AHHH!! HMMMM............

[ovyyus]

MT142 closeup

[Michael]

Hi Ovyyus,

No that's not it-has to be the same area Stew. posted up, but without the filters.

thanks,
Michael

[Michael]

I did a very rough drawing overlay in a paint program of what I see, but am unsure of how to post it up. Could I send it to someone, so they could for me? thanke.

Michael

[ovyyus]

MT142 closeup 2

[Joel Wright]

Does anyone see a chain conveyer in the thing image?

[Jonathan]

I didn't Joel, I'll go look again and edit this post if I see anything. You can send it to me Michael.

[ovyyus]

Michael asked me to post this for him

(hope you don't mind that I cropped the image Michael)

[Jonathan]

I have to disagree Michael, the part where the smallest jack segment attaches to the wheel isn't even on that page, that is on MT135 and is showing through. Further, one would expect to see a mirror device on the other side, but on that side it looks to be a brace only.

[Michael]

Hmmm I wonder. On the page Stewart sent in I can see it clear as day, but I can't on the one Ovyyus sent in. But...even if it is just from the other side keep in mind Jon. the polished looking one could have been meant to hold information for the other-meant to be held up to the light. Where I drew the jack across the brace-this doesn't show in it, I just did it that way because of the cheap program I was using. I thought the small rectangular piece at the end could compress a spring.

Regards,

Michael

[Michael]

In regard to my last message...can anyone see what I was refering to, on Stewarts sent in drawing?

Also, not meaning to offend anyone but if overbalanced wheels won't work...how does that explain J. Bessler's uni directional wheels? John C.
any comments?

Later,

Michael

[Stewart]

Hi Michael

Yes, I can see what you are talking about - it's much clearer in the original image Scott posted on the first page of this topic. I'm not sure what to make of it, and whether it is actually part of MT135 on the reverse. It does look like it stands out from the spoke of MT135, so it could be something on the same side as MT135b (MT142).

I'm still trying to work out what the whole picture is meant to be. I'm still wondering whether the spheres/cylinders contain water and how that would help at all. I'm trying to work out how the beam can be at that angle given the setup as shown in my last interpretation picture (mt135a&b_overlay_closeup.jpg).

I've always wondered the same thing about the uni-direction wheels - how can they self start from any position if they aren't constantly overbalanced?

All the best
Stewart

[Fletcher]

Michael & Stewart,

IMO perhaps the wheels display all the visual charactoristics you would expect of the traditional overbalanced wheel design (so your logical mind takes control reinforcing the illusion/concept over & over). Very hard to break away from.

I was speaking with Tinhead yesterday about just such things & he agreed to post a little animation of something we called the "butterfly" (for obvious reasons when you see it). That should come up in the next few days as soon as he gets time.

We were experimenting using WMD2 with other ways of achieving the "effect of overbalancing" using gravity & interia.

The purpose was to force us/read mainly me :-) to stop looking at the magicians assistant (traditional overbalanced design) & concentrate on what the magician did. I'm sure we've all experienced that ! I'll let him discuss it further in his own words.

-Cheers Fletcher

[John Collins]

Also, not meaning to offend anyone but if overbalanced wheels won't work...how does that explain J. Bessler's uni directional wheels? John C.
any comments?

Michael, I'm not sure what you are asking me, but I can make an observation here. Bessler said that his wheels were not "over-balancing" and anyone who went that route was wasting their time and money, having said that he later describes the actions of an "over-balanced" wheel perfectlly. It sounds like word play and I wonder if perhaps there are different words for "over-balanced" and "out of balance", although I cannot see what the diffence is.

I am firmly of the opinion that overbalanced wheels do work. Of course there may be several ways of achieving the out-of-balance condition that no one has thought of. See my other posting under "parametric oscillation".

Stewart you asked -"the uni-direction wheels - how can they self start from any position if they aren't constantly overbalanced?". We cannot say for sure that the wheels could start from any position as there is no evidence. It may be that as Bessler had to secure the wheels to prevent them from rotating, he always "locked" them at the same point in the same position. If I had to do that then I'm sure that I would choose to lock them in an unbalanced position because how much more impressive that would be to see them spontaneously begin to spin as soon as I released the lock.

Having said that, the opposite also applies and we cannot say for certain whether the wheels had any positions that weren't out of balance.


John Collins

[joppa]

I think that what Johann was alluding to in his statements against an overbalanced wheel were borne out of his experiences with his prior attempts and those of others. In a 'classical' sense, a wheel which relies on any number of apparatuses using real time gravitational interactions with physical structures is fruitless, was the point he was making. His successful model did not rely soleley upon 'real time' gravity interactions, therefore he felt the need for a such a 'clarification'. It is obvious that JB judiciously subscribed to the practice of 'delayed gratification' in his daily life....and perhaps this finally carried over into his thoughts on perpetual motion. The KEY to soving the riddle, at least for him, was in the DELAYED interaction with gravity for KEY components of his wheel so as to CATCH UP with the TIMES, so to speak......this certainly led to JB's GRATIFICATION.

[Michael]

Joppa Get off this board. What this place needs is a good cleaning, not more bannana peel-laugh tracks.


> In a 'classical' sense, a wheel which relies on any number of apparatuses using real time gravitational interactions with physical structures is fruitless, was the point he was making.

Okay so I guess he used supernatual interaction. I mean, he did mention polterguists right?

>His successful model did not rely soleley upon 'real time' gravity interactions, therefore he felt the need for a such a 'clarification'.

Err, is that fake time then or supernatual time?

>It is obvious that JB judiciously subscribed to the practice of 'delayed gratification' in his daily life....

Karma sutra?