlessly exercise (as long as they remain outside the centre of gravity that is) their power and impetus, received from the universal motion, ..."

I agree that the connection to the top in the toy page is strong.

It doesn't mean that any other child game in the street might not also demonstrate more 'basic' elements of his machines & part of his principle, especially when considered in context of impetus/momentum, tendency to move forwards.

The key is the part I've underlined I believe.

Bessler talks about the weights being the essential & constituent parts which must endlessly exercise their their power & impetus, received from a motion - as long as they remain outside the center of gravity, that is !

Any OOB wheel will have power & impetus as long as something lifts & repositions the weights each cycle to create torque.

[Stewart]

Bessler talks about the weights being the essential & constituent parts which must endlessly exercise their their power & impetus, received from a motion - as long as they remain outside the center of gravity, that is !

Any OOB wheel will have power & impetus as long as something lifts & repositions the weights each cycle to create torque.

Yes, he clearly describes the weights as overbalancing weights, and yet also says how important they are - "...these weights themselves are the perpetuum mobile, or essential and constituent parts of it,...". I know we often talk here of the wheel having an overbalance system and perhaps a secondary "prime mover" system, but this description makes me think there is less of a distinction between the two. It seems from this description that the overbalance (gravity) aspect is considered by Bessler to be vital to the operation of the machine, rather than just a simple way to turn a wheel using a totally separate energy source. It's also interesting that he says the weights receive their power and impetus from the "universal motion", i.e. a single weight receives its power/impetus from the motion of all the weights combined or the motion of the whole machine. Anyway, I've got some more thoughts on this text, but I'll wait until I've finished the Latin translation and then talk about it in more detail perhaps in another topic.

Daxwc - you gave three quotes where Bessler talks about calculation. In the second one where you've quoted "tremendous amount of calculation", Bessler actually says "speculation". Here's my draft translation of that part (AP, Part I, Chapter LIV [54], Pages 116-117):

For when I will publicise,
one will soon hear among the ignorant people:

You people behold the true work,
there is indeed not much art to it. &c.

Be quiet you blockhead stop your babbling,
and bear no displeasure/dislike,
I have speculated with might,
before I even conceived such a work,
and refined [it] for some time,
before I devised it so simply;
indeed now it is in such a state,
that a bad craftsmaster's hand
will without any great brain-racking
weld/put the things together,
and (before one knows it,)
the construction of the work can have happened;
also in doing so nothing at all
will feel too elaborate to calculate,
besides, if also the preponderance*
will not be equal everywhere,
(so that in many places one may count
many an ounce [here], that may lack there,)
the work will still retain its motion,
and mind not a jot:
all this seemed best to me;
you master craftsmen, honourable people
will, God willing, in the meantime
go to work with more pleasure. &c.

*Uberwucht = preponderance / overweight / excess (of) weight / overbalance

Once again Bessler says 'Uberwucht' in reference to his overbalancing-weights and says they don't all need to be exactly equal.

For the last quote see the following post:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 6028#46028

Stewart

[ruggerodk]

...Wagner says...
"Endlich aber vermeynet Herr Orffreus näher zur Sache zu kommen, wenn er vorgiebet, die Kinder auf der Gasse spielten mit seinem motu Perpetuo oder so genannten Uberwucht."
"Finally however Mister Orffreus alleges to come closer to the point/matter when he professes that children on the street would play with his Perpetual Motion or so called 'Uberwucht'."

FYI
"Gasse" is a very narrow street/lane - it's not quite an alley as it is not only for pedestrians, at any rate it'll be narrow and paved.

What could children possibly play specifically in a very narrow street/lane, that could not be played in an ordinary street?
Why do JB make this destinction?

Maybe this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLJihEVs66k...look carefully what happens after 25 sec. Caled "Swing in der Gasse"

Thanks Stewart, for your big effort in translating JB's work - I really appreciate reading it.
regards
ruggero ;-)

[ruggerodk]

Another link to the "Gasse":
In German it has something to do with the lane of a "Kegelbahn" - an early kind of Bowling. In 1700+ played by children in the open parks...
For many centuries it was forbidden by law to play this game. In monastry the game was played anyway...(if I understand the German Wiki right: Kegelbahn)
That sounds familiar ;-)

[Stewart]

Hi ruggero

Be careful not to get too hung up on the word "Gasse" at this point as the text is Wagner apparently quoting Bessler, but until we see the source Wagner got the quote from it's possible that the word "Gasse" might not be the exact word he used. I love the woodcut, as it shows exactly what I had in mind for the children play on the little columns with heavy "marbles" part from chapter 46 of AP, but until now the images I have found of the game have not been very clear (see my toys topic in my forum). I've just looked up the book it came from on the internet and found more good woodcuts of childrens toys and games that are in it - I'll add them to my toys topic. Thanks.

All the best
Stewart

[path_finder]

In the 80'ies I worked for a corporate which had a production plant in Germany.
I made the choice to travel there only at the end of each wednesday afternoon because it was 'kegelbahn' evening here (for the men).
What was surprising to me was the reset system of the 'kegel' (skittle).
See here a shot: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... -Kugel.jpg
In the Brunswick american system the skittle are evacuated by a rake and reintroduced a the roof by some arms with succion pads.
Instead in the german system each skittle is attached by a rope passing through an hole of a plate located above the play ground.
When there is time for reset a motor lifts-up the plate, repositioning each 'kegel' at the right place (except sometime there is gordian node, you must dismount manually).
Then the plate is restored at its bottom level, releasing the cords and leaving free the skittle at their reference place.
I don't know if this has to do with the technology used by Bessler, but may be a complement to the pertinent post of ruggerodk above.
We can imagine a lot of applications: per example some weights first deposited on small places, then after a shift by a pendulum, hung somewhere else, therefore changing the application point of the active torque.