The war of the ego about an unrealizable illusion

[Oystein]

Leibniz, the fourth smartest man in the history of the world (apparently), thought Bessler's wheel was powered by a 'physical principle'. Not mechanical, not gravity, not inertia, not codes... a physical principle. Leibniz went even further and stated,

...In which case, I cannot call this work of skill a fraud, if it is able to deliver what is expected of it...

You'll soon find, you splendid mechanics, that this is a nut you can't crack!

For you to study some more Bill :)
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/mat ... r-pressure

A material of mechanical crosses, making up a cube that is expanding under pressure.. Sounds not far from what you are seeking? And Wolff and Leibniz imagined? If the ascending weights apply their collective pressure, it would raise the ascending weights while they at the same time apply force through the same material to rotate the wheel.

Since Leibniz never inspected the machine's interior, I can only fully rely on or trust what he observed, and his conclusion that the energy to rotate the machine stems from inside the machine itself.

Best
ØR

[ovyyus]

Oystein, you also seem to miss both points.

Firstly, if Bessler's wheel was powered by some physical principle then Leibniz seemed to consider the actual mechanism to harness that principle as secondary. Leibniz rightly prioritised the physical principle at work inside Bessler's wheel over the specific mechanical means that might be employed to harness it.

Secondly, Leibniz seemed happy to accept that a physical principle operating inside Bessler's wheel, something that deviated from the accepted notion of a purely mechanical pm, was not a fraud.

[Oystein]

I very well understand what you mean. And I didn't wrote otherwise!

I even directed you to a physical principle similar to what Wolff imagined..

I understand totally what you mean, and at a time in life I would tend to agree. it's very easy to understand what you believe, but it doesn't mean that I agree. The reason you agree with Leibniz is because you nor him (and consensus) can imagine a mechanical combination or structure able to perform the required task. But the only thing Leibniz actually was able to be 100% certain about was what he could see and test, right? From the tests Leibniz was certainly sure the principle of operation stems from within the wheel! What the principle actually was, is his speculation, right? I fully understand that mercury, change in air pressure, temperature etc. would by some be considered Perpetual Motion at that time. But Bessler said that it was only limited to and by how long the Weights remained heavy (thus as long as the universe exist.. ). He also said it never had to be refilled from the outside, like other machines known to man.

Your conclusion and Leibniz and Wolff's speculation is simple and based on concluded from, but limited by current knowledge of mechanical structures known to man.

Your conclusion is simple and intuitive, but it doesn't comply with what Bessler wrote, that is my main concern. He knew the interior, while you (nor I) haven't seen it. so I have to chose his words over yours..sorry for that.

Best
ØR

[ovyyus]

But Bessler said that it was only limited to and by how long the Weights remained heavy (thus as long as the universe exist.. ).

Bessler seemed happy to talk about the weights inside his wheel. He even allowed them to be handled by observers during the translocation test. There seems little doubt that it was an overbalanced wheel, in the classical sense. The use of weights obviously wasn't his secret. But Bessler never spoke or even hinted about what actually lifted those weights - the physical principle at work inside his wheel. Those who think an overbalanced wheel can operate without the lifting of weights don't understand the problem. Leibniz clearly understood the problem.

I even directed you to a physical principle...

No, a mechanism isn't a physical principle. The link you provided was to a mechanism that reacts against pressure change in an unusual way. Just like rubber reacts against temperature change in an unusual way. Do you understand what Leibniz meant by a physical principle?

[ME]

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/mat ... r-pressure

A material of mechanical crosses, making up a cube that is expanding under pressure.. Sounds not far from what you are seeking? And Wolff and Leibniz imagined? If the ascending weights apply their collective pressure, it would raise the ascending weights while they at the same time apply force through the same material to rotate the wheel.

Obviously Oystein didn't read the journal, and keeps assuming all kinds of weird mind-boggling things in the mean time...

Likely my earlier "hypothetical" remark didn't catch on, or I'm under ignore. Anyway, for the ones interested, here some *fact* from journal itself (not the news article).

Page 4:
This behavior has long been known. Nevertheless, likely owning to the fact that it involves an irreversible change of the system, this process has not been widely considered as a mechanism to design materials exhibiting mechanical behavior not found in natural materials.

To be sure, Page 11 (remarks):
Furthermore, while ICTs* have not been experimentally observed, we propose that with the significant advances made in designing both electromagnetic [17] and acoustic [18] metamaterials, it is possible to realize engineered materials that undergo ICTs.

*ICT=[Inverted Compressibility Transitions]
Despite this, it's still an interested recommended read...
So it doesn't exist. and looks at stuff needing an energy input (17, 18).
Of course things can (eventually) be reversed at microscopic scales... Thinking it is magic is a bit like those endothermic cold-packs you can freeze with the flick of a piezo, and then not mention the necessary preceding boiling process (energy input).


Correction:
My journal-remark was based on the Scientific American article.

This material that Leibniz dreamed of, would be something similar to a material that would expand when put under pressure. This also would be in conflict and in opposition to existing physics. Yet here it is described:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... ompressed/

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 220#161220

[Oystein]

But Bessler said that it was only limited to and by how long the Weights remained heavy (thus as long as the universe exist.. ).

