Why Gravity wheels don't violate the laws of Physics

[docfeelsgood]

IMHO , it takes a combination of forces ?? as i am not a physics knowledgable person to define them (forces) . but i dont believe a gravity alone powered wheel will ever work . by combining gravity , cf , inertia , and impact so they compliment each other in harmony will bring about the result !! study Jack (the giant killer) Dempsey and Jess Willard fight . he gave gravity a reason to work !! are there no bar room brawlers left out there ??? if not ya missed out on a helluva lot of fun !!! oh thats right ,, your all the "flower power" generation , must be powerin yer wheels with poppy plants and coca leaves tied tagether with hemp !!! left ya kinda punchy tho dint it !!! sure as hell appears that way !!!!!! Doc. !!

[Bessler007]

This has been an interesting thread. Physicists, doing the thinking for naysayers, teach it is easier to dismiss cranks by explaining which law of thermodynamics their contraption violates. This is much easier than understanding the forces and energies. Knowing what is happening in a pmm would require thinking.

Some cranks work with wheels feeling the mass in motion or energy and attempt to calculate values based only on what seems right. They don't understand precisely what is happening.

What struck me as brilliant in Jim's post was the mention of managing a force differential created by the amplified difference in speed of two masses. A river moves from the headwaters to the sea as a result of a difference in level between the two points. The river of weights in a wheel need some difference in force to exist between the top and the bottom for them to flow.

It's easy to create a differential. Managing it is the tricky part. When the river of the mass of weights arrive near the bottom the differential has to disappear. Also the energy the differential caused in the wheel can't be spent doing that job.

Just before the end of the movement all back torques on the wheel have averaged out to even.

Some cranks who have built a lot have a sense of the motion and also examine the energy and balance of power by putting a pencil to it. They can explain in real terms what they propose and the why of it. In my opinion that's what Jim did.

[Bessler007]

Fletcher,

On another thread you posed this question:

Do you think he just made them larger or do you think he was improving the working principle at the same time, so it was more efficient as the materials & technology of the day allowed ? That just might require a knowledge of precisely how it worked.

In that same thread I dug up a quote from Mr. Collins about the percentage of movement of the weights in the wheel. He expected they didn't move very far. In this thread Mr. Collins made the point of not allowing the cork to be carried all the way to the sea. As I see it both ideas are related.

If the mass is allowed to move too extremely, the forces become unmanageable. With Bessler's design they might have ripped it apart. There are two ways he might have managed a greater difference in force.

If a wheel could be thought of as a river of mass circling the axis then think about a river. The water moves but the bed is stationary. I think there's no need for the rim of the wheel to move. A stationary rim could be made more massive with more ability to restrain force.

[Bessler007]

sir, you better get out there and mind them damn sheep. I'm going to be needing another one for my PhD.

[Jim Williams]

If Bessler's wheel were a piano, this thread would have tuned it approaching perfection. I assume for some reason the posts here are from people whom in their other lives also make music.

[daxwc]

Now we are on a ring hunt?

[docfeelsgood]

SIR 007 ; some ole farm boys [if there are any here] would have taken my last post as a valuable clue . but then there are those that are so busy brandishing their scientific calculator and sheepskin that they cant see past the end of their nose !! while you were busy playing with your toys and sech all these years i have spent 39 YEARS staring at a copy of the Bessler Wheel in CAST IRON . finally there are pitifully few secrets left !! so while you are busy werkin on that PHD. i'll just pick up that $1,000,000,000,000,57 from Jim Randi foundation and party down a bit !! party hearty , boogie till ya puke !!! DOC.

[Fletcher]

Doc .. for the record, I'm a farm boy, so there are a few of us out there.

007 .. I would agree that Jim's post about his theory is elegant & well crafted, some might even call the message it contained beautiful or beautifully put. While it is all those things it can only remain a theory until it can be proven that a usable differential form CF-Inertia can be harnessed as he suggests. I so hope he is right about that.

We cannot know all his math & we don't have experiments that can be duplicated as yet, so although it appears to Jim that he has found a way thru the maze some of the rest of us are still bumping into walls. When he has completed his experiments & built his wheel then we can eventually examine his assumptions in detail, & then perhaps the understanding will come - the penny will drop - until then I'm as much a victim of my own limitations & prejudices as the next man.

