WordNet Dictionary's Definition: [n] someone who habitually doubts accepted beliefs
Webster's 1913 dictionary definition: n. to look carefully or about
On this forum a skeptic might be someone who doubts that Bessler made a working PM wheel. Yet outsiders might consider us skeptics for doubting the idea that perpetual motion is impossible.
I consider myself an open minded skeptic. I look carefully at any idea and try to determine truth. Looking at Bessler's history seems to indicate that he made a continuously turning wheel that put out a small amount of rotational energy.
I disregard anyone who blindly repeats the phrase "It can't be done." just because no one (except maybe Bessler) has been able to do it
I also disregard those that state they have a working wheel but don't post minimal information about it such as size, speed, power, length of time continuously running, etc. Things which will in no way affect there ability to patent their ideas but would lend a little credibility to their claims.
It takes a lot of work to repair a wheel when it throws a weight through the side
Yes and if this should ever happen to anyone, let us know.
So I assume you are saying you use no weights in your wheel.
You two boys crack me up with your suggestions of what you have and do not have in your wheel. At least your having fun.
No weights, maybe magnets,likely not!
I love how you leek information out. Like everyone waits to hear it and back we all run to the shop with the next clue from James.
If you read my posts you would know that my first wheel was 4 ft in diameter. It ran for 3 full daysm. 72 hours. It had 40 lbs of weight. It ran at about 55 rpm. the wheel that I am working with at present is just over 6 ft in diameter. It too uses 40 lbs of weight. I am trying to develope a wheel that has a wide rpm range. With the torque that it developes[ static], the best way to increase work done is to widen the speed range. I have accomplished this, but since it is basically a wood model, it threw a weight through the side. I completed repairs todayand will do a few hours test run and await Ralph's arrival. jim kelly
I see that I have no rep anymore. oh well, why worry the small stuff. I started at 5:00 a.m. today IT is now 4:00p.m. here. I started painting John Collins avatar on the working face of the wheel. 6' in diameter.
"I started painting John Collins avatar on the working face of the wheel. 6' in diameter."
james kelly, I recommend that you put it not on the center, but near the perimeter, that way it will look like just a spot that we can follow with our eyes and count the revolutions for ourselves to verify that it is really going 75 rpm like you said.
you may also want to get a bumber sticker shop to make a bunch so you won't have to paint them one by one on the assembly line.
LOL.
"The louder he spoke of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Emerson
"The history of our race, and each individual's experience, are sown thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal. " Twain
1712 I don't know if you are Robert or not, AND, I really don't care. I'm not someone who holds grudges and casts people into hell. I once gave you a negative rep. only because of negative comments you started to make on people. You haven't done that in a while. You offered an opposing point of view on Bessler. I respected that and I took my negative rep away. It doesn't matter if I believe this, or that. This is a controversial subject and people exploring it should know that by now. I wrote you a letter stating this to you but have just taken it away because it looks like you might be heading back to making personal attacks on people. I'm asking you, please don't do this. Yep I know, people say things that they refuse to back up, and do this at times because they admittedly are trying to affect people for their own amusement. In the end they are only shooting themsleves in the foot. I hope others will come to see them for what they are doing and give them the red hits they deserve. This includes you 1712 if you do this. This is really what the rep system is for. Let the anger come out in lights not spam and let it reflect what's happening now, not the historic past.
james kelly wrote:If you read my posts you would know that my first wheel was 4 ft in diameter. It ran for 3 full days. 72 hours. It had 40 lbs of weight. It ran at about 55 rpm.
The wheel that I am working with at present is just over 6 ft in diameter. It too uses 40 lbs of weight. I am trying to develope a wheel that has a wide rpm range. With the torque that it developes [static], the best way to increase work done is to widen the speed range. I have accomplished this, but since it is basically a wood model, it threw a weight through the side.
I completed repairs today and will do a few hours test run and await Ralph's arrival. jim kelly
That's simple, clear & concise James, thankyou. It is a step in the right direction to substantiation to have Ralph look at it first hand imo. Ralph may be a bit jet lagged though, of course he may be driving with plenty of stops along the way.
Last edited by Fletcher on Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Well, I watched every 0.2 of a second and I did'nt see 99% of Bessler's secret. Where is the missing 1% - maybe it's there?
