Is Force different from Energy ?

[Bessler007]

Given the historical context (physics being in its infancy) I doubt seriously the principle was well understood. It could be your average carpenter's boy of the day had a better understanding of physics than Newton...

[Fletcher]

ahh ... that I doubt !

Bessler found a simple solution to creating a supplementary force within his wheel. So simple that Karl wasn't shooting off letters to Newton et al. In fact his response seems somewhat subdued don't you think ? Makes me think he'd seen it somewhere before, like in nature ?

[evgwheel]

Hi
This will be my last post for a while.
I have had the opportunity to learn a lot from members and visitors over the last few weeks. But it is time to get back to reality.
I enjoyed all the scientific formulas and debates posted on this site, especially force and energy.
But as I am of simple mind, experiencing the wind power in nature (I’m a cruising sailor), using a shovel and feeling the real effects of energy in normal living and experiences is good enough for the moment.

One last question: At what height or position in the wheel did Bessler load his cylinders/weights?

My thoughts will be on gravity and balance, starting with a wheel with one horizontal bar, 2 weights at right angles, perfect balance. A couple of degree will send one weight to the other side, so will a tiny push.
I will miss, but enjoy a break from the forum
evg

[ovyyus]

Happy sailing evg, come back soon :)

[Bessler007]

A carpenter's boy might have been able to sketch or even recall the details of the angles of parts and the distances between pivots and the ranges of the swings and other details of that sort.

It is beyond belief to think that even Bessler understood his wheel in terms of forces over distances and that energy over time in terms of power. These ideas were new. Fletcher, I think you give Bessler way too much credit.

[Fletcher]

Yet, Bessler was able to improve the performance of each successive wheel, even making them operate bi-directionally [which took a bit of working out according to Bessler & compromise too I'll bet] !

Do you think he just made them larger or do you think he was improving the working principle at the same time, so it was more efficient as the materials & technology of the day allowed ? That just might require a knowledge of precisely how it worked.

Seems that it was said by Karl that a carpenters boy could build & understand it.

I hope I give the exact amount of credit due ! I am in awe of what he achieved :)

[Bessler007]

I don't think Karl saw perpetual motion on the quantum level or the extreme level bounded by the extremes of the universe but I think both are true. Moving this thread back from whence it came, it makes me wonder how practical it would be to patent a means that duplicates something naturally occurring.

Makes me think he'd seen it somewhere before, like in nature ?

[Bessler007]

Somewhere I've read Bessler explained he could get more work by making the wheels larger.

Do you think he just made them larger or do you think he was improving the working principle at the same time, so it was more efficient as the materials & technology of the day allowed ?

Karl could have been wrong.

Seems that it was said by Karl that a carpenters boy could build & understand it.

[Michael]

My point I was alluding to is similar to Jims. When Karl said;

1. it was simple
2. and when he said he was suprised no one discovered it before

maybe he wasn't talking about the mechanics, but was refereing to the "unknown" fact that energy is more that velocity. Taking into account the heavy interest in math and the exploration of science and the fact the "world" had been pursuing these matters for thousands of years - Pythagoras, science from India, math from Persia etc. etc. etc... why hadn't that fact been noticed and documented before?

[Fletcher]

You might have a point Michael. The only time I've wondered about ...

the "unknown" fact that energy is more that velocity

... is when I compare the kinetic energy equation to Einstein's.


ke = 1/2m v^2

E = m c^2 [where c is the velocity of light]

Why did Einstein for some reason not feel the necessity to halve the mass, like when calculating the energy of motion for other moving body's, but to be fair it's probably just something a group of physicists & mathematicians might be interested in explaining ?

P.S. for the record I don't think Bessler used any conversion of mass to nuclear energy or anything else so exotic, & certainly not a 4th Law of Motion where mass is reduced in a falling body, to power his wheels.

[jim_mich]

Note that though we now add a factor of 1/2 to this kinetic energy formula to make it work with coherent systems of units, the formula ke = m•v^2 is correct if you choose units to fit it.

My feelings are that because of the vis viva controversy the present formula makes it look like a compromise between the two sides of the dispute. I guess the real reason for halving the formula is based upon the logical way that mathematicians justify the formula. If you read the Wikipedia article on kinetic energy it will explain how the kinetic formula is derived. You need to be a mathematician to understand their complex equations of "thus this equals this and thus, etc.", which many times is too complex for me to understand. (I prefer simple computer formulas that just work when you plug in the known values.)

[Fletcher]

Thanks for that Jim. I read it thru but for some reason my eyes started to glaze over. I think I'll stick with the Newtonian equation & forget about adjusting the Joules for speeds higher than were likely to be found in Besslers wheels. I just have to accept that the units used are what makes the difference & leave it at that - or go to night classes ;)

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Fletcher,
you are right with

Bessler found a simple solution to creating a supplementary force within his wheel

the translation is: it gains energy from it's own swinging, not force.

you view for E=1/2m*v*v and E=m*c*c is also correct. Bessler uses the E=m*c*c even he was not aware of Einstein, i think he wasn't also not aware of Newton's rules when he build his wheel.

You are searching the other Half in Newtons rule. Newton is handling with two systems. I like to explain what I see: if you throw a stone, the stone is getting the energy 1/2*m*v*v. the other part of the energy is used to accelerate the second system the earth. because the earth is so big in its mass, you can not recognize it.

the future has begun

Georg[/quote]

[james kelly]

I thank you for clarification,Georg. It seems that it is difficult to get some people to comprehend what ypu tell them. jkelly

[Fletcher]

Thanks for your opinion Georg. Ultimately the wheel acquired Energy from some internal action [agreed], derived by movement within the wheel. IMO this required a force to be present that could then used to produce the excess Energy, but I take your point about the meaning of 'Kraft' in Besslers context.

That's also an interesting explanation about why the difference between 1/2 m & m i.e. the earth moving. "For every action there is an equal & opposite reaction !" hmm ...