Bessler seemed happy to talk about the weights inside his wheel. He even allowed them to be handled by observers during the translocation test. There seems little doubt that it was an overbalanced wheel, in the classical sense. The use of weights obviously wasn't his secret. But Bessler never spoke or even hinted about what actually lifted those weights - the physical principle at work inside his wheel. Those who think an overbalanced wheel can operate without the lifting of weights don't understand the problem. Leibniz clearly understood the problem.

I even directed you to a physical principle...

No, a mechanism isn't a physical principle. The link you provided was to a mechanism that reacts against pressure change in an unusual way. Just like rubber reacts against temperature change in an unusual way. Do you understand what Leibniz meant by a physical principle?

I think I mentioned some physical principles.. for example materials reacting to change in temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure etc. I think this was kind of principles he was thinking of, but how can I really know what he had in mind?

But Bessler never spoke or even hinted about what actually lifted those weights - the physical principle at work inside his wheel

Again you say you actually KNOW what Bessler was thinking, like you know when Bessler forgot to draw letters or forgot to draw thing the correct way. You also know what was inside his wheel. Your psychic abilities seems profound! Congratulations.

The linkage to expanding materials https://www.wired.com/2013/07/crystal-e ... -pressure/ was to try to think what kind of stuff (philosophically) Wolff was visioning by "a unknown substance or material giving force to weights" could look like. I don't care at all how this material is structured, applied, developed or may or may not be used. It was a subjects to discuss as grown.

Question to Bill: You said before that you know just why Bessler drew things erroneously. I wonder why did he draw the drawings main number 47 both upside down and the correct way in MT 47? I would like to know.

You predictable answer would be: First he drew it upside down by mistake, It is very easy to suddenly do just that. Then when he later discovered that the main number is upside down, he added a new number the correct way! This is what happened.. case closed.

I tried to write to you as a peer today, but you actually (like a big baby) just HAD TO WRITE that Bessler's wheel wasn't driven by CODES!! I am amazed. How old are you?

I REALLY BELIEVED Bessler's wheel was driven by codes.. uhmm

Best
ØR

[Senax]

You're not just a pretty face, ME, are you. ;-)

[ovyyus]

You also know what was inside his wheel. Your psychic abilities seems profound! Congratulations.

wow

[Oystein]

To Bill: Do you think codes in public writings was widely used at the time we are investigating? If yes, why are you attacking me and making fun of me for showing that it seems like Bessler did it too? You have never mentioned any of my findings as insightful or even remotely positive in any way. You have just said for example: "prove it..or...shut.."

I want to ask if you can really prove to us there is a code in this English monument text below: It shouldn't take many minutes to find it..

And lastly, why would anybody make fun of you or attack when you present the result?? I would be interested and grateful for others possible insight and other ways to see things. Discovering their possible different inclination than mine..I have learned alot from others in here, especially when they point out anomalies etc.

The following inscription appears in ST. PAUL's Cathedral on the tomb of Sir Francis Walsingham. The founder of the English Secret Service and also an employer of Francis Bacon.
...............................................
. Shall Honor, Fame and Titles of Renowne
. In Clods of Clay be thus inclosed still?
. Rather will I, though wiser Wits may frown,
. For to inlarge his Fame, extend my Skill.
. Right gentle Reader, be it known to thee
. Afamous Knight doth her EinterreD lie,
. NoblE by Birth, Renowned BY Policie,
. Confounding Foes which wrought our Jeopardie.
. In foreign Countries their intents he knew;
. Such was his Zeale to do his Country Good,
. When Dangers would by Enemies ensue
. As well as they themselves he understood.
. Launch forth, ye Muses, into Streams of Praise,
. Sing and sound forth praiseworthy Harmony:
. In England, Death cut off his dismal Days,
. Not wronged by Death, but by false Treachery.
. Grudge not at this unperfect Epitaph,
. Herein I have exprest my simple Skill,
. As the first Fruits proceeding from a graffe;
. Make them a better whosoever WILL.

[John Collins]

Got it Øystein!

I also can point to apparent mistakes which are in reality guidance to the solution. They don’t relate to historical methods such as yours do but they are still ingenious. No woodcut by Bessler ever retained any mistakes, if errors are found then they are deliberate and an explanation should be sought.

Keep up your excellent work Øystein, and don’t feel disrespected by those who criticise you.

JC

[Oystein]

Thanks JC, the same goes to you!

This one was so easy, and in my opinion, your erea and Germany is full of this tradition. So full that it seems like it was more the standard than exceptions. This example is just to illustrate that you just have to look around, and this is why a FreeMason would be depicted as babies...like me :) So simple, for all to spot...but we don't if we are not shown.



Best
ØR

[unstable]

John, you asked me what made me change my mind: at a certain point it became clear to me that without energy input, the system is not able to self-sustain, and this for any mechanism and type of interconnection is used ... so, much less will it be able to produce mechanical energy.
Perhaps what Bill writes is not wrong, I'm quite on the same idea.