Sorry Bill, I can't spoon feed you that 1% ........you'll need to figre it out for yourself, like the rest of us :D
What I'm saying is this:
Firstly, don't just watch one "uneven bar" video ...you should watch them all! That way you'll discover that the last swing effect increases the rotational speed before flying into the air. Turning CCW their position from starting point 6.00pm position shows the body is straight and knees are slightly bent..........4.30pm position shows the knees are straight and in a slight sitting position...........3.00pm shows a 45 angle sitting position-knees-straight............1.30pm is a repete of the 4.30pm position.................12.00pm shows a complete straight body position...................10.30 am is a repete of the 4.30pm position............9.00am is a repete of the 4.30pm position..............7.30am is as 12.00pm position..............6.00am shows same as above 6.00 position.............and the last position 4.30am before flying off high into the air, shows a repete of the above 4.30pm position.
I think this might be the best way to extract high energy via a "whiplash effect" ....................... "anyone who has suffered whiplash from a car accident knows it's delayed effects and it's lightning speed"
anton
PS.......my scanner is out of order, otherwise I'd post some pics....dam!
This is the last entry that you will get from me. Most of you do not comprehend the information that I give you. I do not need the ridicule nor some of the abuse that is dished out here.All of you would expect to be treated with respect if you were in my shoes and with my education. jim kelly With higher goals in mind.
I 've been on Everts site a few times before but don't recall ever seeing anything regarding whiplash effects or the likes? I'll have another in depth look/study!
I completed repairs todayand will do a few hours test run and await Ralph's arrival.
!!! Now that is an interesting development since last I visited this thread. It sounds like Ralph finally wants to see with his own eyes whether or not James actually does have anything that is capable of continuous self-motion. Great! I trust Ralph to accurately report what he experiences and he can certainly tell the board whether he saw a wheel capable of continuous rotation during his visit without compromising the security of the invention.
As far as skeptics are concerned, I too, after much frustration, have gone through phases of skepticism with regard to Bessler. Like others here, I have considered every conceivable way that Bessler could have faked the performances of his wheels and always came to the conclusion that it could not be done with the technology that would have been available to him in the early 18th century. The only possibility I can see for a faked gravity wheel would have been if he managed to invent the electric motor about a century ahead of time!
But, I do consider the skeptical point of view welcome on this board. However, just claiming it had to be a fraud is not sufficient. Any skeptic should try to back up his assertion by suggesting a rational means by which the fraud was perpetrated.
ken
On 7/6/06, I found, in any overbalanced gravity wheel with rotation rate, ω, axle to CG distance d, and CG dip angle φ, the average vertical velocity of its drive weights is downward and given by:
But, I do consider the skeptical point of view welcome on this board. However,
thats an honest position to take Ken for like Jim said without being skeptics of the main stream scientific community not any of us would be here
just claiming it had to be a fraud is not sufficient. Any skeptic should try to back up his assertion by suggesting a rational means by which the fraud was perpetrated.
you seem to require more of the unbelieving skeptic than from those who belive Mr. Bessler told the truth
to date there has not been any rational suggestion given about what lead his success
this enterprise we engage in is not much more than an exercise of blind faith just as it was for Mr. Bessler
the uneducated
if your gona be dumb you gota be tough
Who need drugs when you can have fatigue toxins and caffeine
winkle .. I think we all wear the two hats of sceptic & believer at various times, in varying proportions. Sometimes swayed one way more than the other.
As jim_mich said a while back, if it weren't for the documented feats of Bessler most of us would side with the scientific establishments point of view & probably not bother venturing down this path of finding a gravity powered wheel.
Although ultimately it does come down to 'belief', each & every one of us tries to back up our belief with hard scientific evidence or theory. So far no one has been able to duplicate Bessler's gravity powered wheel or produce undeniable evidence by way of theory or a physical build that it can be done. We all continue to search to change that.
The quote "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" comes to mind. That applies to both sides of the argument.
In the same way sceptics must also take a position of 'belief', unless they can by the same scientific standards produce a plausible theory or physical build to back up their position. So far no one has managed to successfully discredit or provide a credible alternative explanation of Bessler's achievements that can hold water.
Each has a right to their point of view, but grand statements, from either side of the fence, are just that without evidence.
