Gregory wrote:
I wanted to add that I might be wrong.
This is quite a dynamic setup, speed is changed continuously (on purpose), lots of things at play, hard to have a clear feel for it. Agreed - like juggling balls in the air ..
However, the variator ( nice name for it )does not add energy per see, instead it creates a kind of potential/gradient or quasi-potential, "an environment" (where motion can happen), or whatever we want to call that...
Maybe only a real physical test would tell the full story and the nuances.For sure ! I am 2/3 sceptic and 1/3 believer basically for everything, including my own theories. ;) Me too !
......................
A reflective moment ..
We have all been trying to reverse-engineer whatever mechanics B. used to build a runner - yet no one has managed to come up with the right combination, coordinated in the right way .. he was the first, and the one and only, so far - we know it can be done - it's what keeps us going ..
*** To focus I always try to ask myself .. what is the problem are we trying to solve ?
Last edited by Fletcher on Fri Jan 31, 2025 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fletcher I ask myself questions similar to that and one of my favourites is why should it work?
I ask myself that one every time I am playing with a new wheel design.
Bessler certainly believed that he knew how his wheel worked and he never gave the impression that his wheel was being powered by something other than the force of gravity. At least that’s the impression that his writings gave me.
Bessler could have been mistaken of course but he did continue to improved on the design. That is something that only usually works if you understand what you are doing.
He could however of been mistaken about how his wheel was working and I seem to remember one of the witnesses commenting that if they could find out what he had done then they would be more able to improve on the design bringing into question some of Besslers abilities.
What powers Besslers wheel has turned into a two horse race.
It was either powered by a combination of forces that are not suppose to be able to turn a wheel indefinitely or it was powered by energy such as the earths rotation which is also not suppose to be possible.
From my experience of working with simulations most of the time if the movement is fairly complicated its not possible to work out if it should work and it becomes a mathematical problem and not one that can be properly worked out just by staring at it.
I do think though that the relationship between should it work and the power of the thing are closely connected because if a wheel has a lot of power as Besslers did then the thing that was making that happen would be easy to spot.
So if Bessler was wrong in his belief then the blindingly obvious thing that was creating the torque was not doing what he thought it was doing.
You brought into question if WM2D would be able to simulate what you are proposing.
One obvious flaw in the simulators is that they don’t take into account that everything is moving around us as standard.
The best that I could do in Algodoo to simulate the earth failed miserably and Algodoo started doing some strange things or should I say stranger than normal.
The problem that we have always faced is an over dependence on simulators because in theory they can save a lot of time and money.
That is something that I want to rectify this year and I want to move away from the simulators and start doing real experiments and hopefully use the pc to collect data.
Its not going to be easy for me to do this but I think its the best way forward because there is not as much guess work doing things in the real world.
I think one of our sayings as we try to do this should be – if Bessler did it, we can do it.
Roxaway59 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2025 10:49 pm
I think one of our sayings as we try to do this should be – if Bessler did it, we can do it.
For the first thirteen years that I was doing this, I considered quitting several times. The thing that kept me going was that I believed that Bessler did it, and I would say pretty much the same thing: "Bessler did it, so I can do it."
So, the documentation that John Collins put together is part of what makes this possible, and if I understand correctly then I think that this may go together with what daxwc is saying about belief influencing reality.
Last edited by spinner361 on Fri Jan 31, 2025 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Likely 99 percent of designs by clever people and chasers all alike have shown 1 main problem however not many accept it , in physics this problem is accepted though , its shown and seen almost everywhere and undeniable .
Yet i feel like s9me people who believe that bessler was no fraud , actually believe he did not know jack about what he did , yet historical accounts of the developement and details he shared shows the contrary , he said clearly and boldly "i know why the rest failed" , and still some people out there think they can ignore the problem while we ironicly know why the designs fail .
To my little knowledge and in my oppinion just one problem has ever been identified by most if not all .
