Here is another perspective on the subject, "What if Bessler had revealed his wheel?"
Uncovering Wheel Wouldn't Reveal The Secret. I don't think that much of anything would have happened initially, if Bessler had revealed his wheel by uncovering it. See p. 226 of John Collins' 1997 book "Perpetual Motion: An Ancient Mystery Solved?" which says "... cast aside the mantle that conceals my wheel. But he shall be thwarted in his desires." If the wheel had been uncovered, many people could then have duplicated what they saw. They would be thwarted in their desires, as their wheels would not have moved like a Bessler wheel. The wheels wouldn't work by accelerating up to a steady angular speed. The people couldn't duplicate what they couldn't see. The covered wheel was just another layered ruse for protecting his real invention, which invention I think consisted of his ultra-low-friction roller bearings. They could not see within his roller bearing, but Bessler provided a type of peek within his bearing by his drawing at the end of his "Apologia" or rather at the end of his "Apologische Poesie und Poetische Apologie Von seinem MOBILE PER SE und PERPETUUM MOBILE". In essence, Bessler did reveal his invention in "Apologia", if we have eyes to see what he provided.
The Secret Was in The Ultra-High Quality Bearings. The real secret was how he curiously constructed or specially grew his ultra-low friction bearings. Uncovering his wheel for a long time might have caused some bad people to desire to steal his roller bearings. It might have become obvious that something else was going on. People might have had a clue of how to reverse engineer the construction of his bearings, if someone had stolen them, but I think Bessler had his own guards to guard the guards (who were guarding the wheel) to make sure that the bearings were not stolen (without making such a direct request to the guards).
Just try to build a tiny roller bearing without the use of any lubrication, as lubrication would absorb much energy. I think that it is theoretically possible for there to be almost only rolling without slipping of strong-tough metal upon strong-tough metal. If one does not believe the most basic point, one can put it to experimental tests. One can (for example) easily do a simple experiment to compare the times of a steel ball bearing rolling down a flat incline for the two cases: lubricated versus unlubricated. Which case is faster? What happens when one lubricates with more grease? Bessler could not have lubricated his bearings during the two extended portions of his long test when his wheel was continually operating within a sealed room. Neither is there any evidence that he lubricated them during the half way point. His tiny bearings were of low enough friction that they supported a massive wheel and still did not burn out.
Please don't confuse loud sounds/screeching noises coming from within Bessler's various ruse wheel distractions with the quietness within his bearings. It wasn't the bearings that made the loud noises.
Covering his wheel kept people from inquiring too closely what Bessler was really hiding. Despite Karl's promise not to reveal what he saw, Bessler took a chance when he showed it to Karl, that Karl would not inquire too carefully about what was really going on (beyond what he was being shown). That particular inner ruse layer apparently worked well. I doubt that Karl was an especially deep thinker about such things. Apparently Karl was fooled by seeing the internal weights hitting the inside edges within the wheel, and Karl apparently did not inquire by self-consideration/analysis any further about what was really going on. The internal weights hitting the edges effectively created an inner distraction protective layer for his real invention. And there was the proof right before Karl's very own eyes, as he saw it and it worked exactly as he was told that it would work (though maybe at a very slightly slower angular speed since the covering was off and there was a tiny bit more air friction). Apparently, Karl made a very bad assumption that if one were to build what he saw that it would work.
I suspect that what he saw was simply a series of wires with ends connected to the interior edges so that weights could slide or fall according to their constraint so as to take turns hitting the interior edges. Maybe the wires slightly sagged so as not to make much of a sound when gently hitting the other end when going back up. Any such sounds would have been well masked by the loud hitting noises, as other weights were stopped after falling. It was so simple that a carpenter boy could have built it -- but if anyone including a carpenter boy had built it, it would not have worked. Bessler put all sorts of other things in his wheels as distractions. To first order, it didn't matter much what he put within, as long as it had mass. That explains his claim of having invented so many perpetual motion machines. I am convinced that he directed the building of a very large number of such perpetual motion machines powered by gravity. His brother (while working on his wheel) built them inside of Bessler's wheels according to Bessler's instructions. They were all perpetual motion machines that worked when Bessler's very low friction roller bearings were used.
All wheels perpetually rotating require very low total rotational friction and work done otherwise they would stop. That is the first requirement. "Without such things ... all things will come to a standstill" according to p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book.
Any wheel rotating about a horizontal axis, with ultra-low total rotational friction, would become a Bessler wheel, "For greed is an evil plant." (p. 225 of Collins' 1997 book). To understand the appropriate level of low total friction need for a wheel, one should build/find a wheel that has such low friction that the wheel will not slow down when rotated about a horizontal axis. When one finds such a wheel with such a low level of friction, then one will also have found a modern day Bessler wheel, as it should also speed up to that angular speed from a low initial angular speed. How long can one get a wheel to rotate after giving it a gentle two finger push?
One might say that there does not exist such a low enough friction wheel, as all have friction. -- I would respond that Bessler had such a low enough total rotational friction wheel. Having such a very low source of friction, with enough mass in the wheel will allow it to more obviously tap into a source of rotational kinetic energy from the two-part gravitons available according to the Bessler principle. Even a low mass wheel with low enough friction, at low angular speed can partly draw upon that source. But with total rotational friction being too large, it would eventually come to a halt, having had tapped into the source but then losing that acquired rotational kinetic energy to friction. Upon any uncovering of Bessler's wheel, our coarse eyes would not see finely enough to see the rotating nuclear ground states within, acquiring much rotational kinetic energy from the many discrete two-part gravitons. AEP - 13 Mar 2011
See
http://www1.iwvisp.com/LA4Park/GravitySummaryNews.txt and the associated figures for more information about Bessler's principle, more thoughts on explaining Bessler's words, and more ideas about constructing Bessler's very low friction roller bearings.
