Has anyone ever done a systematic analysis of the MTs?

[ovyyus]

But energy conversion back then wasn't understood in those same terms, so he never mentions what the wheels' original source of energy was, even if he understood it in those same terms.

Bessler wouldn't dare mention the source of energy because that would reveal his secret. We know there was a prime mover therefore we know there was a source of energy. "For a single word could betray my wondrous achievement"

[eccentrically1]

Yes, he can only say what the source is not - the maid, for one. The closest he comes to mentioning a source is the weights' own motion. Which led jimmich, I believe it was, to think they derived motion from motion.

[Georg Künstler]

eccentrically1 wrote:

The closest he comes to mentioning a source is the weights' own motion

A weight is set in motion by gravity if it has a chance to do so.

Different accelerations of a weight will cause to feel a higher force on the ground.
Accelerating a weight with the help of gravity is easier than against it.

So different acceleration keeps the wheel turn around and create an asymmetric torque.

The wheel turns with the weights on its own motion.
This statement I see as true.

[eccentrically1]

Different accelerations of a weight will cause to feel a higher force on the ground.
Accelerating a weight with the help of gravity is easier than against it.

So different acceleration keeps the wheel turn around and create an asymmetric torque.

But, the insurmountable problem is finding and adding that extra *internal* acceleration to create that asymmetric torque. Gravity cancels out its contribution over one cycle. It neither helps nor hinders in that time.

Mass can't create extra motion from its own motion. That violates CoE. Jim and I debated over that quite a lot.

[Georg Künstler]

eccentrically1 wrote:

Mass can't create extra motion from its own motion.

That is true, 1 mass can't create extra motion from its own motion.

But 2 masses in combination can.
One mass is arranging the other and therefore one mass can lift the other if the masses have different speed.
Different speed requires before a different acceleration.
Then the wheel is out of balance.
The energy balance is not the same anymore.

Listen to Bessler, the weights act in pairs !!

[raj]

Spot on again, my dear Georg!

GPE is acts on vertical distance and torque acts on horizontal distance.

GPE of a weight does not necessarily turn a wheel. It is the horizontal distance of a weight from the center that provide torque to turn the wheel.

Keep it up Georg!

Raj

[ME]

Watch the geometry, dear raj!!

Torque induced by gravity acts at a horizontal distance. (the point of contact)
In both cases things are still acting vertical! (The tendency of motion)

But indeed, you need to keep it up to maintain torque.

[Georg Künstler]

ME wrote:

Torque induced by gravity acts at a horizontal distance. (the point of contact)

I write my opinion:
Thats right, but we can change the point of contact.
We shift 2 masses in that way, that the point of contact is moved.
Then we have torque.

Obviously this is not the case when the masses cannot move.
So you need a start high of the masses so that the force can be varied.
With bound masses you cannot variate the acceleration and therefore speed.

[Fletcher]

If Bessler's prime mover was a thing which converted a source of energy into work then his real secret wasn't defined by the thing, it was defined by the source.

Right, no argument there. The combustion engine's secret is fossil fuel to further that analogy.

But energy conversion back then wasn't understood in those same terms, so he never mentions what the wheels' original source of energy was, even if he understood it in those same terms. Leibniz termed it vis viva, living force.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy#History

But energy conversion back then wasn't understood in those same terms, so he never mentions what the wheels' original source of energy was, even if he understood it in those same terms.

Bessler wouldn't dare mention the source of energy because that would reveal his secret. We know there was a prime mover therefore we know there was a source of energy. "For a single word could betray my wondrous achievement"

A Prime Mover (today) is something that converts a known source of energy into mechanical work. Such as a windmill, a waterwheel, a tractor, an electric engine, a horse (and cart MT20). Nothing startling about that.

So as ECC1 alludes we have to look at Bessler's use of the words in his context of his time. He does use them so he clearly he meant something special was happening within his OOB wheels to accelerate them and maintain RPM, and do Work. i.e. an internal energy (source unidentified) was able to be harnessed via the Prime Mover, of which the totality deserved to be called by he and Karl a True Mechanical Perpetual Motion.

