Own up please.

[murilo]

One of the problems with Bessler wheels and other such contraptions is that as you grow older, you realize that they are rather similar to your private parts in that although you still have a lot of ideas, you know they're not going to work.

Nic,
even if you are talking for yourself and indirectly looking for help, I have indeed the solution!
For the while, let's call it 'avalancheviagra'!
(if you are not a lost case, for sure!)
Take care!
M

[jim_mich]

he said, there is a motion to be found in his Maschinen Tractate. And from what I have observed, everyone seems to ignore his drawings as they believe there is nothing there despite what Bessler said.

Your Bessler quote is not quite correct.

Due to the arrest, I burned and buried all papers 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.

So one must take various illustrations and combine them so as to produce the movement that causes perpetual motion. The motion is not found in a single illustration. It is found by combining them. This is much like tinker-toys or an erector set. All of the elemental structural components are available, but they must be assembled correctly to produce a working wheel.

All of Bessler's illustrations are unworkable. That is the point that Bessler made. That is why we seem to ignore them. But because they include most any imaginable wheel, they also contain most any imaginable movement of weights. They do not contain the movement that produces perpetual motion. But Bessler stated that such a movement can be produced if you combine elements from different illustrations. So we don't ignore his illustrations, but we know that none of them work as drawn.

[getterdone]

Right again Jim, it's important to know the MT's and learn from them, but the answer isn't there. Bessler gave us just enough clues to piss a guy off. I've always tough that the movement would be discovered will tinkering, and testing. The sharing of ideas is a good way to get us there also.

James, take a good look at some of the stuff pathfinder has built. He doesn't have a shop either. Where there's a will, there's a way. Some other members have built impressive wheels using Meccano parts. I'm certain if you put your mind to it, you'll figure out a way to test your theories

Good Luck

[James_Arne]

he said, there is a motion to be found in his Maschinen Tractate. And from what I have observed, everyone seems to ignore his drawings as they believe there is nothing there despite what Bessler said.

Your Bessler quote is not quite correct.

Due to the arrest, I burned and buried all papers 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.

So one must take various illustrations and combine them so as to produce the movement that causes perpetual motion. The motion is not found in a single illustration. It is found by combining them. This is much like tinker-toys or an erector set. All of the elemental structural components are available, but they must be assembled correctly to produce a working wheel.

All of Bessler's illustrations are unworkable. That is the point that Bessler made. That is why we seem to ignore them. But because they include most any imaginable wheel, they also contain most any imaginable movement of weights. They do not contain the movement that produces perpetual motion. But Bessler stated that such a movement can be produced if you combine elements from different illustrations. So we don't ignore his illustrations, but we know that none of them work as drawn.

Jim_Mich,
Not to disagree with you, but for Bessler I do need to. You see. if the motion is not found in his drawings, then waht reason is there to believe his claims ?
It is not an easy thing to convey to people and a working wheel might further prove Bessler was a fraud when in fact, his claims are correct.
I have had people ridicule me for thinking I suddenly realized something. This is not the case. As I mentioned, it took me several months of considering this before I realized I had found his motion.
@Nic and Jim, the following illustrations might help you and everybody else to understand mechanical engineering and fluid dynamics.
With mechanical engineering, if a lever has a weight 1 meter from it's fulcrum and weighs 1 kg, it can lift 1 kg 1 meter of the weight on the lever drops one meter. If a shorter lever (20 cm's) is used to apply force, then the difference between 1 meter and 20 cm's is 80 cm's which gives a ratio of 4 to 1.
This means that a 1 kg weight at 1 meter could apply 4 kg's of pressure lifting 1kg of fluid 4 meters, not 1 meter that mechanical engineering allows.
With fluids, the lever needs 1/4 the motion to create 4 times the force and or movement. I firmly believe this is something Bessler knew and is important in knowing to credit him with his invention.
The difficult part would be explaining how athresher's movement was used. It goes to a somewhat advanced understanding of using leverage and gears.
It's almost like saying black holes will lead to stars. Of course, if you were familiar with Max Planck's work in heavy metals, you could understand the parallel.

"sighs"

[jim_mich]

@Nic and Jim, the following illustrations might help you and everybody else to understand mechanical engineering and fluid dynamics.

That is very condesending of you.

If a shorter lever (20 cm's) is used to apply force, then the difference between 1 meter and 20 cm's is 80 cm's which gives a ratio of 4 to 1.

No, a leveraged force of 1 meter verses 20 cm is ratio of 5 to 1. You donn't even know simple mechanics.

This means that a 1 kg weight at 1 meter could apply 4 kg's of pressure lifting 1kg of fluid 4 meters, not 1 meter that mechanical engineering allows.
With fluids, the lever needs 1/4 the motion to create 4 times the force and or movement.

You are full of crap and don't know what you are talking about. Or you don't know how to express your thoughts in a clear and concise manner. Simply stated, You are confusing pressure with weight-mass.

