How can adding more mechanisms increase rpm and power ?

[ovyyus]

Bessler said one cross-bar could turn the wheel very slowly, ie; a one cross-bar wheel applied a constant positive torque. A very slowly rotating one cross-bar wheel would therefore self-start from any stopped position. Thus the prime mover could generate torque without wheel motion.

It seems a one cross-bar wheel turning very slowly still acted like it was wound up with a clock spring. Such a wheel would also maintain positive torque even when forced to rotate in reverse direction.

[Fletcher]

Even a real wound clock spring with a non rotating anchor point to push off would accelerate a balanced wheel. That's why clocks use escapement devices so there is a pulsed release of linear energy in discreet steps and not a continuous streaming.

Bessler was heard to 'twang' a spring in I believe his two-way wheel. He said springs were used but not in the way of a clock working. That does not mean that springs were not used to store mechanical energy in the traditional way for release (perhaps metered) at a later time.

[jim_mich]

I also note that Bessler does not support the notion of Cf's (inertia) as the motive force in the MT drawings (not that I can find), although obviously all rotation is subject to it.

You are correct. All of the MT drawings are examples of unworkable PM wheels. I'm sure Bessler encountered CF, but he never mentions it.

Bessler wrote that if you piece together portions of different MT wheels, then his 'movement' can be shown. Note that 'movement' is a double entendre, meaning both motion and mechanism.

Additionally both John Collins and Oystein have publicly and categorically stated, thru their extensive study of Besslers codes etc, that the wheel is a gravity-only driven wheel, from imbalance.

Academicians state as fact that gravity-only driven wheels are impossible, due to the conservative nature of gravity.

If gravity-wheels are impossible, then according to Sherlock Holmes, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

[Fletcher]

I am well aware of what the physicists say on the matter jim_mich. I'm sure you know that.

I do not doubt Bessler in the MT preamble when he says ...

".. no illustration by itself contains a description of the motion; however, taking various illustrations together and combining them with a discerning mind, it will indeed be possible to look for a movement and, finally to find one in them. "

I believe he was describing above what he believed to be the cause of his perpetuating wheels and the Prime Mover mechanism basics to be found - the double entendre you talk about.

I am trying hard to not put my hands over my eyes so I can't see anything and hold on to my prejudices at all costs, nor be blinded by what physicists say and what I learned.

An equally valid quote from modern day Gil Grissom "follow the evidence".

So far John Collins and Oystein seem to be the lead scientists following the forensic trail in the Bessler tale.

They are not so much piecing together the last movements of the deceased but piecing together the last words and there meaning according to him.

What we might in this time interpret perpetuating motive force to be in the final hour will be up to the individual.

As an example in MT12 Bessler gives a rather shaky explanation of why physical ramps don't work. We might give a different explanation.

[ovyyus]

Academicians state as fact that gravity-only driven wheels are impossible, due to the conservative nature of gravity.

Those same academicians also state as fact that momentum-only driven [powered] wheels are impossible, due to the conservative nature of momentum.

Sherlock Holmes plants face in palm.

[Mark]

Fletcher, thank you for starting this interesting topic. I like what I see so far. Only up to MT15... this could get really good.

One comment, which is more of a reminder really:

"If I arrange to have just one cross-bar in my machine, it revolves very slowly, just as if it can hardly turn itself at all, but, on the contrary, when I arrange several bars, pulleys and weights, the machine can revolve much faster" - AP pg 355

"Much faster" would not necessarily have meant very fast, maybe just somewhat faster than "very slowly" ("hardly turn(ing) itself"). In that case, 'very fast' would probably have been a development after the prototype. Same goes for power.

[Although this is refining a distinction, based on what might be debatable translations?]

[Fcdriver]

As for weights rotating around a fulcrum point I agree, it will not work, but as a wheel being being the transfer point, of a offset fulcrum point, where the weights only move up and down on one side of the total mechanism is a different story ! The main reason a bunched up chain on one side, while separated chain the other doesn't cause rotation, is that the chain has to increase in speed, causing a additional force. F=MA, a weight lifting slowly requires less force, than a force dropping at the speed of gravity! When the force of lift is applied near center of the wheel, and drop force is applied further from center, MA is created. This is impossible to deny. Yes weights rotating around on a wheel will not cause rotation! The wheel is only a transfer point for the forces of lift and drop! Lifting closer to center is slower, and puts less reversing torque on the wheel, which cannot, hold up the exact same amount of weight dropping further from center!

[Fcdriver]

A wheel lifting a weight at the same rate of speed as moving from 10 o'clock to 2 o'clock, thru out the entire lift, puts the exact same amount of reversing force on the wheel. While dropping it quickly by the force of gravity the force equals the force of movement from 2 o'clock to 4 oclock. The main reason for multiple arms or weights is because lifting is slower, if lifting is 1/4 slower it takes 4 arms or weights.

