20th June 08 - PM machine to be revealed ?

[RRRRyan]

Michael, thanks for your response, but it we already know that torque can rotate the system without any part of the actual system moving. Weight applied as torque against the axle from a stationary (within the system) object rotates the object. Objects can be made lighter without actually moving them. Therefore... well... I read your post carefully, but I don't think it's a trap.

Funny thing with Kevin's (aka Archer) floating weight = pm thing is it really isn't any different than something sitting on a spring, except the spring cannot be passed through and the field can. So I don't buy that floating something on a magnetic field is pm, but I do think there is an important concept here. A weight, sitting on a spring, distributes its weight downward to the bottom of the spring. If it hangs on an arm from the axle, then that exact same weight is applied as torque at the axle producing the exact same effect. At 7:00 in a clockwise rotating system that would be acting to slow down the rotation.

Now, consider the proposed design (I like my blades better)... No magical moving magnet blaa blaa ... BUT!!!! Replace the spring with a magnet cushion anyway. It is so far all part of the rotating system. No gain... However, you introduce a repelling field at 7:00 in such a way as not to disrupt the rotation, but to seamlessly transfer the weight of the mass out of the rotating system via the magnetic field (no axle torque or peripheral torque) and voila ... OB. The weight is there, but it is no longer being applied to the wheel. That is what Bessler did. I'm sure of it... and explaining it for the 10th time today has given me yet another clue... that seamless handoff is more difficult than it sounds... though I have yet another idea!!!

Now, it is interesting that he is determined to use a more complicated electromagnet. If we are defining the same phenomenon a bit differently we could be on the same page, though I am still trying to solve it with configuration and mechanics, and he has introduced electronics. That handoff, (or the "wall" if you look at it as moving something in and out of an acceleration field) could be helped by such a magnet because it would be mounted outside of the rotating system but the weight it displaces would be weight from inside the rotating system. I just don't see the need to move the actual mass. If the transition is smooth the job is done. Kinda like pulling a table cloth out from under a bunch of dishes ... oh, and putting it back again after... LOL.

So in the spirit of full disclosure:

Three ways to smooth the transition of the weight out of the system:

1. Mount springs on the external deflection magnet such that the weight is added at an angle and the magnet then pivots against the weight (and perhaps springs) until it is released back into the rotating system.
2. Configure the external magnet such that it distances itself automatically and approaches just in time to steal weight from the internal mass.
3. Some how position the external repulsive magnet such that it suddenly supplements the already repulsing magnet in the system. The extra repulsion (that I insist is work even if nothing moves) would be transferred out of the system and into the external world.

Gosh I type a lot... sorry.

[Ben]

rrrryan wrote,

That is what Bessler did. I'm sure of it... and explaining it for the 10th time today has given me yet another clue... that seamless handoff is more difficult than it sounds... though I have yet another idea!!!

You're mistaken. If you're using magnets, that's fine, but it doesn't jive with all the information we already have about the wheel.

Said Bessler,

Machine was set in motion by weights.

And from the website http://www.spartechsoftware.com/dimensi ... fyreus.htm

"When the oiled cloth was stripped away, said Count Karl, he found himself gazing upon a very simple arrangement of weights and levers.

I think it's probably possible to get a wheel to move with magnets, but you''ll not get enough power left over to use. If you put a generator on all 4 wheels of your electric car, you won't generate enough to run the car indefinately.

[Fletcher]

Ryan et all .. take a look at this post by John Collins on an electromagnetic gravity wheel he posted many years ago - open the attachment drawing as its animated [in Johns Post - not below] - probably one of the simplest ideas I've seen but shows the problems you are talking about IMO.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... ?p=232#232

[ovyyus]

it's all fun... you guys that aren't having fun (Bill are you having fun?) should take a break and come back when it's fun again.

Fun is something kids have in sandpits, or adults have at bars :P

You guys that don't understand basic physics (Ryan is that you?) should take a 101 learning break and come back when you do. Only joking - it'd be a boring world without ignorance :D


BTW Ben, I don't think the quote about Karl, "gazing upon a simple arrangement of weights and levers", is attributable to any historic source. IIRC, that's another quote from Frank Edwards' imaginative writings.

[evgwheel]

Quote “it would be a boring world without ignorance�

Ignorance: The lack of knowledge (or education) on how to build a Bessler wheel.

That would explain the popularity of this forum. Not boring at all.

[RRRRyan]

LOL, now it's fun.

BTW, I am not proposing that Bessler used magnets, just that his accomplishment was transferring the weight out of the wheel in such a way that it did not cause more resistance than gain. It does not violate thermodynamics.

