A theory about why the number five is so prominent in Johann Bessler's works.

[daxwc]

Nic:

There is abslutely no proof or supporting evidence for Bill to make the statement he did, eg "I have no problem accepting that Bessler's wheel was driven by gravity. But it was not powered by gravity :) "

Lack of evidence is not evidence. And a statement such as "it was not driven by gravity" requires serious proof. Notably a "PM" wheel device which is powered by something other than gravity ?

Actually Nic, you have very much less proof that it ran off only gravity. Your lack of evidence is not evidence that it ran off gravity only, in fact it is worse than Bills. Nowhere does Bessler say the energy comes from gravity, in fact he does indicate only that the weights and principle are the source.

The right path is there - the thing is somewhere in
Nature's laws. AP pg 272

I had a rare dream, which gave me strength, happiness, air and
space. For weeks I forgot the outside world and concentrated on
my innermost self. Soon I was free of cares and greatly comforted
by a new enlightenment. God had sent Joy after sorrow. After
barreness, the finest silk was being spun. For I put together the very
first device which could spontaneously revolve a little. I saw that I
had finally made the right choice, and why the earlier ones had been
wrong. My heart leapt for joy at the sight of this genuine Mobile. AP pg 274

He who wishes to make it in this world must often be prepared to
use a combination of lateral thinking and initiative! But I say this -
despite many a temptation to go too far, I kept a sense of
discipline, and everything that took place did so with God's
approval and with a clear conscience. If anyone wants to know
when all this took place, the answer is: - seventeen hundred and
three.

All the evidence is against him using only gravity.

[ovyyus]

There is abslutely no proof or supporting evidence for Bill to make the statement he did...

You mean supporting evidence other than centuries of serious scientific investigation, and centuries of serious non-scientific investigation, which have collectively produced not a single reproducible experiment showing gravity acting in a non-conservative manner? There's absolutely no pleasing some people :D

[nicbordeaux]

Well Gentlemen, as you have challenged me ;-)

In spite of centuries of experiment, eons of experience gleaned through serious and unlikeley tests alike (and for the most part presented on this forum in modern re-enactments), no evidence has ever been presented and verified that any force such as centrigual or other arises spontaneously. Even less that these forces which arise from motion are capable of doing work except at a rate of faster diminishing returns than when using the originating force, the one that gave "birth" to these pseudo-forces. Looks like conservation of energy and it's siamese sister entropy are much harsher on pseudo-forces at the level at which we work.

Gravity is as far as we can determine to all extents and purposes at our level "constant". The only solution is to devise systems which are less energy taxing than wheels. Or, as action = reaction, and counterproductive reaction force is what kills gravity wheels, devise systems which make use of the reaction forces, or accumulate them for use at a later moment. Obviously, starting with a energy input of one unit, deduction made of friction and air drag, in the best case scenario we are still short.

So back to the point : we need an additional energy source. Unfortunately there is no other "free" energy source. Heat generated by a gravity wheel's friction used in a 100% efficient manner if 100% of it were recovered might get a wheell round 359 degrees ?

Telekinesis, levitation and other hocus pocus has never been used with any success in a gravity engine.

It ensues that gravity is a less unlikely a candidate as any other hypothetical motive source.

Which is why I totally disagree with the behavior of my latest series of contraptions, because they appear to be breaking the LAW. Using gravity as a "prime mover" as sole energy input. And believe me, I'm being as careful as I can in every measurement. Therefore, I am deluded.

The most sensible thing Bessler seems to have said is in Dax's quote about there being a path. Energy flows. It is a path we are looking for. A not very obvious one. A sailing downwind faster than windspeed path. In a constant wind speed environment any self respecting physicist would declaim that sailing faster than the wind is a heresy, were it not for the numerous documented, irrefutable examples. Yup, sail sizes and sail angles modified constantly. But that is just a purely mechanical arrangement.

So, for a given force, different mechanical arrangements yield different results. It must be pretty obvious by now that 360° wheels are impossible, unless driven as outer casings (or whatever) by quite different mechanical systems.

And I'll conclude this entirely sterile banter by declaiming that the only method that appears viable is to adapt to what "nature" imposes upon us, not to coninue trying to make things work as we think they should. Look at any device, see what it is doing. The natural reaction is to try and make it bahave as we want. That just isn't possible. Therefore, determine exactly what it is doing, and why, and however pointless it may be, try and build around the natural path. It can't be any more pointless than repeating the same old recipes for 360° over and over again in different forms.

[eccentrically1]

Notably a "PM" wheel device which is powered by something other than gravity ?

I think that's what Bill means; bessler's wheels were powered by something other than gravity. If he's right, and I think he is, that's your proof.

If they weren't powered by gravity, the prominence of number 5 possibly being a clue to how many mechanisms are required to keep more weight on one side becomes another misleading clue.
If there is some sort of solution, that is, what powered the wheels, I think his best clue was the "movement could be found" from the correct understanding of his words and drawings. But it can't be a mechanical understanding, it's more sublime, for lack of a better word.

(This presupposes you think his wheels weren't gravity driven or powered.)