Bills theory is an exposition of symmetry & simplicity itself [always good qualities for a theory], if only we could find the source of the heat gradient that could put out that much continuous power ? But still, it seems the most reasonable explanation that an energy/heat sink was found & used to power Bessler's wheels - If I were a betting man I lay odds that Bill was absolutely right about a gradient from ambient forces or energy being the Prime Mover.

As for your comments about Bessler's weights not moving too far I think you need not look any further than the obvious - a force was required to move the weights out-of-balance & that distance must be restored again at some point in the wheel cycle - a force has a duration & thrust so it would appear to me that the force that Bessler harnessed was not that strong or was not applied for long durations & that's why the asymmetric torque wasn't that huge by comparison to the size of the wheels.

[Michael]

If Bessler's wheel were a piano, this thread would have tuned it approaching perfection. I assume for some reason the posts here are from people whom in their other lives also make music.

Watch out for that piercing B, it's the devils note you know.

[jim_mich]

Doc .. for the record, I'm also a farm boy.

[Bessler007]

Fletcher,

A wheel needs a gradient to turn. Bessler didn't use the thermal difference between magnified sunlight and a hole in the ground but if a thermal gradient is all that's needed that one should suffice. I think it's more than what would have been available to Bessler.

I don't think Jim's idea is what Bessler did either. He's attempting to cause or create the gradient. If he is successful he will in effect be creating energy. The normal structure of a wheel might not be able to withstand the forces that could develop. That's why I mentioned a stationary rim.

I'll mention my theory. A gradient exists in the perfect symmetry of a circle. If exploited to it's fullest a normal wheel such as Bessler built would come unglued. That's why I don't think he perfected his wheel. I think he could have moved mass more quickly over greater distances if the wheel were housed in a substantial stationary rim. There's no use turning or balancing all that mass.

So, no, I don't think he perfected his wheel given the materials of his day.

If I were a betting man I lay odds that Bill was absolutely right about a gradient from ambient forces or energy being the Prime Mover.

This sounds like another way of stating Mr. Collin's point of getting work to turn a water wheel from a stream. In my opinion the mass within the wheel was a manipulated 'quicksilver' stream that was driven in a circle purely by gravity.

[Fletcher]

All engines require a gradient or differential - this can be naturally occurring or generated - the trick is to find one of sufficient potential & exploit it efficiently.

There are a few Arabian wheel designs on the home page for "museum of unworkable devices" that use a flowing medium as the source for an OOB wheel. Quicksilver or Mercury gets a mention IIRC. Since that is quite dangerous you could try water first then look at more dense liquids at a later date. Mercury has a relative density of 13.6 so once you found the way to keep the wheel unbalanced then it would be way more efficient to use Mercury in regards to size to power output.

IIRC you were interested in the kinetic properties of cornstarch !

[Bessler007]

IIRC you were interested in the kinetic properties of cornstarch !

Your memory's not your friend. I wouldn't trust it if I were you.

In my opinion the mass within the wheel was a manipulated 'quicksilver' stream that was driven in a circle purely by gravity.

This might be more clear if I reword it.

...The various weights within a wheel constitute a stream that emulates to some extent the fluid nature of quicksliver. Kind of like a flowing but lumpy quicksilver.

Nothing like any of the examples you mentioned. Have a nice night.

[rlortie]

Fletcher,

In that same thread I dug up a quote from Mr. Collins about the percentage of movement of the weights in the wheel. He expected they didn't move very far. In this thread Mr. Collins made the point of not allowing the cork to be carried all the way to the sea. As I see it both ideas are related.

If the mass is allowed to move too extremely, the forces become unmanageable. With Bessler's design they might have ripped it apart. There are two ways he might have managed a greater difference in force.

First line of parables taken from AP:

"Greed is an evil root"

Ralph

[MrTim]

I don't think Jim's idea is what Bessler did either. He's attempting to cause or create the gradient. If he is successful he will in effect be creating energy. The normal structure of a wheel might not be able to withstand the forces that could develop. That's why I mentioned a stationary rim.

My impression is that Jim is trying to make an inertial propulsion device that just spins around on an axle. Too bad the Inertial Propulsion engineering forum no longer exists. Lots of great stuff in the archives lost....