Don't understand basic physics? Thanks. I know what I've been taught, and I know what I observe. They don't always match. Tell you what, you go write up a formula to calculate the exact motion of a chaos pendulum and I'll conceded that math is all we need to solve this. We'll see who finishes first.

BTW, basic accepted physics already concedes that overlapping magnetic forces create eddies and do so far there is no proven formula to predict the behaviors. Therefore it is a mystery and the possibilities are open, even to physics experts like you Bill.

I bet the guy that solves this will be the guy who enjoys it.

[ovyyus]

Don't understand basic physics? Thanks. I know what I've been taught, and I know what I observe. They don't always match.

Yes, like when you try to lift something that is too heavy to lift and you get worn out by the effort of trying. The apparent conflicting observation of you are doing a bunch of work doesn't seem to match the observation that no work is being done on the thing you're trying to lift. But when you understand WHY you are working so hard (internal muscle twitching) and WHY no work is being done on the object (W=FxD), suddenly that apparent conflict resolves itself - you understand.

Alternatively, you could entertain all sorts of explanations that attempt to resolve the apparent conflict, such as by inventing the new concept of your "static work". But the real problem clearly doesn't, in this case, reside with the nature of an unknown physics as much as it does with the nature of the observer's misunderstanding of a known physics.

Unlike a chaotic pendulum formula, or concepts of overlapping magnetic field eddies, I do think that fundamental mechanics is pretty basic stuff that any non-expert can grasp, given the inclination.

[RRRRyan]

Fletcher, I can't get the animation to work. Is that a counter clockwise rotation? If so, why have the pulse on the downward side? If I understand it correctly, and it is cc, then one problem would be that the pulse would absorb weight while it is still helping the rotation. That weight is transferred to the magnet and out of the system instead of continuing the rotation. I realize it may just be semantics but I am not hoping that the magnet will actually push wheel, I'm hoping to transfer the weight to the magnet for a period of time. An even hand off, only the weight will be out of the system.

[jim_mich]

To view the animation you need to open it from the original post. Or click here. The magnets repel the weights upward.

[RRRRyan]

oh, it's not ccw, between the square roller and the rounded angle on the hinge it looks like an illusion. the magnet is still pushing the wrong way which is hard for me to get my brain to accept. If the horizontal component of the emag is CCW how can it rotate CW? I see there is some lever pivot action going but it still looks unnatural to me. The torque in the pivot of the hinge would pull it CCW. Hmmm...

Thanks for the help Jim.

[the eskimo quinn]

Time to go gentlemen.

the concept of the site was indeed correct, i believe bessler knew what i know and what the egytians knew, 1 tone with one gram.

all you need to know is now on the site.

I removed the magnetic wheel as it was too time consuming, but as I said i had six i could build all that will work, the one loaded now is fastest and is likley what bessler did.

your kids can play this in the kitchem with brooms and buckets.

Thank you for being believers that there are no fixed rules.

[ovyyus]

With the construction details now removed from the website in order to hide the fact that the concept is fatally flawed (and the author's lies about his previous success) all that's left is a bunch of senseless gobbeldy-gook. Shame on you for not coming clean.

[LustInBlack]

Sounds like he should have continued school at age 13 ...

[RRRRyan]

just in case anyone is still following the physics argument quinn has posed. I would like to give a try at explaining why it doesn't work. He cleverly hid something from us, and apparently himself. As a magnet approaches another magnet, lets use repelling poles instead of attracting for instance as quinn contends, it will go through a point where the magnet you hope to push upward is actually pushing your rotation backward. No big deal, normally if it pushes it backward on approach it will push it forward on exit, but quinn has configured his arms perfectly to absorb that energy and cause a movement of the mass to what appears to be a better position (height for width). Unfortunately, it has just eaten up and moved away from what would have been an acceleration in the right direction. A similar configuration at 1:00 would do everything backward but with the same net result. No biggy again, by moving the top mass at 1:00 you've added some forward torque, exactly the same torque you stole at 7:00 (and 1 if you pulled there). No net gain. It looks neat though. Maybe when the smoke clears from all of this someone who explains things better than I can should just put a section here on recognizing height for width in all of its sneaky forms.

I started to ramble about some observations I made today, but I'll save everyone the time. In the midst of those though I realized, 1. magnets aren't popular here, 2. it seems the majority of senior members are focusing on prime movers, 3. I am in a terrible minority because I still don't think the masses necessarily have to move. I would like to name my camp camp wanna-hock-a-loogie... aka the transfer-the-weight-out-of-the-system camp. Anyone already got dibs on that name?

[LustInBlack]

Meh, I'm in the "Virtual-Mass-Displacement-by-resonance" camp !