Posted by Darren (208.143.232.66) on May 28, 2003 at 12:25:24:
In Reply to: Re: Note to JC : To Be or Not To Be - What was the Question ? posted by John Collins on May 28, 2003 at 00:04:46:
: As you know Fletcher, I have always believed that the two-way wheels contained mirror image mechansism, each designed to turn the wheel in a particular direction. I tested this hypothesis with a Savonius windmill, mounting two of them on a single axis. When separated each turned in its correct direction. But when the two separate windmills were connected to each other, the whole thing remained stationary. However a gentle push resulted in a slow movement in the direction of the push at about half the speed of the disconnected mills. This worked for both directions. Although a Savonius windmill works by wind power, both wind and gravity act like conservative forces at certain times and therefore I can assume similar reactions. That is why Bessler's wheel coud turn in either direction, in my opinion.
IMHO (the H means humble :-) ... it is also possible to build a *single* mechanism that will turn in both directions. Mirror mechanism may certainly work, but are not necessary.
: The records say that the two-way wheels stopped immediately. the hand was removed when applying a light push. I suspect that it was ot so mucha light push as a short push.
Yes, I agree with that.
: The records also say that as soon as weight was heard to fall the machine began to gather speed - to accelerate.
That also makes perfect sense.
: : It seems to me that JB’s one-way wheel (coob) being tied down & then released throws a contradictory spanner in the works when I try to reconcile possible mechanisms that translate into two-way wheels.
Build a uni-directional wheel that *works* and once you do that you'll find the "principle" that allows OU to happen... and then you'll be see how it will fit into a bi-directional wheel very simply.
: : Why do the two-way wheels need a threshold level of activation energy (or momentum) to get them & keep them accelerating?
If you had a see saw with one side chopped off it would immediately drop on the heavy side, no? But it you have a normal see saw you have to bump one side or the other to get that side to drop down... right? The uni-directional wheel is constantly unbalanced... the bi-directional wheel needs a turn in one direction or the other to know which side it should unbalance on.
: : If the push was too small the wheel stopped still, BUT, did it rock back & forth or stop dead in a smooth way. i.e. if it rocked was it moving back & forth between +ve & -ve torque areas & settling at the neutral area? Can you or anybody else shed any light or opinion here?
Inside the wheel there are "trigger points" where things move around, become unbalanced... if you don't push far enough to pass a trigger point then you will rock back and forth... if you push enough to get past the trigger point then you'll be unbalanced, and that unbalance is large enough to get you past the *next* trigger point... and so on.
: : I was hoping that other bdb members would put their money where their mouths were so to speak & at least give some logical reasoning to back up their view on position of CoG etc especially if they held a different view. I believe that only clear & focused thinking & debate will solve this. i.e. seeing an obscure pattern in the observations & testimony & then reasoning why it had occurred – at least that’s how I’d prefer to attempt to solve it rather than relying on the scattergun approach. Sometimes you have to know ‘what question to ask’!
Absolutely.
: : Otherwise we can all take a holiday until the good-ol 4th July ;-)
Hmmm I wonder if that part was meant for me :-)
Darren