Has anyone ever done a systematic analysis of the MTs?

[silent]

.

[eccentrically1]

I think someone started to go through the mt’s like that, I don’t remember who or what the topic was called. It might have been fletcher? And he grouped the mt’s together that shared similar designs.
Basically the mt’s suffer from the same failure, they don’t have a prime mover (MT 15).They’re all just variations on OOB wheels without the prime mover structure/mechanism/process.

[silent]

.

[eccentrically1]

That’s right, and Bessler wants us to think if we combine the “right failures� together, then the piñata will break. You’d think someone would have seen PM in there somewhere by now, wouldn’t you? If it was that simple?

[Fletcher]

Nah .. wasn't me ECC1. Everyone including daxwc has had a pretty good go at some of them tho, in various threads.

Silent .. I for one have a hard copy of MT from John Collins. After a few years I started making margin notes, and now it is full of things and thoughts that were important at the time. I kinda like it that way.

N.B. recently got JC's electronic versions for quick searching, from his web site.

Whilst MT has a loose structure it does duck and dive around with what I call replacement or place holder pics, IMO.

You can read what Bessler said about his unpublished book to be below.

Opening quote from Bessler's MT published by John Collins (underlining and bolding mine).

"Further demonstrations regarding the possibility and impossibility of perpetual motion.

N.B. 1st May, 1733. Due to the arrest, I burned or hid all the woodcuts that prove the possibility. However, I have left all demonstrations and experiments since it would be difficult for anybody to see or learn anything about a perpetual motion from them or to decide whether there was any truth in them because no illustration by itself contains a description of the motion; however, taking various illustrations together and combining them with a discerning mind, it will indeed be possible to look for a movement and, finally to find one in them'."

I don't think it is as easy as combining a couple of "failures" from a bunch of failures (no disrespect to ECC1 there).

Bessler says there is a description of the motion to be found, and a movement to be found. Clearly he felt they were different enough to mention them separately, so they must mean slightly different things, or to be combined into his True Mechanical PM with Prime Mover ;7)

Or perhaps searching for a Motion eventually begats a Movement !

[silent]

.

[eccentrically1]

. I don't think it is as easy as combining a couple of "failures" from a bunch of failures (no disrespect to ECC1 there)

But that’s exactly what he says in the quote you mentioned!

owever, taking various illustrations together and combining them with a discerning mind, it will indeed be possible to look for a movement and, finally to find one in them'."

??

[ovyyus]

MT001-2 opening statement (prior to No.1 description)

'The first prints using lampblack'; clear problems in the demonstrations and experiments, what was seen among various friends.

Almost everyone who has sought to invent a perpetual motion machine has considered bringing about motion through spheres and thereby has hit upon the idea that through straight lines nothing would be gained for their purpose. Therefore, departures from the structure are present, as the first figure shows. A beginning student of mechanics can judge that with such things [departures?] assumed nothing at all would be effected.

---------

Bessler says there is a description of the motion to be found, and a movement to be found.

I think Bessler used "motion" and "movement" as shorthand for 'perpetual motion'.

"However, taking various illustrations together and combining them with a discerning mind, it will indeed be possible to look for a movement and, finally to find one in them'."

Bessler's fundamental requirement of a "discerning mind" in order to put the pieces together seems like just another tease. Bessler's discerning mind already knew the answer and I'm sure he saw pieces of his wheel scattered throughout MT.

The entire human race is either severely mentally retarded and Bessler was a genius, or Bessler was a fraud and we are still retarded in our thinking for even trying to figure out the wheel.

There's a third option. Nothing is ever either/or.

[Fletcher]

Then all of a sudden we get to Bessler's wheel and the movement is so specific and so precise so as to be unique to the PPM and yet no one, not even the world's top mechanics and scientists can figure it out. Yet here we have a guy who in the 1700s - before modern advances in machinery and engines even came into existence - that build not just one, but 4 and maybe more wheels that ran and the largest having enough power to lift a few bricks.

The entire human race is either severely mentally retarded and Bessler was a genius, or Bessler was a fraud and we are still retarded in our thinking for even trying to figure out the wheel.

silent

.. the design has, in fact, progressed to the point where there is nothing supercritical about the exact disposition of the weights - an ounce more or less, here or there, makes not a scrap of difference to the Wheel, which will hold its course serenely without 'turning a hair' – AP pg 316

When an answer is not immediately obvious to a question it is human nature to default to more and more complex alternatives. I can't see the answer so it must be a more complex solution that I am searching for, not a more simple one, else I would have already thought of it, eh ! Perhaps the answer is actually simple, we just are looking in an apple orchard for an orange ?

