Swinging .. or .. Momentum .. you be the judge !

[WaltzCee]

He was here yesterday

• Last active:
  Sat Jun 03, 2023 8:58 am

This is weird. What are the experts waiting on. When I know I have an answer, I want help to go viral!

Why are the experts so shy? I can't find Oystein's site now. Did he take it down?

Cool cover. I think I'm going to hand sketch my cover so don't judge the book by its cover.

[WaltzCee]

.
.
Sorry about all that noise, Fletcher. I'm going to try to get it back on track.
.

.
.
Kaine recently posted this

. .. .. . JCs AP page 235
The wheel's own power from within
Must begin without all momentum
. .. .. .
For without my principle
There is no mobile perpetuum. NB.
. .. .. .

. .. .. .
Good discussion, Fletcher.

In my judgement, the answer to your OP question

• Swinging .. or .. Momentum .. you be the judge !

is neither. There is a principle embedded within the wheel that isn't either momentum or swinging.

Kaine's quote confirms my bias. Is there an expert in the house?

ETA
My doctor told me it's nap time. After which, she wants her patootie spanked!

Sorry guys, doctor's orders.

[JUBAT]

Does it have anything to do with gyroscopic precession - like when a helicopter blade lifts and it comes on 90 degrees later?

I guess you referenced momentum. In relation to a wheel though - it's such a generic term that nobody except you knows how to apply it to a rotating wheel. Meh... It's kind of like saying, "Hey I figured it out - the wheel must rotate!" It's like being amazed my shoes have laces...

Is it something unique that science and physics has ever seen?

That's about all I care to know. I feel like I'm asking what kind of cheese the moon is made of.

[JUBAT]

.
.
If one wants to investigate codes & clues
.
this was written by one of the world's leading Bessler authorities.

Are we allowed to ask if the clues have any merit, why haven't the experts produced an answer?

What the duck, I'm axing.

To my knowledge that book has not even been published yet. Oystein is a BW forum member but unfortunately he doesn't post often now.

I suspect that most of the supposed clues people think they are finding are false or red herrings. They spend more time looking for a treasure map than for the treasure itself. There is big business in publishing books over untested ideas.

[Fletcher]

I was hoping to have finished my whole translation of the German and Latin parts of DT that talk about the inner wheel structure before posting, but I've just not had time this week to complete it. However, I can at least offer something for the first part which is the bit you were questioning. I disagree that the German and Latin are different, as they seem to me to be very similar. There are some small differences which is perhaps because of the difficulty in finding suitable Latin words, but on the whole the two versions seem to tally. Interestingly though it seems that sometimes the German has extra words and more detail and in other places it's the Latin. When I've finished the full translations I'll give a link to the output of my translation-aid software and you'll be able to see for yourself how similar they are. Anyway, here are my two translations so far:

Page 19/20 of DT - German:

The inner structure of this tympanum or wheel is of such a nature, after which a number of weights arranged according to 'a priori' (that is, scientifically demonstrable) laws of mechanical perpetual motion, continuously drive the wheel after/from [a] single received rotation, or after/from [a] single impressed force of the swing/impetus/momentum, and its revolution must continue, so long as that is to say the whole structure maintains itself, without any further assistance and help [from] external motive forces which would require restitution:

Page 19/20 of DT - Latin:

The interior structure of the tympanum or wheel is so constructed, in order that weights, arranged according to 'a priori' or scientifically demonstrable laws of mechanical perpetual motion, may drive the wheel without rest [from a] single received impulse & revolution, and may cause perpetual motion, as long as of course the structure itself [does] not lose its position and order/arrangement; and without any further help & without another added source of motion which may need to be restored.

