My consideration

[ovyyus]

Georg, have you ever claimed a working pm wheel?

[unstable]

Bill, why do not you let the users dream a bit ? Is it so bad for you to hear from someone else who has a working model even if it's not true ? I did it too some time ago, it does not seem to me anything so serious... until someone asks for money or something else.. We are on a forum and most of the users do not know each other in reality. From my point of view you take these things too seriously.
Others may also tell you: "You're just upset because you can not dream about a working model designed by you." whether it's true or not. :)))) We all know that it is not possible to obtain perpetual motion... It's just a dream... and even if someone could get it (I do not think that will ever happen), certainly would not come to publicize it here but would behave in a different way, following strict paths.

[eccentrically1]

I thought we were trying to solve Bessler's wheel? If "we all know that it is not possible to obtain perpetual motion..." or "hear from someone else who has a working model even if it's not true ?" , then this is just a forum of cranky old men having the same argument every day. Wait...

[unstable]

Ok, you're right but it does not make much sense to attack those few who do it. The truth sooner or later comes out. Pricking someone else's ego does not lead to anything but useless clashes. And from what I know it is almost always ovyyus to do it

[sleepy]

Ovvyus has rubbed some people the wrong way many times. But he may be cranky because he has seen and heard so many claims of success and no one has ever been able to prove their success! In the past 5 years we have seen at least 5 claims of "a working,running,real-world wheel", and yet there has never been a shred of proof to back it up.Just so it's clear,saying that you have a working wheel when you don't have one,is lying.It's that simple.

[eccentrically1]

Ok, you're right but it does not make much sense to attack those few who do it. The truth sooner or later comes out. Pricking someone else's ego does not lead to anything but useless clashes. And from what I know it is almost always ovyyus to do it

The truth might not come out at all if the few's claims of success weren't challenged. If you are in agreement with the modern laws as you said earlier, then you already know the truth.
If someone comes here and claims they have either a working model or an idea for one, they should expect to be clashed with. I've had clashes with a few myself. My approach is different, but if someone's ego gets pricked in the process, well... the standard disclaimer 'in my opinion' applies. They don't have to engage with whoever is questioning their claim. They can go on believing they have 'it' and ignore the pricks.

[John Collins]

Nicely put ecc1 (forgive the abbreviation?).

It seems to me we all need thicker skins (myself too) and what ever happened to our sense of humour? I have always admired ovyyus’ acid wit and not been offended by it, and I have been on the receiving end more than once. We are serious but we take ourselves too seriously sometimes.

Words without body language can offend because there is no way to interpret the nuances present when some speaks to you in person, visible, there, in your face.

JC

[ovyyus]

This forum was created in response to Bessler's claim of a working pm wheel. Claims of an actual working pm wheel are special cases that demand special investigation. The main event is uncovering the truth, the sideshow is human nature. Or is it the other way around? :D

[ChrisHarper]

Everyone's mistake is to keep calling it, whatever 'it' is,a 'wheel'.

Bessler showed a light-weight disc covering the inner device, but that is as far as the resemblance went.

The perfect circle is yet another Man-made construct, as is a straight line. Those two geometric paths are handcuffs.

If you all continue to just see the closed-loop or energy-cycle as circular, the only thing perpetual will be your search for the answer.

Bar a notable few exceptions here, most of you are precondition to think in a formulaic or linear fashion, which is great for working out how many oranges are in a crate, but what if those very same pieces of fruit can exist somewhere else at the same time in duplicate, without loss of force their mass brings, then what ?

Look 90 degrees away from what you think you know, or continue trudging alone along the same well worn path as everyone else has done, past and present.

The actual 'working wheel' you all seek, is almost an irrelevance in the scheme of things. It is a 17th Century throwback where, mechanical advantage was defined, as the name suggests, mechanically!

The answer is a lot more subtler than what has been proposed in the past, and upto the present day here in this forum.

The moment you add any form of poorly conceived, bastardised arrangement / variant of previous attempts onto a Balanced back-support, you may as well just add an anchor!



Chris Harper

[ovyyus]

Yep, it's the other way around.

