Pair of Pairs

[WaltzCee]

My poor old brain does not always remember small details, so this is a request for help.

Regarding Bessler wheels we've heard the term "weights work in pairs". Where does this phrase originate? In the English language a "pair" is two of an item. Pairs would be plural, or more than one pair. If you have "a pair of shoes" then you have two shoes. If you have "pairs of shoes" then you have at a minimum of four shoes. If you have "shoes work in pairs" then do you have a multiple number of shoe pairs?

Might the phrase indicate at least four weights, such as one pair of weights on one side and one pair on the other side, all working or connected together. Does this make sense?

My request is... Can anyone tell if Bessler's German texts support this concept of a pair of a pair of weights working together?

Could this be the configuration that works? Why does Bessler picture two pairs of toys, each with two hammer guys? I may be on to something, but it's too early to tell.

This Thread is a good read. Enjoy. I call it the quad Bob.

[Robinhood46]

When Bessler spoke of the weights in pairs, he said something about one moving nearer to the centre and one moving further from the centre.
Many of us only have the translation to work with.
Are there any German speakers who can clarify this.
Does this mean without doubt that 1 weight leaves a position on the wheel to go to a position on the wheel further or nearer than it's original position and the opposing weight (or it's partner) does the opposite?
Or could it mean that both weights move from a position at a given distance from the centre to move to another position at an equal distance from the center and that it is just the moving that is done nearer or further from the center?

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Robinhood46,
it means that the 2 weights are coupled, they work in pairs.
As one weight is going to the rim the other is going to the center.
Here you must notice, he is not saying the weight is going to the axle, he is saying going to the center, which is a huge difference.

Depending on the wheel version:
1.Both weights have the same distance from the center when the wheel is standstill.
2. The opposite weight have different lever length, a short and a long lever arm. The lever arm is variable in length.

The distance to the rim is going to zero when the pair of weights are moving.
Reason: Because this one weight is hitting the rim.

so it is your:

Or could it mean that both weights move from a position at a given distance from the centre to move to another position at an equal distance from the center and that it is just the moving that is done nearer or further from the center?

[Robinhood46]

Hi Georg,
I would have thought that if Besslers words mean that a weight is "going" to the center then it would have been my first suggestion and not the second.
My thoughts that i was hoping to clear up are;
A weight at 20cms from the center moves to 80cms from the center, it is "going" torward the rim, or away from the center (my first suggestion).
A weight at 20cms from the center moves to arrive at a different place 20cms from the center is not "going" anywhere with regard it's distance from the center or the rim because it is at the same distance. For a weight to do this there is obviously need for "movement" and it is the "movement" that can be either nearer or further from the center. (second suggestion)
I was rather expecting you would say that the original text allowed us to be sure that it was the first suggestion, which is obviously the most logical assumption to be made by anyone trying to create an off centered COM.
The bottom line is, is there any ambiguity in the wording that could be intentionally misleading us and throwing us "off the sent"?
I don't think it is the case and you use the word "going" which would imply that it is the first suggestion but you say it is the second.
I can't understand German, so i cannot answer. In English and French there are some synonymes of moving that could mean both suggestions and others that couldn't.
ien bierre bitashun is all i can remember from a few decades ago and i wouldn't be surprised to learn that i made a few spelling mistakes.