Forget it

[John Collins]

The quote from my book, used above, "On Leibniz: It was something of a surprise to me, therefore when I discovered that he wrote many letters enquiring about the invention, and was able to visit Orffyreus and examine the machine on at least two occasions," was in a passage in which I question why there is no mention in any account about Leibniz, of his dealings with Bessler.

I only discovered by chance the existence of a number of letters by the famous scientist to and from friends who were in contact with Bessler.

You can read the letters in my book, "Perpetual Motion, An Ancient Mystery Solved?" I apologise for apparently advertising my book, but it is not to increase sales but to point out that it is still the best information source for those people who seem still to be unaware of much of Bessler's life.

JC

[daxwc]

JC:

I apologise for apparently advertising my book, but it is not to increase sales but to point out that it is still the best information source for those people who seem still to be unaware of much of Bessler's life.

Then I will do it for you, it is a book full of facts and a great read for only 8 dollars.





Bill quote:

Oystein wrote:
Leibniz tested the waterscrew for 2 hours.

I don't think this is correct. Perhaps Oystein meant to say 'sGravesand instead of Leibniz?

Still looking into it but I think he just saw the wheel run.

'Orffyreus is a friend of mine, and he allowed me, sometime ago, to carry out some experiments with his machine. It ran continuously for two hours in my presence and demonstrated considerable power. JC’s book pg 60

[John Collins]

Thanks daxwc, I sometimes get frustrated that people who haven't read my book, ask questions about various things to do with Bessler and his wheel when the answers are there if they take the time to look.

JC

[getterdone]

The quote from my book, used above, "On Leibniz: It was something of a surprise to me, therefore when I discovered that he wrote many letters enquiring about the invention, and was able to visit Orffyreus and examine the machine on at least two occasions," was in a passage in which I question why there is no mention in any account about Leibniz, of his dealings with Bessler.

I only discovered by chance the existence of a number of letters by the famous scientist to and from friends who were in contact with Bessler.

You can read the letters in my book, "Perpetual Motion, An Ancient Mystery Solved?" I apologise for apparently advertising my book, but it is not to increase sales but to point out that it is still the best information source for those people who seem still to be unaware of much of Bessler's life.

JC

Thanks for posting that JC, I have your book, and enjoyed reading it but it's been a few years.

I think it's time for me to read it again. The cast of caracters that witnessed the wheel are a fascination to me, reading about them and trying to imagine how it must have felt to see the wheel in motion.
What would one think?
Is it a fraud?
is it a magic trick?

Is it real, and if so, how does it work?

I'm in awe just reading about it.

I hope this mystery get's solved in our lifetime

[WaltzCee]

Posted: Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:57 pm
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... 427#116427

Da vinci had very nice and clever designs, IMO very efficient, only if they would work, but...
If gravity was not a source of power to make a wheel run by itself before, why do we expect today that gravity had change to our convenience.
I like the name of your topic: "Forget it"; welcome to the real life, a gravity wheel will never run.
Gravity it is not the only mechanical way, just realize what had in common all the famous non runners: they are/were intended to run by gravity.
If gravity gives something in the side going down (or wherever you want in the wheel), it will take it away on the other side, so the equation gives you zero.
It is necessary to change the equation by other different in order to get a different result.

Thank you thx5. The emboldened text is exactly what I think. I put it this way:

• The wheel is an analog computer. It is going to produce a
  result based on the equations the model is given to calculate.

There is no doubt wm2d can do calc better than me. How could I spin a wheel over 9
million rpm and any thing in that design not be plastered to the rim?

I changed the equation.

That design had over 100 parts. Boy I wish I could have saved that model.

[Georg Künstler]

WaltzCee wrote:

That design had over 100 parts. Boy I wish I could have saved that model.

As more parts you add as less you will see how the wheel really is powered.
Good luck with your 100 parts. You cannot follow the interaction of the parts.

2 weights and a rope will build the basic for the undamped oscillation.
Look for reference in Besslerwheel.com it you can find anything similar.
Take Charly2 or anyone else who will show you how this is managed.

[WaltzCee]

This is an after thought I'm putting before the point.

The value of citing the source of your inspiration is so others following you can follow
along your reasoning to check it. That enhances the chance your comparitve analysis
isn't between apples and Georg.

A biprodct is the original source gets something out of it all. A bit of credit where it's due.

Another idea came to me as I was perusing this thread. John Collins demonstrated it.
The actual originator of the idea can join the discussion and clarify the idea.
That's of great value.

John Collins is one of many prime movers in this search.
Archimedes is maybe one of the great granddadies.

[WaltzCee]

2 weights and a rope will build the basic for the undamped oscillation.
Look for reference in Besslerwheel.com it you can find anything similar.
Take Charly2 or anyone else who will show you how this is managed.

You still refuse to acknowledge the sources of your inspiration.You're
such a dawg, roaming around claiming some other dawg's vomit.

Look for reference in Besslerwheel.com it you can find anything similar.

• Why do I have to limit my search to Besslerwheel?
  Why can't I root thru my many boxes of broken toys?

It's obvious but I don't mind saying my source of inspiration is Bessler.
I'm not a student of Bessler tho. I'm a student of the problem, guided by my Sensei.

• He has exulted his Word above his very name.

You cannot follow the interaction of the parts.

• How do you know what I'm able to do?

I can assure you the actual theory of operation is indelibly etched into my very being.

You brandish around some other dawg's vomit as if you actually upchucked it.

Since you seem to have a problem getting to my points I've done you the favor of
indenting them, then italicizing them, and finally putting them in red.
How could you possibly miss them?

Moving right along to the final point.

• If "your idea" is valid and the right course,
  what is stopping you from moving it along to something that exists?

I'm not talking about pictures from your pile of broken toys. Everyone has that pile.