BesslerWheel.com

Sorry Chris. I still do not see any key to perpetual motion here.

While there is radial movement of the red weight, There is also equivalent radial movement of the COM of the other 2 weights equal to your extending weight. That is why There is balance, but there is no imbalance in this design ...

Open your eyes and look. I don't use gravity to separate the magnets; the magnets aren't touching, and they naturally separate on the lower right side

Magnets don't have to touch to need separating. Are they in the magnetic field or not? Naturally separate ....🤣

I think someone needs to buy ...

Chris, AFAIK, none of the V-gate motors work. Magnets depleting has nothing to do with it.


Here, the magnets are simply used to counterbalance the weights and create an imbalance in the wheel. The wheel will be set in motion by gravity, and the magnets will create this imbalance.

Sigh..... I ...

Magnetism and gravity have a surprising amount in common. Magnetism is always drawn wrong IMO, but you can see why they draw it that way. It takes the same energy to go up the hill as you get from going down. This is true for both gravity and magnetism. For magnetism, we think that sliding vs ...

Chris, what did you model your pendulum in? Perhaps you could provide a more technical drawing or file so that it can be modelled in WM?

You can if you just extend one side of the dynamic lever, which induces an Elephant reduced radial position, which creates an under balance force, thus turning the other plane's still balanced state.

Nothing would make me happier than if your build proves this. Unfortunately, I do not believe ...

And the problem is if the elephant is balanced by the mouse, the elephant can't enact its weight on the wheel.

Hi P.

How does the liquid get to the 7:30 position? ;)

I will certainly be shoot down for this, but I unequivocally state that I believe that I have found the answer, and this is not some delusional statement.

Hi Chris.. It is Kaine, not DAX, but that is neither here nor there. We both worked with you briefly in the distant past. IMO a statement like ...

This arrangement has no tappable MA,

Sorry, not sure what MA is. Mass Advantage? The COM is still at the axle, so it doesn't matter where the 5kg mass is, it isn't going to help rotation.

I can't find it, but I saw somewhere you said When you said you had unequivocally found the solution. Do you ...

.... So the green weights weigh 5 x the red weight? What am I missing here?

Hi Chris, why do you hide the rest of the mechanism? You have already shown your "dynamic balancing".

While I do not see the need for the agression, I do agree with THX. As far as I can see, if you account for the counterweights and COM, you have as much weight moving down as up. This doesn't match ...

As the inertia increases with radial increase, the bar will slow. Will the OB be enough to speed it up more than what is lost in that phase?

I remember early in my journey using a variant of the Chebyshev linkage on its side to make a perfect OB shape.

The priblem with balancing on any plane, if it is balanced, it is balanced, around the axle or around any point. You can only achieve unbalance with unbalance....that seems like a stupid thing to say.