[Sam Peppiatt]

Fletcher, Yes, you are right the sliders by them selves won't work. But don't you see, this where the levers come in. The idea is to mount a lever at 90 degrees to the slider to lift it / them up and over as the wheel turns. In other words there are two sets of weights, the slider weights to rotate the wheel and another set of weights, with levers, to lift the sliders. Sam Peppiatt

Live Your Days Inspired Anew, LYDIA.

[Fletcher]

"In a true Perpetuum Mobile everything must, necessarily, go round together. There can be nothing involved in it which remains stationary on the axle." - AP pg 361

"all the inmost parts, and the perpetual-motion structures, retain the power of free movement, as I've been saying since 1712." - AP pg 295

"by making the true claim - that no weights hang from the axle of my wheel." - AP pg 281

"I don't want to go into the details here of how suddenly the excess weight is caused to rise. You can't comprehend these matters, or see how true craftsmanship can rise above innate lowly tendencies (as does a weight above the point of application of a lever)" - AP pg 357

"it runs according to 'preponderance', and turns everything else along with it; as long as its materials shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord." - AP pg 363

"On one side it is heavy and full; on the other empty and light, just as it should be." - AP pg 363

"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." - DT pg 191

Morning fellas ..

Thanks Mark - I hope it refocuses the members on what is required to solve Besslers Wheel and his true PMM mechanics, according to Bessler himself. Too many drift off and away in other directions, or fail to take heed and include ALL the things he says are necessary to be successful.

I can understand that, I've done it myself when I've become frustrated, or desperate lol.

The fact remains that Bessler said it was an imbalance wheel with internal motive force from weights therein being out of center of gravity, they could not reach their position of least GPE and stop there. They were forced to continue moving seeking it; the PQ point, keeling position.

ALL things revolved around inside the wheel with nothing hanging from the axle acting as an artificial horizon to leverage off. They retained power of free movement (though I assume there was some latching and releasing somewhere).

The bottom line - his wheels were OOB wheels according to him, that turned on one central axle or Center of Rotation.

IF we know that ordinary construction wheels (99.9999%) don't have a prolonged displacement of the CoG to cause more positive torque to carry it thru the PQ (least GPE position) then we must have a NEW mechanical arrangement that does give the CoG a different displacement and imparts excess momentum/RKE to the wheel to carry it thru a sector to seek the next PQ. And part of that is being able to lift a weight at some stage thru connectedness (rope etc).

And different structures (Prime Mover/hero mechanism) can bless a marriage to make almost any ordinary OOB wheel a success. Look at MT48 to see how versatile the Hero mechanism (with the correct handle construction) is.

[Fletcher]

Furthermore .. I suggest not trying to immediately visualize a new mechanism or arrangement.

Bessler wrote MT to be a lesson plan of sorts. He builds a picture of the parts required. He says there is a movement to be found.

Identify those parts that he points to. Understand why he says certain things about certain MT's - what is he getting at and go past the obvious ? Look deeper, sometimes simpler !

The next one of importance is MT18 - what could be so good about it when it doesn't work. It has flexible arms (elastic tension) that bend and straighten.

What does it 'tell' more than 'show' ?

We all know that an impact wheel can not work because unless you have 100% elastic collisions some energy will be lost as heat, sound, and deformation losses. Not to mention ordinary friction losses such as air drag etc.

But it seems a 'gentle' impact is desirable, even necessary. Wolff supports the notion of elastic arms contacting short perpendicular boards at the rim - witnesses heard sounds. Even though it wastes energy. Clearly if the ascending arm were lifted early though. And what happens when weighted levers are forced to rise and allowed to fall - how does the wheel react e.g. when a weight falls that side of a wheel feels lighter and it back revolves a little. What happens when it is lifted ?

What is the correct application of the storksbill ? Rather than ask that question tho, ask yourself what can a jack do ? We know there are plenty of visual signs of their importance e.g. the bent-arm 'A's. We know a storksbill does not give any advantage AT ALL in terms of leverage. It's just a linear gear. It can not lift any mass higher, it can not give a horizontal mass more velocity and KE than the GPE lost by the driver.

Storksbills get a special mention in MT - reinforced in the toys page - Bessler notates the toy page saying there is something special/extraordinary there for anyone who can rearrange them / apply them differently.

What can/does it do ?

Look for the simple rather than the exotic. It is just part of the system, as are springs or at least spring analogues.

So ask yourself what do springs do ?

ETA: a spring can act like a mass with KE and store mechanical KE - it has little mass to effect CoM - is this an advantage in some situations ?

I know these are all basic things we have all studied form time to time. But we have never 'stuck with it' and combined them correctly, nor harnessed our collective minds to any degree for long enough to find the correct solution to Bessler's PMM.

[oldNick]

Fletcher, Yes, you are right the sliders by them selves won't work. But don't you see, this where the levers come in. The idea is to mount a lever at 90 degrees to the slider to lift it / them up and over as the wheel turns. In other words there are two sets of weights, the slider weights to rotate the wheel and another set of weights, with levers, to lift the sliders. Sam Peppiatt

Live Your Days Inspired Anew, LYDIA.

Sam,

When I read your quote a picture popped in my head! It was a combination of your sliding weights and MT 123, I'm not saying it's an answer, but it's worth thinking about.

