Bessler's 2nd greatest creation!

[sleepy]

Maybe Bessler's 2nd greatest creation was his inexhaustable web of riddles and hints.His writings and illustrations were not revealed on his deathbed,but were available during the time that he was shopping his wheel around.He didn't tell his secret to his wife,or brother,or children.He destroyed all wheels.He was seemingly VERY paranoid and difficult to deal with.It just doesn't make sense that he would reveal any real clues or codes,especially while he was still alive.BUT,he has had people looking in the wrong places for almost 300 years now, and with no success.What a clever way to keep us from finding his secret.Don't misunderstand me,I think Bessler's wheel was genuine,but I'm beginning to wonder if his writings are just an elaborate smoke screen.There,I said it.Let the spankings begin!

[Fletcher]

In many ways I agree with your sentiment Sleepy. I think the important thing to remember is that he says 'he found it where others have looked'.

That means it's there to be found, but if you try to follow or interpret his writings literally you will be overwhelmed by the many possible directions one could & probably has followed.

It's a lot of information to digest & make sense of & his "clues" appear non specific & very open to interpretation so don't really help to narrow down the field imo.

I think he intended that you find the answer first by your own endeavors then you will perhaps see commonality with his writings & drawings in hindsight. That won't stop us attacking the problem on both fronts however, smoke screen or not.

[John Collins]

I think he intended that you find the answer first by your own endeavors then you will perhaps see commonality with his writings & drawings in hindsight

.

Well put Fletch! I can also assure you that there are some very specific clues to be found which will lead to an eventual solution, but they are deliberately vague and although helpful, as you see I don't have a working machine yet so the hunt continues.

John Collins

[Oystein]

I think the most important thing he discloses is this :
(My own concusion from his written statements !!!!!)

If you can`t make a pair of weights that by them selfs (internally) break Newtons law (w=mah) in a demonstratable seperate mechanism all your work wil be in vain ! This mechanism can be used to demonstrate the laws of perpetual motion, and be used to put into a wheel, wich then will be in perpetual motion.
We could call this demonstratable principle "the inverse lever"...
(1/4 = 4/1) instead of : 1/4 = 1/4

These weights will then shift so the biggest of them always applies its weight at the cirmuference on the descending side of the wheel..

All other movements of weights in/out wich do not break Newtons law (between weight A and B) (w=mah) will never work.

It is only one basic principle that allows these laws to be broken.
Everything else will be in vain !

This is only my interpretation of his hints, and a summary of what my view on the Besslerwheel is right now...

Best
Oystein

[ken_behrendt]

Alas, we are forced to operate with a variety of handicaps. First we have an inventor that wants to be as cryptic as possible when it comes to dispensing details of his invention. Next, we have the language barrier to contend with. Then, we have some vague descriptions of the wheel's interior that are not specific enough to use as a basis for design.

Yet, we do know that it is possible and that no hoax was involved.

It's kind of like being stuck at the bottom of deep well. We want to climb out of it and have been told it is possible. We are given a few "hints" about how to do it, but, unfortunately, we can not understand what they mean.


John...

It's too bad that you can not find some more Bessler literature out there somewhere. Maybe there's another pamphlet he published in his later years that gives a few more hints. Maybe the problem is that we are only one additional hint away from being able to make sense of the ones we already have and that hint is in a piece of work of his that is somewhere other than the Kassel library! Is this possible?


ken

[John Collins]

Ken you're right of course there are other pieces of paper out there I'm certain, although I think that I know of, and have copies of, all of Bessler's publications. But there must be letters other than those I've found, simply because of all the draft copies of letters Bessler sent out. Those letters may contain additional information about the observed performance of the wheel - such as accurate descriptions of any noise heard or even more information about the weights themselves - or the noise heard when Bessler removed the weights - anything that might contribute to our understanding of the machine must be of help.

I have always been puzzled over the lack of letters about Bessler in France. It maybe that I have not looked in the right place, but certainly France was right there along with Russia, Sweden and other European nations who must have heard something of Bessler. I know that there must be other letters about Bessler within the Russian archives and I have copies of letters to Bessler written by Detlev Klefeker, a Prussian representative at the Peter's court in Russia, but they are to me at least, completely illegible.

On a more hopeful note Bessler's first publication "Grundlicher Bericht" is almost ready and will be of some interest I hope since it contains the very first drawing that Bessler published, plus of course full Englsih translation.

John Collins

[ken_behrendt]

John...

