the mechanism that everyone has been looking for has been found

[WaltzCee]

Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2021 11:14 am

I can assure you that the mechanism is so simple that it is enough to look at the diagram to understand how much the center of mass is displaced from the center of the axis. I just did one primitive experiment using a regular home fan to make sure it was simple. Yes, I understand that people need to prove my case. I will deal with this and will try to lay out the simplest mechanism within one or two days, one of the proofs of which will be the rotation of the wheel together with the axle, like in Bessler.

Where do you stand?

[WaltzCee]

I read your pm, Artur. If the build works we might be able to work something out.

This is no longer available.

[WaltzCee]

Congratulations Artur .. I am looking forward to how your thread develops.
. . .
All The Best !

[Artur]

Good day to all!
Please read this post to everyone! It's important for me.
As I said, I discovered the Bessler wheel. At least the mechanism that turns in one direction and fits almost all descriptions of this device known to us. On the basis of this design, you can easily build a wheel with rotation in both directions. The scheme is very simple and understandable even for a child. Even a carpenter's assistant can actually make a mechanism (sorry, I'm not a carpenter). And as I said, this is the second mechanism, known to me as the PM on the gravitational basis. The first scheme is my personal achievement, which I keep in my head, since its principle is even simpler than the Bessler wheel, but it is more difficult to equip it. But more on that later.
Now about the important thing: I am ready to either sell the scheme to one person, or publish the scheme, if AFTER publication, as soon as possible, I can collect a certain amount of money in the form of gratitude. The attendance of the forum is unlikely to be enough to collect the amount that I urgently need, so I will also need the maximum repost from the members of the forum, if I stop at this option. I have very little time to make a decision. I ask you for your comments, which option is the best?
Briefly about the current haste: a few days ago, when I decided to build a sample wheel, I was urgently forced to leave for family issues. Left a mess at home. Now that I have returned, there is no time to create a structure. All efforts and time are directed towards finding money. I will not describe the "heartbreaking story". Not my lot. Let's just say: even after going through the army in the combat zone, being in the status of a war invalid, it has never been so difficult for me as it is now.
Perhaps I forgot to write something, since I have been without sleep for several days.
In any case, I look forward to your comments. If someone wishes to contact directly:
email: artshine86@gmail.com
phone: +38 (095) 205-95-04(the level of knowledge of English is above average, it should be enough for communication. If anything, there is always a google translator)

Sincerely! Kochiiev Artur

[Robinhood46]

Artur,
I think you will find that you will have little help in your quest, unless you give enough information for it to be clear that you have the answer.
For you to do this you would need to show how it works, which is obviously contradictory to what you wish to do.
It's a vicious circle that is not easily broken.

[Artur]

Dear Fletcher! In fact, my name is spelled as Artur, so it is written in all my documents. Although in fact both options are correct and depend only on the region of residence. As I wrote a little earlier, fate does not give me the opportunity to implement the idea myself (now), but I do not despair. I am sure that one of the most difficult moments in my life occurs before a turning point. I have only recently started to study physics and it is thanks to this that many things are easy for me, since I am not burdened with mistakes inspired by my school desk.
Regarding schemes 44 and 48: they have nothing to do with the Bessler wheel, unlike the 142 si 143. Bessler left a lot of clues, although he embellished some. There is a topic on the forum where 28 points are indicated that characterize this mechanism. I put together this mechanism "by strings", using every clue and confirming or refuting my guesses. I am neither a mathematician nor a physicist, but I have always been good at analyzing information.
Sincerely! Artur

[Artur]

I understand it. However, what kind of evidence can there be? Are the tips like Bessler's? So he already gave enough clues: a lot of moving loads; simple arrangement of counterweights and levers; it is not a wheel, but a circular arrangement of levers and weights; there is a system of scales; after launch, gravity falls at right angles to the axis; Bessler wrote about the rotation of the planets - each load has a similar trajectory, he did not lie; the design has fluctuations, so I used a system of matniks - this drawback can be compensated in another way. On my own I will add: the usual swaying of weights will not give sufficient amplitude for the wheel to rotate at the same speed as in Bessler's. Although, he also wrote about this, only in other words. In fact, all these "wisdoms" are just side decisions of one key moment of displacement of the center of gravity from the center of the axis inside the mechanism. It is equivalent to describing a car, saying that inside you can put a box with purple scarves for hamsters, or that it is snowing, it is dry and warm inside the cabin, and we must use these descriptions to determine the properties and technical characteristics of the car.
As I said, I would ideally find one (or more) sponsors to whom I can provide the scheme in exchange for solving my questions. All the more so since I only looked to the Bessler scheme to show that I have another solution for energy conversion.

[Fletcher]

As I said, I would ideally find one (or more) sponsors to whom I can provide the scheme in exchange for solving my questions. All the more so since I only looked to the Bessler scheme to show that I have another solution for energy conversion.

Artur, I think you will find that you will have little help in your quest, unless you give enough information for it to be clear that you have the answer.

For you to do this you would need to show how it works, which is obviously contradictory to what you wish to do.

It's a vicious circle that is not easily broken.

Hi Artur .. thanks for the replies.

I think RH sums up the situation pretty well. It's less than ideal for you but probably a reality in this field.

This conservative (less than enthusiastic) response is due to the history of scams and fake artists, and the delusional, in this endeavor. In free-energy in general.