The part that you're asking about is this:

GERMAN: after/from [a] single impressed force of the swing/impetus/momentum
LATIN: [from a] single received impulse

In the German text the words used are 'Force des Schwunges'. 'Schwunges' is a genitive form of 'Schwung' - so it is 'force of the Schwung'. What does 'Schwung' mean? Click here to see some dictionary meanings. ....

swing, drive, impetus, momentum

it's also true that the word can be used to mean 'swinging' in an oscillatory sense, but in my view that is the least likely meaning in this sentence. "after a single impressed force of swinging/oscillation" - this seems unlikely to me. If Bessler had really meant to say 'swinging/oscillation' I think he would have used a more common word for it such as 'Schwingen' or 'Schwingung'. Also, the Latin does not support 'swinging/oscillation' but rather impulse/impetus/momentum etc., and as both pieces of text are so similar in all other respects it seems very unlikely that there would be two different intended meanings for just that part.

It's interesting to see some other uses of the word though - there was a reference to 'buoyancy' on that link I provided. Also, the following are from an 1810 German-English dictionary:

Schwung, m. swing; von der Seele und ihren Fahigkeiten strain; ein hoher Schwung a high flight; im Schwunge seyn to be on the wing, to soar.

Schwingen, n. swinging, seesawing; vaulting, soaring, taking wing; brandishing, flourishing, beating with a swingle-staff.

Schwingung, f. swinging, seesawing; vaulting, soaring, taking wing; eines Tons, des Pendels vibration.

One final thing that might have some relevance is that in the phrase 'Force des Schwung', force is not a word of German origin (as is apparent by Bessler's use of a Roman typeface for that word), and the German word that Bessler often uses for force is 'Kraft'. If we look up the term 'Schwungkraft' in the online dictionary - click here - we get...

buoyancy, momentum, centrifugal force

I'm still trying to confirm the terms that might have been used in Bessler's time to refer to centrifugal force.

Going back to the Latin - the word used is 'impulsu' which is either the ablative case of the noun 'impulsus', or possibly the ablative case of the supine of the verb 'impello'. Either way it has the following noun meanings: impulse, push, pressure, shock, impact, drive, instigation, incitement.

Other Latin terms used:

tympanum - means a drum. Bessler's wheel resembles a drum in its construction because it has a lightweight cylindrical frame and the top and bottom surfaces of the cylinder (sides of the wheel) were comprised of stretched canvas.

Click here for a dictionary definition of 'a priori'.

Stewart

[Fletcher]

KAS wrote:
He contradicts himself so many times that it is hard to fathom the truth.
And the more he rants at the unbelievers who continually wind him up, the more his clues become blurred. It seems to me the only writings that resemble any shred of truth are those he wrote when the critics were quiet.

I disagree - I'm not aware of any contradictions in Bessler's writings. It seems to me you're struggling because of inaccurate translations:

KAS wrote:
"It revolves, but without other wheels inside or outside,
and without weights, wind, or springs".
- Bessler

This translation is missing two vital words which clarify the intended meaning. Here's the original text from Chapter 46 of AP:

Laufft ohne in- und außre Räder/
Zimbel-Gewicht/ Wind und Uhr-Feder/ &c.

[It] runs without internal and external wheels,
cymbal-weight, wind and clock-spring, &c.

cymbal-weight is a reference to weights that are attached to a rope/chain and they power a device as they fall under gravity - many devices were powered like this in Bessler's time. There is no contradiction here as Bessler says in various places that his wheels contain weights, but they are not used in the manner I've just described. Bessler even stresses the importance of the weights in his wheel in DT, saying that they are not simply attached in this manner, but are in fact themselves the perpetuum mobile or essential & constituent parts of it.

Again, with the part about the springs, there is a word missing which removes any contradiction. The original text has the word 'Uhr' (clock) in front of 'Feder" (spring). So he is saying that his wheel is not powered by a wound spring that was found in many clockwork devices in Bessler's time and require re-winding - however, this obviously does not rule out the use of compression or torsion springs as a temporary energy store, for example.

KAS wrote:
"Accordingly, this wheel consists of an external wheel (or drum) for raising weights"
- Bessler

As for that quote there is no part of the original text that says "for raising weights"!