Sounds intriguing. My only concern about Grundlicher Bericht is that, being Bessler's first published work (that we know of!), he might have really been on his guard and extremely careful not to reveal too much. I am hoping that, someday, you can locate something he wrote toward the end of his life like in the decade before he died. Perhaps in his late fifties, he had "mellowed" a bit and, realizing that finding a buyer for his invention was more unlikely than ever, would have been a bit "looser" in dispensing clues about his wheels to maintain the interest of an audience that might have followed his story over the decades but was dwindling because nothing ever seemed to come of the invention.

Anyway, I can see with all of this material you are reproducing / translating, I am going to have a lot of work on my hands when I finally manage to catch up on all the reading I have to do! But, it's good this material is available. It will help keep the subject alive from generation to generation in the event that we do not find the solution in our lifetimes (what a dismal thought!).


ken

[graham]

I'm sure that there must be many hundreds of PM seekers who have gone through Besslers publications hoping to find a key to the solution from his writings.
Long before any of us were born and especially those who were alive at the time all this happened these seekers must have tried everything that we are trying today yet without an answer.

Thanks to John Collins these writings have been resurrected for us today . When you read Besslers words and hear what eyewitnesses said , you KNOW that there truly is a principle that somehow everone is missing.

I don't think Bessler had any intention of helping to show the way by leaving clues , he was only concerned with jealously guarding the secret and flaunting his private knowledge in your face. Teasing you with ambiguous verbiage.

So all that's left is discovering this principle the hard way . No shortcuts , just a discerning mind employing experiments that have not been "done to death" already. Find the principle that JB said is "so simple yet so deeply hidden".

Graham

[Guest]

I think he intended that you find the answer first by your own endeavors then you will perhaps see commonality with his writings & drawings in hindsight

.

Well put Fletch! I can also assure you that there are some very specific clues to be found which will lead to an eventual solution, but they are deliberately vague and although helpful, as you see I don't have a working machine yet so the hunt continues.

John Collins

[Guest]

John,

Are you saying that you know of other clues/ details about Bessler's wheel that you haven't told us about, hoping to discover the principle yourself first?

Otto

[rlortie]

torque Seeker,

<Are you saying that you know of other clues/ details about Bessler's wheel that you haven't told us about, hoping to discover the principle yourself first?>

Sounds kind of personal to me. Are not all who seek the answer holding back what they feel is the the ultimate answer to a clue. Problem is there are too many clues with to many answers. So why elaborate on something with no substantiation.

I certainly hold back either because I feel I am very close or it is to far out of the box to be accepted. Just because John wrote the book does not mean he is or should be excluded from seeking what we all seek.

The act of thinking some one else knows more or is closer to the answer is the catalyst that keeps us all on our toes

Ralph

[Guest]

rlortie

It was just a question. Why blow so hard on the brown-nose horn? Why get defensive and fly into self-righteous pontification?

He said he was imposing a deadline on himself for the discovery, and if he couldn't do it, then would "tell all he knew."

///////
One site has Karl saying that there was a peg that swung out of the way when the weight reached its zenith.

Is this true? If so, it's an important thing to know. We should be told one way or another.

[ovyyus]

It's not true. The Frank Edwards peg fiction has been addressed here several times already.

EDIT: Hi Robert, I see you're back with a new look account - but the same old sock-it-to-the-jaw approach - just couldn't stay away, huh. Thought you could sneak back in under the radar, eh? 'Otto' - that's real cute - lol

[ken_behrendt]

Otto...

That reference to Karl saying that there was a peg mechanism that prevented the weights from following their normal path against the rim of the wheel on the ascending side and which then made the peg swing out of place at the top of the wheel has been the subject of some debate here in the past. The reference is attributable to the author Frank Edwards in his popular selling "Stranger Than Science" book.

The concensus of opinion here is that the alleged comment by Karl was something that Edwards made up based on his own beliefs about how the wheels worked and added to his Bessler chapter in an effort to make it more interesting and tantalizing. Of course, there is the slight possibility that Edwards had access to material that we have not seen yet and that the reference could be real! However, I think that such a mechanism would be too complicated for that "carpenter's boy" to handle.



Graham wrote with regard to Bessler:

...he was only concerned with jealously guarding the secret and flaunting his private knowledge in your face. Teasing you with ambiguous verbiage.

I tend to agree with this observation. In his writings, Bessler comes across as the master of perpetual motion who wants so very much to convince those who have not personally witnessed a demonstration of his wheels that they are, indeed, real and possible. He seems to always be on the verge of revealing something, then...nothing specific. If this is how he wrote, I can imagine how he was in real life!


ken

[Michael]

Thanks for catching that Bill.

EDIT: Hi Robert, I see you're back with a new look account - but the same old sock-it-to-the-jaw approach - just couldn't stay away, huh. Thought you could sneak back in under the radar, eh? 'Otto' - that's real cute - lol

LOL