[unstable]

Chris, great comment. It's been three days, I'm trying to visualize things from another perspective. I agree with you. I would add that it is evident from everyone's experiments that the closed loop is not the right path: it can not work. We need to think in another way.
From my point of view the 180 ° out-of-phase weights must be free to move ... there are several ways to achieve this. Only in a certain angle one of the (opposite) weights must be bound to the complete structure ... but not for many degrees of rotation. Then it must still be freed to be able to get the reset condition. For now I'm analyzing this.

[unstable]

A few days ago I tried to find sometging usefull by the fantastic system whereby when one weight goes up the other goes down, so the energy required to move the weights on the Z axis (third dimension) is very small. but this system is part of the closed loop, and therefore, in any situation you do not gets nothing favorable. In my opinion the way to follow is the free oscillation and constrain to the structure only a weight per time and only for a few degrees of rotation. How to reset and therefore "self-pumping", for now is still to be fully understood. Simulation programs are very useful to understand what should be done and what is not to be done. Obviously, it is also necessary to experiment in physical reality, to better understand and to verify if the simulation is relevant to reality

[Georg Künstler]

Hi Chris,
I cannot say it better !!
There are many ways to extract the energy from gravity.

The simples way is the top heavy pendulum, but that is not a wheel, it is only an oscillator which can extract the energy from gravity.

I have made several models but is is not understand that I use the other way around, and they are working in real.
I extract energy and gravity must react.

A well balanced system will create torque when you extract the energy.
A balanced system is always consuming energy to produce torque.

Maybe it can be described as an colapsing system or overstretched system.

The wheel is a uncomplete wheel,

weils felgen und auch keine hat

, because it has rims and has none.
An uncomplete wheel is automatically not going round, and so additional forces will be available.

Technicians don't like this movement, when we have a car wheel they put additinal weights to make it round...

[unstable]

I am convinced that if there is a solution to the Bessler wheel, this lies in the displacement of the weights thanks to the centrifugal force. The problem that afflicts us all is to find an efficient mechanism that allows us to make this small shift and reset the position of the weight when required. I do not see any other solutions. Chemistry can not be, energy from the outside not even. Gravity alone is not enough but combined with the intelligent exploitation of centrifugal force could work. There is also the problem of the friction of the air to be solved ... that is, it is necessary to minimize it.

Edit: I would add that in my opinion the weights must not be moved inwards (towards the axis) or outwards but must be moved in the direction of rotation. Also in this way an imbalance is obtained which, depending on how it is carried out, can be advantageous and generate torque. In this regard, I would like to ask if anyone else thinks of it in my own way. I would be very happy to have some answers from you. Exchanging opinions and information can only be good for the whole forum.

[unstable]

Not the Bessler wheel for sure but an example of useful movement could be this: imagine having N toothed wheels with internal teeth. These toothed wheel, regardless of how many they are, are arranged equidistantly along the circumference of the primary wheel and are fixed permanently. Within each toothed wheel there is a gear of smaller size (not much smaller, something similar to the attached image). At the center of this gear is a ball bearing of the one way type. Attached to the bearing there is a rod of a certain length, the opposite end of which is fixed to a weight (a kind of pendulum). Imagining that the primary wheel rotates clockwise, when the weight is on the left side, due to centrifugal force, tends to be pulled outwards. The gear inside the toothed wheel tends to turn clockwise, going inward and rising a little (not too much, otherwise the teeth of the two gears would try to separate and then return to the center of the gear), there should never be a counter torque... maybe :). Otherwise, when the weight is on the right side of the primary wheel, the weight is free to be pulled by the centrifugal force towards the outside. In this case the rod does not rotate the internal gear, due to the functioning of the unidirectional bearing, so it does NOT tend to go inwards and to go up a little but stay at the center of the wheels with internal teeth... indeed, it would probably just be a little dragged outwards (perhaps, it's hard to imagine what it would do). I ask if It might work...

edit: maybe there would be too much friction because of the covers that hold the inner gear imprisoned ... damn
When on the left side, another problem could be to allow the weight to go outward at "nine o'clock" and not before.... but in this case, since the gear also moves towards the inside of the main wheel, it may be good for the weight to go out even before nine o'clock. There is a need to try a simulation. The idea is not so bad but I do not think there is enough energy for self-sustaining the rotation of the main wheel.
Moreover, when the centrifugal force acts, part of the weight is shifted, so it's all to be tried.