It's no wonder you're finding the whole thing rather confusing!

Stewart

[Fletcher]

Steve - from memory the part of DT that you are referring to as mentioning the word 'swing' or 'swinging' is probably better translated as 'momentum'. I'll look into it for you and post about it here later.

Stewart

[Fletcher]

I've worked out where it comes from with a bit of help from Ed. It's from John Collin's book "Perpertual Motion: An Ancient Mystery Solved". Here it is (page 89):

The inward structure of the wheel is of a nature according to the laws of perpetual motion, so arranged that certain disposed weights once in rotation, gain force from their own swinging, and must continue their movement as long as their structure does not lose its position and arrangement. Unlike all other automata, such as clocks or springs or other hanging weights which require winding up or whose duration depends on the chain which attaches them, on the contrary these weights are the essential parts and constitute perpetual motion itself; as from them is received the universal movement which they must exercise so long as they remain out of the centre of gravity; and when they come to placed together, so arranged that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wondrous speedy flight, one or another of them must apply its weight vertically to the axis, which in its turn will also move.

This is a translation from "Das Triumphans...". I'm not sure who did this translation, but there is a different translation in John's more recent book of "Das Triumphans...". Here it is (page 190):

The internal structure of the wheel is designed in such a way that weights applied in accordance with the laws of Perpetual Motion, work, once a small impressed force has caused the commencement of movement, to perpetuate the said movement and cause the rotation to continue indefinitely – that is, as long as the device retains its structural integrity – without the necessity of external assistance for its continuation – such as the mechanisms which are to be found in other ‘automatics’ – e.g. clockwork, springs or weights that require rewinding. For this concept, my ‘principle of excess weight’, is NOT just an external appendage, an ‘added-on device’ which is there in order to cause, through application of its weight, the continuation of the motion (the revolution) so long as the cards or chains, from which it depends, permit. NO, these weights are themselves the PM device, the ‘essential constituent parts’ which must of necessity continue to exercise their motive force (derived from the PM principle) indefinitely – so long as they keep away from the centre of gravity. To this end they are enclosed in a structure or framework, and co-ordinated in such a way that not only are they prevented from attaining their desired equilibrium or ‘point of rest’, but they must for ever seek it, thereby developing an impressive velocity which is proportional to their mass and to the dimensions of their housing. This velocity is sufficient for the moving and raising of loads applied to the axis of rotation.

Please remember these quotes are from John Collins' books and are copyrighted by him.

I'll work on my own translation of this section of DT when I get some spare time.

Stewart

[Fletcher]

Stewart's quotes go backwards in time to 2004 .. i.e. most recent first in the thread ..

I'll later give my what and why definitive answer to swinging v's momentum when everybody has had the chance to digest what Stewart said and fully consider the CONTEXT of where and when it was said ..

[Tarsier79]

I mistakenly posted a translation of AP I thought was where it came from in the other thread. It is surprising how similar the two texts are. The translation of them is almost identical in JCs books, even though not as close in rhyming couplets. Even so, it appears he is trying to convey the very same message. In AP the word used is "prepondium" (which appears to be an improvised latinised word.)

[JUBAT]

Trying to be a bit more productive instead of preaching doom and gloom (although I prefer reality over false hopes).

Could this anvil receiving many blows be more like a trampoline? Instead of a pendulum coming down and parking, might it come down and instantly be deflected back the way it came from? This could present some interesting scenarios in that the now-relaunched pendulum takes advantage of gravity and the rotation to restore what normally would have lost in a standard configuration akin to a child jumping on a trampoline?

The more I read about the wheel, I tend to start thinking about off center rotation right at the axle. With CF being the pita that it is and no energy available to move anything, I start hyperfocusing right around the axle. Things like roller bearings that take an eccentric path or a planetary gear drive where all the bearings are on eccentrics so that no matter when the entire internally weighted structure ends up, it can't stop. But every time I'm finally hit with the idea that I can't magically lift the entire wheel. Even eccentrics settle.

