A gravity powered perpetual motion machine would be proof that energy exists in the zero-sum of rotating mass. It would be proof of 'energy out of nothing.'
It would substantiate creation.
Ex nihilo is a Latin term meaning "out of nothing". It is often used in conjunction with the term creation, as in creatio ex nihilo, meaning "creation out of nothing". Due to the nature of this term, it is often used in philosophical or creationistic arguments, as many Christians, Muslims and Jews believe that God created the universe from nothing. This contrasts with "creatio ex materia," which is creation out of eternally preexistent matter, and "creatio ex deo," which is creation out of the being of God.
Eternally existent matter would negate the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
I think the chance of one of us discovering the Bessler mechanism alone remains slim. Lets face it Leonardo Da Vinci and many others could not uncover the secret of "perpetual motion" if we should call it that although some such as Leonardo may not have put enough effort into the search. I am now coming to the conclusion that just finding the solution may need to be the primary goal rather than any monetary gain, patent etc.
And several years have already passed since members of this forum began the search, to no avail as yet.
We may need to decide to be more transparent in our experiments and that includes myself and the older members. The time may soon be approaching to discuss newer ideas openly. I know the previous discussions about patents etc etc. If revealed in this forum the secret cannot be patented in its fundamental form although derivations may later be patented.
It may be better to discover the secret and reveal it prematurely than to never discover it at all. I say this perhaps more for myself as I come to this realisation.
It would be intensely satisfying to find a proof of the philosophy 'creatio ex nihilo'. This discovery would be similar to the discovery of the atom, proving the ancient Greeks atom.
The satisfaction of this discovery is the 'why' for me.
I think the chance of one of us discovering the Bessler mechanism alone remains slim.
It's going to take a miracle for anyone to discover perpetual motion. Experiencing this miracle is a second 'why'.
Each one of us has invested an enormous amount of time & effort in our own ways to narrow down the search & sort the "wheat from the chaff" in this mystery of epic proportions - many of us 'go public' with our thinking & reasoning but as we find out, its not always received with the level of enthusiasm & interest you might think it deserves. Partly this is due to not having the experimental evidence to support your theory, but more often than not, not fully disclosing the detail of the idea [as far as you have worked it] so that the people interested come up against the same 'road blocks' you encountered when they analyse the idea, & so without much discussion it goes no further & also looses its value as a learning opportunity for the rest of the board members & perhaps yourself included.
If this happens this thought probably flashes thru your head "you can lead a whore to culture but you can't make her think". This probably reflects the level of disappointment you may feel at the lack of response some ideas get. The thing is to put the response [or non response] issue aside & plough on knowing that you have shared what you were able & believe that it in some way it will contribute to advancing the inertia of this discussion board toward a solution. Then you are truly a part of a community & not a worthless parasite.
007 .. 'creatio ex nihilo' is of course nonsensical [in relation to powering Bessler's wheels] which only leaves creatio ex environmentalo ;)
My theory is about manipulating nothing and turning a normally invisible incrementing square wave into mass.
At minimum the square frame of 5^2 is converted into mass in the form of a incrementing square wave. Set at the right frequency (length of 1 to 111) 6 of them will produce rotational energy forced by oscillation. I use articulated incrementing square waves, gravity and weight displacement within the square wave to force rotation.
My theory is about manipulating nothing and turning an incrementing square wave in to mass.
It seems that a majority just want to find the solution and get some closure. I too am in that camp.
As the years go by with no positive results the appreciation of just how difficult it is, grows and grows whilst any desire for fame and fortune becomes less and less important.
What makes it worse is the apparent ease that Bessler was able to make those wheels of his. "what would you like me to build next, a six or twelve footer? Will that be one or two?"
Human nature led to the loss of this important invention, and human nature gets in the way on these boards.
Graham
I am a lover of Humanity, It's people I can't stand.
I agree with everything you are saying in this post and the post from February 2005
That is why I belief that all of us are too interested in our own designs, instead of analyzing other peoples design and not only seeing or saying why it doesn’t work, but also seeing and saying “but what if� or “is there a way of adding� etc.
This only goes to show not all Kiwis are bad, and there are a number of members that think the same as you, but it is the minority. EVG
Just notice; Graham seems to be on your side too
''nothing doesn't exist!'' and any thinkable stuff MAY be possible... what varies are the reallity levels... the ''thinking'' allways come before...
As in a true novell, while you all make own accountability of your ''whys'', dramas, emotions and so on, try to evaluate this:
Beiond any Bessler previous gossips, tips and designs, and anything else you may say, I KNOW that I got the solution for a power PM.
Right or not, you may just guess a little the PRESSION I deal inside my reallity... and if look at me in my dayly live, I look quite normal... :)
Take care. M.
You can add my name to Fletcher's and Graham! We go our separate paths and sometimes our input is totally ignored.
It was once described to me as being like a colony of ants without a queen. We go our own meandering paths, bumping and crossing into each other occasionally. To me this has meaning, for if we were all on the same path then we would be limited to what we can discover.
Make a post of your relevant thoughts in an ongoing active thread, and have it totally ignored. You will understand that even though your post is relevant to the topic at hand you do not always get a response. If you are like me, it makes you feel insignificant and only acts as the incentive to drive you forward into proving why you should not have been ignored.
We may have to select a queen (not a gay male).
Maybe two queens may be better.
One to oversee; the hands on members.
One to oversee; the theory members.
If you wish to select two queens or overseers, I suggest it be an optimistic yet skeptic person such as this forum just inherited (humbugger) on the 5th of this month. Place him on a podium next to and with ovyyus.