Thanks for the inspiration

[Fletcher]

No one can figure out how weight can give an upward impetus?

Yes, that's easy. Anyone can do it in many ways.

The thing to remember is that more than one part makes up the Prime Mover mechanism. Its function is just leverage. It has some other predictable effects common to all leverage situations.

It is not OU by itself. It cannot lift 'more with less' so to speak.

But, the arrangement of the Prime Mover falling leads to a situation where it loses GPE (it must to move) and affects wheel torque (+ or -) precisely because it has moved and changed shape. It, thru the connectedness principle effects another weight(s) which is shifted internally to gain individual GPE of the 'connectee' and/or change the wheels torque characteristics.

The combined result is a CoG below the axle line but wheel showing a different CoG circulation pattern than normally established and from what we normally see in all previous attempts of affecting CoG/system CoM. The literal 'dead end'.

This pattern allows for the wheel to not be able to find and stop at it position of least GPE (the keeling position, PQ point). Because it has excess momentum/RKE from the CoG pattern giving greater positive torque it swings on by into the next sector and so the process continues - all the while gathering excess momentum and RKE.

Nothing is lifted higher in terms of expending X amount of GPE spent to get X+1 GPE gain - GPE is replenished/restored each sector.

The result is an animate object that can not find rest.

This, at least, is what Bessler says categorically.

"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, these weights, on the contrary, are the essential parts, and constitute the perpetual motion itself; since 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 be placed together, and so arranged one against another that they can never obtain equilibrium, or the punctum quietus which they unceasingly seek in their wonderfully speedy flight, one or other of them must apply its weight at right angles to the axis, which in its turn must also move."

- Johann E. E. Bessler, 1717

[james.lindgard]

Furthermore .. I suggest not trying to immediately visualize a new mechanism or arrangement.

Bessler wrote MT to be a lesson plan of sorts. He builds a picture of the parts required. He says there is a movement to be found.

Identify those parts that he points to. Understand why he says certain things about certain MT's - what is he getting at and go past the obvious ? Look deeper, sometimes simpler !

The next one of importance is MT18 - what could be so good about it when it doesn't work. It has flexible arms (elastic tension) that bend and straighten.

What does it 'tell' more than 'show' ?

We all know that an impact wheel can not work because unless you have 100% elastic collisions some energy will be lost as heat, sound, and deformation losses. Not to mention ordinary friction losses such as air drag etc.

But it seems a 'gentle' impact is desirable, even necessary. Wolff supports the notion of elastic arms contacting short perpendicular boards at the rim - witnesses heard sounds. Even though it wastes energy. Clearly if the ascending arm were lifted early though. And what happens when weighted levers are forced to rise and allowed to fall - how does the wheel react e.g. when a weight falls that side of a wheel feels lighter and it back revolves a little. What happens when it is lifted ?

What is the correct application of the storksbill ? Rather than ask that question tho, ask yourself what can a jack do ? We know there are plenty of visual signs of their importance e.g. the bent-arm 'A's. We know a storksbill does not give any advantage AT ALL in terms of leverage. It's just a linear gear. It can not lift any mass higher, it can not give a horizontal mass more velocity and KE than the GPE lost by the driver.

Storksbills get a special mention in MT - reinforced in the toys page - Bessler notates the toy page saying there is something special/extraordinary there for anyone who can rearrange them / apply them differently.

What can/does it do ?

Look for the simple rather than the exotic. It is just part of the system, as are springs or at least spring analogues.

So ask yourself what do springs do ?

ETA: a spring can act like a mass with KE and store mechanical KE - it has little mass to effect CoM - is this an advantage in some situations ?

I know these are all basic things we have all studied form time to time. But we have never 'stuck with it' and combined them correctly, nor harnessed our collective minds to any degree for long enough to find the correct solution to Bessler's PMM.

Fletcher,
It's nothing personal, believe me, it isn't but the number 1 reason for my being the most banned person from this forum is for building what Bessler drew.
Some of the most credible people in here discredit Bessler. In reality, quoting Wagner gets green dots. Bessler made fun of Wagner because Wagner thought water couldn't allow for perpetual motion. After all, if water is siphoned into a tube, where is it's opposing weight ? There isn't one.
There isn't one and yet an opposing mass is required. Kind of why lead melting meant something to Bessler. Weight can flow if it is a liquid but water is not a weight, it is a volume just like a gas. And as we all know, if a gas is in water, then it can create an upward force.

[Sam Peppiatt]

oldNick! Yes ,you are right! Why couldn't I see that. It gives the sense of it.
Mt-15 shows the sliders, but not how to reset them. The single lever, rack and pinion won't work. There has to be a single acting lever at each end of the each slider. One to lift the slider one way and the other to lift the slider the other way. If that makes sense. And the levers need to be bent to about 45 degrees, to get the timing right. I used 4 to 1 levers. It's not turning, so still have some thing wrong. Maybe the weight on the levers should be heavier. More sawing, ( Iron). Sam Peppiatt

Live Your Days Inspired Anew, LYDIA