Altho it won't comfort you in your hours of need I will repeat why this is so. For the 20 odd years I have been a member here there was a period of years when about once a month a new claimant came along, with the solution to Bessler's wheel, and the answer for our free-energy/OU prayers. Most had a theory to disclose, some had diagrams they would show, but no physical 'real world' build or experiment to prove their claims. Some did put up You-Tube videos which were fakes. Some had simulations but these were not allowed to be investigated by experienced users etc for veracity.

Many wanted upfront money in exchange for information. The last I remember was a scam by a K.W. (fellow New Zealander unfortunately) who conned money out of a now deceased member and researcher.

All these experiences, have generated an air of distrust of claimant's in general. Hence why we say build it. And this would apply to me also, and in most instances.

What I can suggest is that you might increase your exposure and reach by joining OverUnity.com and posting up the same topic and posts you have made here. You could also upload a video to You-Tube etc. You could set up a Go-Fund-Me page and see how that goes for you.

Given the climate of response you are likely to receive you will need to be very creative to build a high level of trust before people would likely part with promises and cash to ease your situation financially.

I would say that there are only a few members here who if in your shoes would get my immediate attention and buy-in. And I would still need a high level of proof soon after the claim. And probably before I sent any hard earned cash. And as I said that would equally apply to myself I should imagine, and should I make similar claims.

The best way forward to monetize your ideas is to first prove them, perhaps to a private forum, and perhaps with non-disclosure agreements in place, so that you can build critical mass, IMO.

Even then, some who do not know you (you've only been here a short time) will be reticent about being involved, even in a private forum.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained ! Fortune favours the brave !

All The Best sorting out what you do next !

I am glad you have good analytical skills, and I equally hope you really have figured out how to make a Bessler wheel ! And your own idea of course. I think most of us would want it to be true !

[Tarsier79]

Artur, I am currently building my own model, so at this point in time I personally do not want to get involved with your wheel, at least financially.

You have to look at your proposal from a potential investors point of view.

Someone who buys something, wants their investment to be sound.

Hypothetically, if I were interested in your design, I would not buy it without seeing potential operation, or without the promise of getting something worth paying for.

If I did purchase your plans for the money you want, then it turned out that it wasn't a runner, I would want my money back. Otherwise what am I purchasing? A design that isn't tested, that has not been peer reviewed, that I have not seen even a computer simulation of it working?

[Tarsier79]

A separate post for a separate reply.

Artur, some options to consider:

A computer simulation is the cheapest, quickest and easiest way to test your hypothesis. You said yourself your design is simple.

Find a copy of Working Model 2D. With a small amount of effort you will be able to assemble simple mechanisms with a few hours of learning. You can post questions about WM2D on this site and people will be happy to give you advice. This way you don't have to release any sensitive information.

If you are willing to supply your design to one or more members here with a non-disclosure agreement, I am reasonably sure someone will be happy to build your computer simulation for free.

[thx4]

Hi Artur, congratulations for the discovery...
I sincerely believe that you think you have found LOL.
I think there are a good hundred of us here in the same case. The crucial moment is to pass to the experimentation either a simulation or a model even in paper...
But that requires an effort, an honesty towards oneself that you don't have.
Your first concern is money, I can understand I spent 2/3 of my life trying to be rich (long novel, one day). Today I have everything. I still have impossible things to distract me, Bessler is one of them.
No sponsor or group of investors will be interested in your discovery without insurance and the minimum would be a patent. A patent, assuming it is patentable, will be copied within 15 minutes of its release, so what you are looking for does not exist on earth.

Now that you have savoured your victory I kindly suggest that you come down from the heights and join the peer review of this forum.
Failing that, read DON QUICHOTTE again.

A++

[Artur]

Dear Fletcher!

Thanks for the debunked answer. I'll check out overunity.com shortly. Perhaps this will also be a solution to my question.
I agree with everything are write to me. However, as I said: when there are people who are willing to cooperate and finance me, I will be the first to provide a working and understandable diagram of the Bessler wheel. This is not my only idea. I stopped on this question only because many people believe in this project. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that among the forum visitors there may be those who are ready to invest in the development of the project, if this project has a perspective. And there is a prospect in the development of this direction. I am sure about that.

Sincerely! Artur

[Artur]

thx4
Your manner of communication causes a slight disgust, nevertheless, I will briefly answer:
I am sincerely glad for you that you have everything. In this case, leave the search for "pipe dreams" so as not to be left without aspirations at all. And if you were more attentive in your desire to moan and "neigh", you would not have missed the point in which I pointed out more than once: first, I provide a working model to those who are interested. Mindfulness is not your strong point.

[SHADOW]

Bonjour Fletcher,
Que pensez vous du MT 22.
J.B

[agor95]

Note

Wiki -> Maschinen Tractate -> Drawings -> MT22 -> Discussion

I have built a full model of the peacock's tail design (5 foot in diameter plywood sides.wheel) with extensive testing of different variations of this design, and can say quite confidently that this design is not it. This was my first build. What I did learn and can advise others building test designs is that it is best to keep model design to a limit of three or four feet in diameter as 5 feet is too difficult to work with as a model. BIBLEAL

J'ai construit un modèle complet de la conception de la queue du paon (5 pieds de diamètre côtés en contreplaqué.roue) avec des tests approfondis de différentes variations de cette conception, et je peux dire avec confiance que cette conception n'est pas elle. C'était ma première construction. Ce que j'ai appris et que je peux conseiller à d'autres conceptions de test de construction, c'est qu'il est préférable de maintenir la conception du modèle à une limite de trois ou quatre pieds de diamètre car 5 pieds est trop difficile à utiliser comme modèle. BIBLEAL