Assuming you have a 4:1 lever ratio, (contrary to your 1 meter vs 20 cm example) you can apply 1 kg of pressure and produce 4 kg of leveraged pressure, but the piston travel will be only 1/4 the distance. Thus you will be able to lift 4 kg to 1/4 the height. Or, if the leverage ratio is reversed you can lift 1/4 kg to a height of 4 meter.

Respectfully,

PS, I really wish you newbie guys would quit insulting my intelligence.

[Tarsier79]

Jim, James is not a newbie, he just acts like one. He has been banned from this discussion board at least once.

[James_Arne]

Kaine,
It is for this idea that I was banned, not for my conduct.
As your friend AB Hammer has told me, only he can make me credible.
This is why he was banned from overunity dot com, for his persistent attacks on me which you support.
The realitys, was Bessler smart enough to build a wheel ?
With your friend, if he gets credit for my work, he can retire and support his family quite well.
The reality is, he wants a free ride, the same reason why my family kept me from meeting some one. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free, right ?
As for jim-Mich, I am being patient. You or others have no idea worth trying that you wish to credit to Bessler. Myself, I am alone in this aspect.
The reality is, with fluid dynamics, water can be pumped to 4 times the height as allowed for by mechanical engineering. It requires 1/4 the motion to accomplish the same amount of work. This is what allows for over unity.
And it is not something realized in post or 2 but over many months. After all, how quickly can you learn ? That is what you are asking right now. If you know it or can learn it, it will be in your next post.
And you as did AB Hammer's friend miss the point of Max Planck's work and his quote that AB Hammer used.
Was it before or after he realized his constant ? Einstein, Schroedinger and
Neils Bohr never would have realized their work with out it.
And since you guys are so much smarter than me, clue me in on what I am posting.
The reality is you can't and Bessler did build a working wheel which you dispute based on your lack of engineering schooling and experience.

nobody that matters to no one

edited to run spell check

[James_Arne]

For those who don't like me, in the next month or so, I will have surgery that will eventually allow me to return to work.
If you are as smart as you say you are, wait until next year when I am not working from a very bad position.

[James_Arne]

Jim, James is not a newbie, he just acts like one. He has been banned from this discussion board at least once.

Here is a quote for you Kaine,
.. NB. 1st May, 1733. Due to the arrest, I burned and buried all papers 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.

Orffyreus >>

This, what does it mean ? >> 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 <<

Orpheus is who made the lyre of Hermes sing, something I am sure you know. Hermes invented the lyre, Orpheus made it sing.
What is missed is that Bessler made his wheel sing when he wrote the Poetica Apologia. Words to music or words to motion in Bessler's case.
It seems he was Orpheus as the one who makes his wheel know wheel be Hermes, the inventor even though he is not. Something to be lived with if you like Bessler and history.

Signed
nobody

edited to add;
With Planck, his constant allowed for Einstein's Thoery of relativity and his constant might be the universal constant that Einstein looked for but never found.
Just sayin' being ignorant and all.

[rasselasss]

"i told you so"is reckoned to be the four most used words of critics in the english language,so,we should be pleased we provide amusement for the 20% of those that voted......but makes me wonder,why are they here at all ?

[Tarsier79]

Probably because it is possible to believe in a Perpetuum Mobile without believing in Perpetual Motion.

[murilo]

"i told you so"is reckoned to be the four most used words of critics in the english language,so,we should be pleased we provide amusement for the 20% of those that voted......but makes me wonder,why are they here at all ?

Be sure... some are here just to quit our hard on... 8(

[Furcurequs]

I've still not voted in your poll.

...for no matter how promising I believe my ideas to be, I wouldn't feel comfortable in claiming I've achieved the goal until I've actually seen something unmistakably working in front of my own eyes.

If something of mine were to ultimately work, however, the date of the conception of the invention could be years (if not even decades) ago.

In the U.S. where the patent system is still first-to-invent rather than first-to-file - at least for the next 7 months or so - I would still, though, have a pretty hard time in claiming such an early date of invention.

...for due to my health problems and the numerous projects of mine that are for all practical purposes on hold, I would have a very hard time showing that I have worked diligently to reduce any of my previous inventive ideas to practice, I would think.

http://patents101.com/2009/03/date-of-i ... to-invent/

Anyway, after March 16 of next year, I guess that really won't matter much.

...not to mention that for our quest a working model would pretty much have to be demonstrated, anyway.

Dwayne

[nicbordeaux]

Good work getterdone,
At least there are some people grounded enough to prove their theory before claiming victory and supreme knowledge. There will be no wheel untill someone proves a theory that gains energy, or finds a way to use up available heat energy from ambient temperature. If aliens give you the method, all the better;)

If you are using ambient temp you might as well be using wind. Just store up the energy from windy days to keep your wheel with folded down sails turning when there is no breeze.

[bobriddle]

>> If you are using ambient temp you might as well be using wind <<

guess it depends on need.
http://www.worthpoint.com/blog-entry/le ... tual-clock