[eccentrically1]

Bessler's fundamental requirement of a "discerning mind" in order to put the pieces together seems like just another tease. Bessler's discerning mind already knew the answer and I'm sure he saw pieces of his wheel scattered throughout MT.

Yes, that's what I meant when I said he wants us to think if we combine the right "failures" together we'll find a motion/movement. But then in MT 15, we get

"

No. 15 This ratchet-wheel derives from the previous model, except that the tensions are somewhat longer and have an additional special weight at the external ends. From this drawing alone, however, nothing of the prime mover's source can be seen or deduced although the figure shows the superior weight.'

As we know, any figure can be drawn to show superior weight. When he says 'anyone who see fit can build this on an axle' he's teasing again because he knows his drawings don't reflect what happens after it's built.

That's the answer his discerning mind already knew - the prime mover.
So a prime mover has to be an additional, external force traced to a transfer of a form of energy that is either thermal or mechanical. Those are our choices apart from collusion in fraud.

I think a great thread would be to take one MT, slice and dice Bessler's commentary, and then start taking notes over the best ideas the brain trust can put forth.

I'll get you started:

MT1-27 are all basic overbalanced wheels. Same cart, same horse.
MT28 doesn't have any internal weights, but it is a leverage type design.

[sleepy]

Hey silent,
I did my first build in 1991 and didn't think I had any more ideas.But I've since done about 300 more builds ( my basement has barely room to walk ) and every time I think I'm out of ideas, here comes another one. If you look up specific MT's you will find that this forum has probably dissected it at some point. The more builds you do and the more failures you have, the faster you'll be able to spot a non-runner without building it. What other cause would you give your time to? I personally have no other avenue that would allow me to change the world from my basement.

[Georg Künstler]

eccentrically1 wrote:

So a prime mover has to be an additional, external force traced to a transfer of a form of energy that is either thermal or mechanical. Those are our choices apart from collusion in fraud.

A prime mover has to be an additional, internal or external force traced to a transfer of a form of energy that is mechanical.
Because we are dealing with Bessler and not with a Diesel engine.
The energy for the start purely mechanical. m*g*h

In my opinion we have for the different types of the Bessler wheels also two types of the prime mover.

1. the self starting wheel has a prime mover in that way, that you set the complete internal mechanism under stress by gravity.
Internal force.

2. in the bi-directional wheel the hand of Bessler was the prime mover.
External force.
He turned the wheel out of position, so that the internal mechanism tilt over.

[ME]

Has anyone ever done a systematic analysis of all the MTs?
...
Just throwing out some thoughts to see if we can work together to try and analyze the failures of each MT.

Dave Roberts attempted something similar a few years ago... not really a success I think.

To aid future Bessler enthusiasts who endeavor to solve this puzzle, if enough discussion follows (and please, keep it as technical as possible), lets try to analyze each MT Drawing.

MT 001 - this is a basic wheel and yes I built a similar wheel many years ago with no success. It obviously cannot work because more weight is being lifted on the ascending side than on trying to impart rotation on the descending side.

If you find a way to lift the two weights at the bottom straight up, you have rotation.

How many others have tried to build this or similar?

Am I wasting time trying to start a discussion on the MT's?

Topic MT001:
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6410

The most successful topic from the series: MT013
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6421


I guess we all have our own priorities, points of interests, conclusions...
Maybe best to look at the MT's on your own and ask specific questions when you find something.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/wiki/index. ... T#Drawings

Eventually there are so many ways to look at it, you can always try to summarize it, or pattern-match it, in your own way.
Note that it would also take you almost 3 years to go over each MT once a week, hence my advice is to find your own way of compressing the information to your own liking.

This is one of my attempts from a while back.

Topic: Bessler's wild Goose chase
http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6282

[raj]

Full marks for Georg!!!
Spot on for prime movers.

Prime mover can be nothing but the one that moves FIRST.

Raj

[eccentrically1]

A prime mover has to be an additional, internal or external force traced to a transfer of a form of energy that is mechanical.

No, sorry, a prime mover would have to be external to the wheel and it could have been thermal as well as mechanical. Think of it as an energy transfer machine. A solely internal prime mover violates CoE.

1. the self starting wheel has a prime mover in that way, that you set the complete internal mechanism under stress by gravity.
Internal force.

The operative word in your prime mover is "you". You set the the weights under stress by gravity. The weights didn't jump onto the wheel by themselves. They are given GPE by an external form of energy - you. Gravity (an internal and external force btw) gives it back by self starting the wheel.

2. in the bi-directional wheel the hand of Bessler was the prime mover.
External force.
He turned the wheel out of position, so that the internal mechanism tilt over.

He was the self starter for the bi-directional wheel but not the prime mover. He didn't stand there and keep pushing it by hand.