Words of encouragement

[Grimer]

Merry Christmas to all and Season Greetings.

Thank you John for the encouraging post. John Collins wrote:
“I have the updated version of the original book almost ready for publication but I don't want to release it because I feel that the solution is about to appear and I would like to include any new information relating to the new discovery.�

I was going to write John a private message but thought I would share this with all of you since I have gain so much insight by reading the forum discussions over the years. I have not posted much recently because I feel I have discovered Bessler’s secret. Of course I have thought this many times in the past but this time it is different. Several months ago I decided I will no longer make a physical build until I first make an accurate hardcopy scale drawing of the machine and do the math to see if it is out-of-balance at ALL degrees of rotation. I will not build it unless the math shows it will self-start from any rotation position. My current math and drawing design shows it is self-starting from any position. I believe it is Bessler’s Drashwitz machine.

My breakthrough came by doing word associations with clue keywords of adjectives, nouns and verbs. Putting them in common groups made the secret stand out. I have 277 source pages of Bessler and Witness clue sentences. From these sentences I have 1574 individual keyword clues. I have both a computer spreadsheet and large cork poster board where I arrange clues by subjects.

I have often told myself that “All The Clues Become Clear When You See The Working Machine�. I was not going to do a physical build unless EVERY clue could be explained in the mechanical design. I just finished going through all my clues adding a note as to what part of the machine it is describing. When I said that this time it was different, I meant that for the first time I now have an explanation for ALL of the text and graphic clues of what part of the machine they represent. This includes AP Little Book and last page drawing, the DT portraits, the MT drawings and the Toy Page.

I had to wait to start the physical build as I needed to order more Meccano parts; my machines are all made from the British metal construction set. My parts have arrived and I am now building the machine. If it does not work I will post photos and share all my clues. If it does work I will send John Collins a private message. I will not post the secret on the forum until my attorney gives me permission. I will contact John out of respect because I never would have found the secret without his translations of Bessler’s books.

Of course all of the above is just my opinion but I feel very strongly about it since I can explain all the clues. I could never do that before. And who among you can make that statement?
I feel like Bessler did about being careful about what he said or wrote because the design of the machine and the principle of how it works is very simple. It had to be to run at 50+ rpm.
It is so simple that I cannot comment about it without giving away the secret. The only difficult part of the design was the lock/unlock mechanism. I will share this…

This is Bessler’s clue that gives away the secret:
“This ratchet-wheel derives from the previous model, except that the tensioners are somewhat longer and have an additional special weight at the outer ends. From this drawing alone, however, nothing of the prime mover's source can be seen or deduced although the figure shows the overbalance superior weight.� MT15

And Bessler wrote:
“A single word could have betrayed my wondrous achievement.� AP 280
The single word is “ratchet�.

-Rocky, Christmas Eve 2010, a splendid time to share this information <><
“All the clues become clear when you see the working machine�
AP – Apologia Poetica (Formal Poetic Defense), Bessler, Germany 1716, John Collins/translated by Mike Senior 2005
DT – Das Triumphirende (The Triumphant Orffryrean Perpetual Motion), Bessler, Germany 1719, J. Collins/M. Senior 2005
MT – Maschinen Tractate (Treatise on Machines), Bessler, Germany 1722, J. Collins/translated by Andrew Witter, 2005

Fascinating - and the ratchet bit seems very plausible.

Good luck - and Happy Christmas.

[Grimer]

...
This is Bessler’s clue that gives away the secret:
“This ratchet-wheel derives from the previous model, except that the tensioners are somewhat longer and have an additional special weight at the outer ends. From this drawing alone, however, nothing of the prime mover's source can be seen or deduced although the figure shows the overbalance superior weight.� MT15

And Bessler wrote:
“A single word could have betrayed my wondrous achievement.� AP 280
The single word is “ratchet�.

-Rocky, Christmas Eve 2010, a splendid time to share this information <><

I think Rocky could be spot on with this ratchet idea. A ratchet is a valve which allows motion one way and not the other by shedding action/reaction to a high inertia "earth", or a high elastic modulus sink which because of its high inertia/modulus does not absorb significant action.

This is what I have been struggling with in the context of the VP wheel and the Keenie. In the case of the Keenie it is clear that a high inertia wheel and a low inertia wheel gives you an asymmetry in the action of the gravitational wind.

If you think about it walking involves a ratchet action.



The foot on the ground is acting against the inertia of the earth. It is turning the earth backwards, albeit only a tiny amount. The foot in the air is moving forward against the negligible inertia of the air.

If the foot on the ground could not generate shear by being on ice, say, then the forward motion of walking would be impossible. One would have a Michael Jackson "moonwalk" action.