So as I beat my ahead against my lifelong pile of failures, I start to wonder if maybe it's a bunch of small weights that move just a tiny bit. But how am I going to move them?

Bah! It's why I say it's impossible in this day and age to solve this. I think Bessler had absolutely nothing to do but sit and think on this all the time and maybe he had supernatural help. He claimed he did.

Looking forward to that 15K check from WC. ;)

[WaltzCee]

.
.

Looking forward to that 15K check from WC. ;)

Let me make this perfectly clear, if my build is not a runner, I'm done. I will never post here again.

However, if I do you can know I've made a working wheel.

[preoccupied]

.
.

Looking forward to that 15K check from WC. ;)

Let me make this perfectly clear, if my build is not a runner, I'm done. I will never post here again.

However, if I do you can know I've made a working wheel.

I guess you will never post here again. I think the best advice I can give you is the overkill lever that I have been proposing in my thread. You can position a lever away from the wheel to an infinite length. For example you can move a lever 90 degrees from a parallel position to a perpendicular position in a 90 degree rotation of the wheel or you can shift a weight using gears up and to the side along a track, gears on a track with a long lever positioned away from the wheel an infinite length, and the block the holds the lever in place can be a circle, half a circle for one side of the wheel to effect a lever and half a circle for the side of the wheel effecting another possibly infinitely long lever to lift the weight back up. Weights shifts up and to the right on the right side of the wheel and up to the right on the other side left side of the wheel and wheel rotates CW. I'm saying guys that infinitely long levers eventually the lever will be long enough. This might be one of Bessler's rules for perpetual motion machines. Didn't he mention in phrases something about rules governing perpetual motion? Infinitely long levers away from the wheel might be one.

If you think about it the lever on the main axle is always balanced, no matter how you shift weights on it such as with ramps rolling weights or swinging pendulums. But levers positioned against a separate axle from a position on the wheel are not part of the unbeatable balance they have their own positions. I know that it takes a longer lever to move something potentially but if the lever can be infinitely long then it can move something like a gear would. I think (I'm not sure) that you have to make the lever long enough to surpass the distance of the axle on the wheel to the axle on the main wheel. So if you have a lever positioned away from the wheel and its distance away from the wheel is the same as the distance to its axle as to from its axle to the main wheels axle then there is no leverage but anything beyond that is leverage it just looks like a very long lever compared to the other components on the wheel.

I hope I've contributed to your search for Bessler's wheel to your liking. I had a nice weekend looking into this and 4th of July Holiday. I might have made a lot of progress this week. I hope that I didn't offend anyone with my strange beliefs or ideas. Or have people put me on ignore? That would be a shame. I am looking for possible friends still. It's not easy being arrogant.

"scientifically Demonstrable laws of mechanical perpetual motion" might be an infinitely long lever away from the wheel...

[ovyyus]

...I hope that I didn't offend anyone with my strange beliefs or ideas...

I enjoy reading your strange posts. But I don't dare comment for fear of making your posts less strange. Great things have been discovered by strange people.

[John Collins]

fletch wrote :- “ This is a translation from "Das Triumphans...". I'm not sure who did this translation, but there is a different translation in John's more recent book of "Das Triumphans...". Here it is (page 190):”

When I first wrote PMAAMS? I think I used either Henry Dircks’ translation or that Rupert Gould’s, but when I acquired copies of Bessler’s books, I managed to interest Mike Senior, who had a degree in 18th C German and Ancient Greek, and agreed to translate everything into a English. He agreed to provide what he believed to be the true meaning of what Bessler wrote, rather than a literal one. He was a polymath, a consultant in Flora, with sidelines in astrophysics, astronomy and pure mathematics. He frequently quoted aloud from memory from old Greek plays as well as Latin in which he was also proficient. Unfortunately he is no longer with us, but fondly remembered.

JC