Scissors Simplified

........ · Post by **........** » Thu Jun 16, 2011 10:04 pm

This is one basic concept I believe Bessler used.
When the lever with the scissors nears 3 o'clock, it will have maximum force. The example of the scissors is a spread of 90 degrees.
By having the scissors shoot outwards at 45 degrees, 4 lbs. of weight would have the force of 2.8 lbs. This would allow a 1 lb.weight with no resistance and using a 4:1 leverage to have greater potential.
In retracting the weight, the weighted lever nearing the 9 o'clock position would be at it's greatest potential to slow. This would give it greater potential than the weight between 3 o'clock and 6 o'clock (135 degrees ATDC) allowing it to be retracted thus conserving momentum.

Good Bye

edited to add, weighted levers would essiantally counter balance each other negating any effrect they have except for how they effect the extension or retraction of scissors.

edited to add; it would take a builder who can pay close attention to detail yo make such a design work. Today, doubt there are such builders.
In the past, a craftsman could do quarter rounds as if they were done by machine today. Or just watch antique roadshow and check out the work that was done on furniture without modern tools.
p.s., math helps to understand what to watch for. Trig will do it.

........ · Post by **........** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:49 am

"No. 26: This is somewhat different from the previous model, but it can be described simply: A are levers which are interrupted at B and equipped with weight-wheels at C. The weight-wheels run in a channel E and are attached to the cords D. As the diagram shows, one side is heavier than the other. Behind this problem one looks for an augmented problem."

- Johann Bessler

< The weight-wheels run in a channel E >
With 2 E's, D is not necessary.

< A are levers which are interrupted at B >
Scissors ?

< Behind this problem one looks for an augmented problem >
their actuators/levers ?

........ · Post by **........** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:23 am

A bit of an advanced thought.
When retracting the scissors, pulley's allow for a more efficient retraction.

daxwc · Post by **daxwc** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 4:13 am

Really... how are you threading the design... if I may ask without offending a held secret.

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 12:52 pm

What is retracting the scissors?

........ · Post by **........** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 5:21 pm

Mt 24 helps.
It is the principle that is important, not the specific mechanics.

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 6:57 pm

The drawings are seductive; they seem to demonstrate a principle of gravity as a source of energy, but they only provide further proof that it's a conservative force once you construct a wheel based on any of the drawings, or combination of drawings.
Actually, in a mechanical system, the specific mechanics is the only thing we have to work with.

........ · Post by **........** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:42 pm

eccentrically1,

< Actually, in a mechanical system, the specific mechanics is the only thing we have to work with. >

This simply is not true. If the principle is not understood, then the true function of the mechanics might be missed.
As such, this could be why people have such a diffcult time concieving how Bessler could have used similar principles in a different fashion.

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:30 pm

Well, what general principle, what law, what rule, what truth are we trying to understand here?
We're trying to understand the principles of physics; specifically as they apply to uniform circular motion.
Physics laws aren't negotiable, right? No measurement of any mechanical system has ever been found to break the principles. So we're left with specific mechanics, simple machines that abide by those unbreakable truths.

........ · Post by **........** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:09 pm

< Well, what general principle, what law, what rule, what truth are we trying to understand here? >

It would be what Bessler knew and understood thaat we do not.

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:33 pm

Bessler's wheel didn't break the principles of physics either, James. More than likely, the wheel was balanced to begin with. It would be more difficult to mechanically turn an unbalanced wheel. If they were unbalanced, or overbalanced, they would have pulsed when the weights went from balanced to unbalanced, back to balanced. The observations never mention this; only that the action of the wheels was smooth. A smooth motion could only come from a balanced mass. The sound of the weights was a distraction to make observers believe the weights were providing the energy.

So we should be trying to discover what specific mechanics he used to turn his balanced wheel(s).

........ · Post by **........** » Sat Jun 18, 2011 12:06 am

eccentrically1,

< So we should be trying to discover what specific mechanics he used to turn his balanced wheel(s). >

This is why I consider his drawings valuable. Otherwise, what value are the clues he left behind ?

eccentrically1 · Post by **eccentrically1** » Sat Jun 18, 2011 1:55 am

The drawings are clueless. Variations on a theme. They're designed to fool you into thinking a wheel can be designed that runs on gravity. The more complicated the drawing is, the better (to fool you).

Jim Williams · Post by **Jim Williams** » Sat Jun 18, 2011 2:30 am

While I don't believe Bessler's wheels worked any better than the MT drawings, neither do I believe the drawings were meant to fool anyone. I would think they were first designed with the designer hopes in mind, whom could only be called a fool for having made the attempt, i.e., be no fool at all.

........ · Post by **........** » Sat Jun 18, 2011 3:23 am

@Jim W & eccentrically1,
It does seem he put clues in his drawings as well.
In his drawings, he has done some things to point the way. Kind of like hansel and gretel with the bread crumbs.
Of course, even the most credible people say his drawings are worthless and should be ignored. Was harassed for a long time by one person over this.
I'll give away an obvious clue. In Mt 27, he has 2 heart shaped weights at the outside of the wheel. By one of them is an E. In Mt 26, E is a guided slot. Why would you have the outside of the wheel a place where a weight can roll around ?
If you consider that hearts pump something, he could have been suggesting pumping a fluid around the outside of the wheel.
Of course, such a concept is possible and would probably have the smoothest rotation. After all, one weighted lever could seal thelower point of a warped board while a weighted lever further up closes the top of the warped board causing it to pump fluid.
Don't have a place to warp boards or would have built it already.
Of course, Anthony Burr built a wheel with scissors on it and they shot out. Bessler described his weight as doing that. It is possible he built two different types of wheels. On youtube, I think Ant_Burr is the channel name Anthony used. Da*n, did a check and if it was his channel I saw, he did quit working on stuff like he said he was going to do.

BesslerWheel.com

Scissors Simplified

Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified

re: Scissors Simplified