[john]

Nic,
It is possible Bessler's achievments and knowledge are more than they can endure.
If anyone read the information I refered to, the pentagram was also associated with celestial bodies. Freemasons are aware of this and it's history as well as their usage of it. Why do they use this symbol ? Their own information did not make this known, or at least what I read of it.
As to something being spontaneous. That could refer to one motion effecting another at the same time. Einstein called this an equal but opposing effect.
What I believe people miss is how religious Bessler most likely was.
As to his wheel(s), a long lever can act as a cross bar. And if anyone checks wikipedia for perpetual motion, they say unlikely by KNOWN applications of current knowledge. What I believe Bessler knew was a different application.
Just checked and my suspicions were confirmerd. Storks are associated with water. I know this is something people will dismiss because of the screw pump. But then, the answer to Bessler's wheel lies in what is not known or presently understood.
And I agree with you Nic, unless someone can show something other than gravity, then I believe it is only reasonable to believe he realized a way to use it's energy to power his wheel(s).
John

edited to add;
After posting this, I realized what Bessler may have meant by Stork's Bill in Mt 40.
In a way, Jim_Mich might have been dancing around it in another thread when he was discussing what a screw pump could do.
Bessler referred to a stork's bill in illustration by using scissors. What is the profile of a screw pump ? From one side, the opposite of the other. In other words, it would look like scissors. And of course, a screw pump pumps water, etc.
With the attached picture, how does a stork's bill work ? What happens if two surfaces are like a stork's bill when they close ? What happens to what is between them? If it's a fluid, it will move or be displaced as if it were being pumped.
Could be like the story of Hansel and Gretel,foloow the crumbs. Of course, that's a German child's story.

[daxwc]

john :

And I agree with you Nic, unless someone can show something other than gravity, then I believe it is only reasonable to believe he realized a way to use it's energy to power his wheel(s).

It is only reasonable that the earth is flat too, because it is part of my observable world. Or that the sun revolves around the earth, because I am the eye of my universe, but the truth can be much different than perception. Bessler’s wheel most likely gave the illusion of being gravity run while harnessing a different energy source.

If gravity could produce energy just by falling weights, why haven’t we not seen the slightest bit of over-unity in modern machinery; never mind a full blown PM machine. There is no spare energy in an Atwood’s pendulum.

Nic despite your best efforts I see no energy gains in your experiments; an accumulation of chaos does not harvest energy, just look how fast your pendulum slows down. Show us two equal weights and the second ends up at a higher PE, than the first also provided with a better experiment data and maybe somebody might listen to your twitchy non-energy finger. My own personal opinion, what I think is wrong with your experiments is the mass and pendulum arm is not taken into account for properly. I don’t think you can just weigh it without applying some of its mass to the axle, but I could be wrong.

[john]

Dax,
Fair enough question.
The project I am currently working on will either prove or disprove what I say.
As things are, the build is proceeding, even if at a snails pace. Details, they are the devil ya know.
BTW, the Earth is flat only from a low vantage point. even in Egyptian times, the possibility of the Earth being spherical was postulated and calculated somewhat accurately. It had to do with how shadows were cast on the summer equinox. Basic info. This info was supposed to have been kept in the Library at Alexandria.
John

[Michael]

John I just read your link. Yes that's pretty much what my thoughts were. Knowledge of the planet Venus tracing a pentagram is ancient knowledge. Being an astronomer and privy to certain knowledge Bessler more than not knew about it. Maybe he was indicating points where different masses in motion come together to create a desired effect. Might makes sense along with the three planets quote that are ready for any battle. Just an idea.

[john]

michael,
I think there is the religious side of Bessler nd his Earthly or engineering side.
What most people might not know is that trigonometry was invented about 200 b.c. And Rome occupied/controlled Egypt until about 500 A.D.
This gives about a 700 year window for the Light House and Library at and of Alexandria. 2 of the 7 Great Wonders of the Ancient world.
With trigonometry, it is believed that a well in Egypt had no shadow ont he summer solstice (?). Could be equinox. And further north on the same day, a shadow was observed in a similar well. By using trigonometry, the suns distance from the Earth and the earth's rough diameter could be calculated.
It is believed to have happened.
As for Astrology, as I mentioned, even the Freemasons themselves only state what is said about something they value as a symbol. Myself, I will keep with the simple belief that the pentagram represemts Jesus' 5 wounds.

John

[daxwc]

Michael, I have always found that Bessler put the pentagrams upside-down, is this the normal tracing of Venus through the sky?

John, good luck with your build, they always take longer time than you thought it would take to build.

[Michael]

I'm not sure if there is an upside down right side up orientation to the path of Venus since it's referenced to the earth. It's probably always changing since we are both moving. I thought John had shown right side up drawings?

[Michael]

The other john, the christian church borrowed heavily from ancient greek knowledge. This is an academic fact. The pentagram is very old, a part of that fact.

[daxwc]

No, the main one is upside down. JC has drawn it as a pentagon, but a pentagram can be drawn in as well and in my opinion more accurate.

http://www.theorffyreuscode.com/html/the_pentagram.html

I have issues with his other two. All the ones I found in drawings are upside down.

[John Collins]

There are both pentagrams present in the GB and DT drawings, one with its point upwards and the other pointing down.

Nic, I couldn't have put it as well myself, but I echo your sentiments. Good job!

JC

[rlortie]

Daxwc,

Hate to throw a paraprosdokian your way, but how do you draw a pentagon upside down? A pentagram is a five pointed star while a pentagon is of five equal sides and can be displayed with anyone of the five sides representing top, side or bottom.

A pentagram may also be drawn in any position, although it is traditional to be done in 72 degree increments to maintain one point vertical and two horizontal.

____________________________________________

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit Salad.