Translate this into rotary motion using two independent wheels and one has the seeds of a gravitational mill.

Edit. I'm so out of touch with modern music that I thought the moonwalk was walking on the spot. Having looked it up on YouTube I see that it is walking backwards.

Oh dear. Oh for the days of Bing Crosby and White Christmas.

[Ealadha]

I think a ratchet because the bow twangs .

Happy christmas to all .

[path_finder]

Merry Christmas to all.

a new keyword (not easily translatable or without existence at the time of Bessler): dashpot

A dashpot is a mechanical device, a damper which resists motion via viscous friction. The resulting force is proportional to the velocity, but acts in the opposite direction, slowing the motion and absorbing energy. It is commonly used in conjunction with a spring (which acts to resist displacement). The process and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) symbol for a dashpot is Dashpot Symbol.svg.
Dashpots frequently use a one-way mechanical bypass to permit fast unrestricted motion in one direction and slow motion using the dashpot in the opposite direction. This permits, for example, a door to be opened quickly without added resistance, but then to close slowly using the dashpot. For hydraulic dashpots this unrestricted motion is accomplished using a one-way check-valve that allows fluid to bypass the dashpot fluid constriction. Non-hydraulic dashpots may use a ratcheting gear to permit free motion in one direction...

See the details here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashpot
The ratchet and the spring can be included.
An interesting video on this concept:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNzanZXvmo8
For the mathematicians everything is calculated here:http://virtual.cvut.cz/cemlibmodules/qQ ... nha9R.html

[justsomeone]

Rocky said:

This is Bessler’s clue that gives away the secret:
“This ratchet-wheel derives from the previous model, except that the tensioners are somewhat longer and have an additional special weight at the outer ends. From this drawing alone, however, nothing of the prime mover's source can be seen or deduced although the figure shows the overbalance superior weight.� MT15

And Bessler wrote:
“A single word could have betrayed my wondrous achievement.� AP 280
The single word is “ratchet�.



I disagree Rocky, but wish you luck.

I think the one word that would give it away... is a word not spoken in Bessler's comments, other wise it would have giving it away.

JMHO

[bluesgtr44]

Graham put up this....

A steady 14 psi is all around us ,we live in it. So for me it's worthy of serious investigation.

Ralph put up this.....

IMO the emphasis is in 'all around' or an ambient environment. It is gravity that is responsible for the 14 psi which can also be considered ambient.

Back to Graham....

Thanks for the lively discussion going on here .
Ralph you are correct that the 14 psi I mention is a manifestation of gravity. However it is the result of gravitys' effect on the mass of the atmosphere we exist in.

So this pressure may or may not be easier to manipulate than working directly with gravity to create an OOB situation .
An indirect approach if you will.

Like I said, I now have lots of ideas popping into my head .
I'll post them if it proves to show promise but I have to do a few experiments first.

Graham

Yes, and the biggest ingredient in this is the sun. This is more of a thermal driven effect than gravitational, IMHO. I think the big thing with me in this is there is no way to actually remove gravity as a player in this scenario. No matter what the solution is, gravity will be factored into this somewhere...it is essential!

When Bessler talks in DT about "form" and how no matter the other differing qualities of an object....if it is the same spherical form....it's a sphere, no matter if it's made of wax or iron. Just because one would not be as physically strong as the other doesn't change that fact. I think the same could be said about other comparisons in other ways. Like in his stupid little poem where he talks about "the rain drips down/the snow falls". They are both water and are of the same basic "form" in that sense. In this case, the basis for "form" being the element (H2O), Changing shapes would not disrupt that aspect. I don't think the comparison of the materials he mentions has anything to do with what we would be looking for as much as I think it is the approach towards what we may be looking for.

I still go over my notes from the witness descriptions when I can, I find them the most interesting and inciteful. I can somewhat see how those "minds of the time" would be a bit astonished at what they were witnessing. These were not small players in the scientific community in those days and some of their opinions on just the authenticity of what they were seeing is enough to raise anyones eyebrows. It's not that they were convinced of it's perpetuity.....it's that they were convinced that "nothing from outside" provided any impetus to the device....what ever provided the impetus was coming from within.

OK, so he actually found out about a D.C. commutator by mere accident messing around with copper and maybe some graphite while trying to reduce friction.....I don't know. But, I do have a tremendous amount of respect for those individuals who actually witnessed and tested his device in this particular understanding. There was nothing outside the device that could have attributed to the impetus....the only place it could have come from is within.