I would add then Bessler lied in a certain sense in his text and also during the wheel tests, betraying the witnesses stating that the weights were the reason for the functioning of his wheel. No, another physical principle was the reason for the continuous rotation of its wheel.

However, I still have the doubt that it was a brilliant fraud.

[John Lyndsay]

Mr. In stable, there is an inventor with a fan that puts out 30% more air than it is supposed to and I think he is using this principle. Other inventors have mentioned using a principle like this to get results. It is not about making something out of nothing and it never was! It is about making use of different kinds of eccentric cycles. Saying there isn't anything ''out there" in the world proving the existence of something is beyond laughable considering we have been in a holographic experience more manipulated than you can possibly imagine. Originally the ego could have been an open minded advisor for the outside world. How is your ego operating as of late? The Lower ego doesn't want anyone messing with a rigidly held perspective/identity, including the owner! (you). New information contrary to rigidly held opinions, is to be dismissed, banned or destroyed. Otherwise, peace be with you

[ME]

You're not just a pretty face, ME, are you. ;-)

I don't know if you ever have seen my face but, besides my pretty face, I also have this amazing stomach which is apparently able to turn and crumble when I read some of the replies here.
And please don't forget and underestimate my gut feelings here. Even though I suspect its environment is not meant to be pretty at all, I still feel free enough to happily let it go and share its results with all of you.
Apparently some share the same motivation and posted their thought processes with seriously less consistency. At some points I slip and totally get flabbergasted. But that's totally my bad.

I know it is an unrealizable illusion, but let me return a counter strike to protect all our egos.
Sorry guys, I really can't hold it any longer… here I go. What's the saying: "Duck and cover"?

This one was so easy, and in my opinion, your erea and Germany is full of this tradition. So full that it seems like it was more the standard than exceptions. This example is just to illustrate that you just have to look around, and this is why a FreeMason would be depicted as babies...like me :) So simple, for all to spot...but we don't if we are not shown.

(I still assume to be on ignore, so it’s like firing blanks)

You get used to what you know. And will see precisely that exact thing that's imprinted in your brain just about everywhere you look... I personally like to choose what I see, but I understand some are incapable of independent critical thought... but what do I know... :-)

Seriously, I ask rhetorically, who really cares about other one's made-up codes.
Is it 'fear' in general, 'greed', this 'Fear Of Missing Out' syndrome, spying, voyeurism, lack of imagination, lack of self-control?
What? Why? Yes, codes may be interesting up to some point: do your thing, ask annoying questions, expose all the secrets if you please, but just bugger off with the assumed nonsense... it's just worse than any "secret".
Trying to expose Freemasons? LMAO, perhaps unaware of your grade or level.
It is not ignorance to stay away from all those so assumed important codes; we just have to live a life. Otherwise it's just better to join that group, because there are simply more "codes" outside the range of visibility so we have to go deep. And joining such group is perfectly fine too. What better way to learn a thing, than just joining the group exercising that exact thing you want to learn more about – I suspect this "open-mind"-theory fails badly here, so I would advice a critical mind as a way to filter out the nonsense and to keep the things of value. (For some reason mine slams shut completely on some replies).

Sure, many can relate with the search for hidden relations and the thrill of finding secret message here and there... If that helps to discover a physically possible mechanism; then why the heck not. Perhaps it points to something better than random.
Codes as a watermarking method just like current DRM, to ensure ownership and the likes... seems valid. That possibly has some historic value. But strangely we already know what the source is when the only place we look is actually that exact source.
So in my opinion that proofs not a single thing. Some have another opinion, that’s ok too.

I read here that Bessler's wheel is definitely powered by codes, electromagnetism, piezo electric propulsion, and possibly goes near or perhaps faster than the speed of light
-- Is this all inclusive, or do we need to pick one?
And although I know it's difficult to expect a tiny bit of sanity on a forum for perpetual motion research... but babies? Really https://www.merriam-webster.com/diction ... ing%20(me)? Yes, you told us you think it is metaphor.

Here's a possible metaphor, but I actually mean it:

• I really hope everyone's kid has the capabilities and the abilities to study something interesting to kick start new and awesome discoveries, whatever that may be.
  (with or without parental permission or fear)

Sometimes mistakes are codes, sometimes mistakes are just mistakes. And how do we know? (oops, collateral damage) Let's find out:

I also can point to apparent mistakes which are in reality guidance to the solution. They don’t relate to historical methods such as yours do but they are still ingenious. No woodcut by Bessler ever retained any mistakes, if errors are found then they are deliberate and an explanation should be sought.

So now we have *at least* two totally different methods of decoding the same stuff. That this happens to be one's own discovery is surprisingly the most ingenious ever? [...] o_O
That doesn't ring any carillon, a bell, ... a single ting?
Mind me to observe that this is seriously one of the better replies in this topic with the title it has.

Holy smokes.... Casualties!
It looks like Nuance died, Common Sense seriously injured, and Reason is MIA!!

[ovyyus]

Well said Marchello, even if it's like firing blanks.