Steve

[Andyb]

merry Christmas every one and a happy new year, i agree with John the solution is simple and we have to keep it simple, Flecter i believe said some thing which rings bells with me ,that was to cause the force to be applied on the inside and transfered to the out side, i believe causing a low weight lose internally driving a heavier weight externally is were the answer lies ,the external weights have to retain the power of free motion,as do the internal weights,finally after 282 lessons i am beginning to see the light, i have at present every single clue Bessler ever wrote and every other observation including noises which at present adds up to 43 clues,i have never been this high in the clues and feel convinced i have it .My concern is how to handle it ,it drove Bessler crazy, why should i be exempt,so just to find a way of beginning to trust people and relieve some weight from my very heavy shoulders,i would like to propose that a pledge be made,that pledge being, however does solve this problem commits to offering the opportunity to meet the individual and thank him for completion and find closure or possibly a future ,it strikes me there are a lot of like minds how have done a lot of work and are driven to helping the world ,for so many reasons,please try not to forget those that have tried so hard and not quite got there, there is so much to do lets try and work together,saying all of that i will never release my design until i have completed it ,irrelevant of patent protection,its just a need to finally finish it my self.Rocky deep respect to you sir,ii just wanted to share with you that i tried a couple of rachet designs they both did the same thing ,they failed, not to say yours will it may not be any thing like mine any how mine worked by using 8 kilo weights connected to rachets all these weights being 9 are free to move in only one direction due to the rachet my theory was simple as am i ,that was to stop cf on the lift but allow the cf on the fall side to swing the weight out and capture it in the rachet, causing the wheel to go down ,gain force from there own swinging was the principle behind this approach,what actually happened was the speed of the wheel was increased by force ,my arm ,every thing went fine to start with click click click 6 rpm fine no overunity started higher speeds got to about 12/15 rpm the wheel went into a bad vibration then one of the rachets snapped ,it sheared a 10 mm shaft these cf's are high with with hanging weights,capturing may be ok, preventing through a rachet no way thats where it sheared on the lift side hope this is of help Rocky,all the best Andy

[nneba]

P_F

Love the dashpot that would be a fun tool to experiment with.
(I used to indulge in the old "dashpot" once in while myself)

If you know what I mean

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi nneba,

The dashpot experiment are only good as long as you keep it up! If you stop then they will cloud your mind and you will be thinking of ways to use the dashpot and you will start to think of experiments you would like to do with the dashpot every time you see a good one, I do like the piston to fit snugly in the cylinder though for the perfect operating time, if it is to tight the extra friction can damage the piston, and if it is to lose then the dashpot will not function correctly and you may need a new one.

Be aware that dashpot experiment can cost alot and you could lose your house if you experiment away from home, still fun though.

Regards Trevor

[path_finder]

Dear nneba, Trevor Lyn Wathford,

You cannot better say.
Don't minimize the role of the condom.
This item can be an efficient component in the building of the 'Cartesian diver' design (COG relocation)
See here for memory: http://physics.kenyon.edu/EarlyApparatu ... Diver.html

[Trevor Lyn Whatford]

Hi Path_finder,

You are right there should be more pressure to use rubbers!

Thanks good find, but most divers know about the dangers of going down to far and how the air will expand again.

Regards Trevor

[getterdone]

Hi there AndyB, just wanted to say, that post had to be the longest sentence in BW.com history.

You might want to try using this button...........

Just razzing you, on a more serious note, if your collecting clues, you should check out a thread in CBuzz . The thread was posted by Jim Mich about 2 years ago , I think it was called" 50 clues with comments"

[AB Hammer]

Words of encouragement of the old old school.

GET TO WORK!!

LOL
Alan

[jim_mich]

Link to Jim_Mich fifty clues with comments.

[graham]

I've been looking into ideas that would harness atmospheric pressure to drive a prime mover.
I won't call it a wheel although it does revolve.
I have come up with a design that seems quite promising and have created a wm2d simulation that is runs very well indeed.

However I'm not totally convinced yet, so before I actally build the thing I would like your opinion on my method to simulate atmospheric pressure using the "Force"tool in wm2d.

The attached sim is NOT of my new design but just shows how I'm applying the forces .

We have two rectangles here with a pivot joint at the lower end .
Each rectangle is 5" long by 1" in depth and therefore each presents 5 square inches to atmospheric pressure on its right hand surface.

So we have 70lb of total pressure on the right hand side of both rectangles.
The left hand side of both rectangles are presented with a vacuum.
(It is not important how the vacuum is achieved for this discussion)

Whether I apply 14lb to each square inch as in the right hand rectangle,or apply 70lb to the mid point of the left ,both results are the same.

Do you see a problem with using the "wm2d force tool this way" to simulate atmospheric pressure .

Thanks a lot

Graham