Some take that to mean that weights were lifted by some known (but undisclosed) source of energy via a mechanical Prime Mover. That's certainly one way to sum up the problem of how his wheels turned and performed. Take known energy and add a Prime Mover to convert that energy into mechanical work and lift weights in an 'false' OOB wheel. Some sources of known energy although continuous are ambient and very weak and not likely to replicate Besslers' wheels performances, even with todays technology. Some known energy sources such as chemical and fire need replenishing so their use calls into question Karls support of a True Mechanical PM.

But what if Besslers' OOB wheels were governed by Natures' Laws. And they just simply worked as described by him, and supported by Karl ? Everyone knows that all other 'false' OOB wheels have no vis viva, they are not self sustaining, they can not accelerate and hold RPM while doing Work. They need the addition of a known energy source (temporary or permanent) converted thru a Prime Mover mechanism to become a 'faux' Mechanical PMMs.

Yet Bessler tells us there is an additional Prime Mover apparatus hitched to 'false' OOB wheels. In MT15 he goes out of his way to show a superior imbalance representation where weights are very clearly lifted into position by something. The excess lifting of weights IMO is a further red herring designed to mislead. Bessler says continuous rotation occurs as long as the weights stay out of the center of gravity. They don't need superior lifting or addition of extra GPE from a press ganged energy source.

And if Besslers' wheels simply worked as described because they had a combination of ordinary OOB wheel and co-dependent Prime Mover apparatus, then both then and today Bessler would not be able to describe the source of energy for the Prime Mover as coming from gravity force. He wouldn't technically be able to describe the energy source at all. But he could say as long as the weights stayed out of the center of gravity, and this was the formal cause of his wheels vis viva. IMO.

ETA: so put yourself in Bessler's shoes. There is some mechanical structure additional to the 'false' OOB wheel that makes the whole into a True Mechanical PM wheel. Because the whole-of-wheel can't work without it he defines it as the Prime Mover. But it has no obvious and discernible energy source like others have. And it can't 'work' on its own without the secondary 'false' OOB wheel either. Bit of a quandary what to call the two co-dependent systems then without giving too much away ? Prime Mover is near enough for the layman !

[eccentrically1]

So as ECC1 alludes we have to look at Bessler's use of the words in his context of his time. He does use them so he clearly he meant something special was happening within his OOB wheels to accelerate them and maintain RPM, and do Work. i.e. an internal energy (source unidentified) was able to be harnessed via the Prime Mover, of which the totality deserved to be called by he and Karl a True Mechanical Perpetual Motion.

Any ideas what that internal source might be? It must have been mechanical, everyone seems to rule out a thermal source.

But what if Besslers' OOB wheels were governed by Natures' Laws. And they just simply worked as described by him, and supported by Karl ?

There's nothing in nature (on earth at least) that creates its own energy (either mechanical energy or thermal energy) while being completely isolated from its environment. Thermodynamics is the natural extension of the laws of motion.

[ovyyus]

Some take that to mean that weights were lifted by some known (but undisclosed) source of energy via a mechanical Prime Mover. That's certainly one way to sum up the problem of how his wheels turned and performed.

Why must the energy source be known? Why wouldn't Bessler be smart enough to discover an unknown thermal energy source when he's expected to be smart enough to discover an unknown gravity/inertia energy source?

[Fletcher]

"it runs according to 'preponderance', and turns everything else along with it; as long as its materials shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord" – AP pg 363

"all the wise ones were looking for the same principle (of 'excess weight') that I have described, and they sought it in things that were already familiar to them" – AP pg 366

"by all intelligent people, who, with true understanding, have sought the Mobile in a place no different from that in which I eventually found it" – AP pg 367

[agor95]

A good summary that we should keep in mind.

[Georg Künstler]

Bessler wrote:

it runs according to 'preponderance', and turns everything else along with it; as long as its materials shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord" – AP pg 363

In my opinion:
This sentence is true for the bi-directional wheel.
For the one directional wheel this sentence is wrong.

In the one directional wheel, the space on a lever is to short for 2 weights, so always one weight is falling.
Here the distance between two objects is configured in that way that you have only space for one weight.
The support basic is to short for both.
Then the falling weights oscillate.
Also here you need a carrier frame.

[ovyyus]

"it runs according to 'preponderance', and turns everything else along with it; as long as its materials shall endure, it will revolve of its own accord" – AP pg 363

"all the wise ones were looking for the same principle (of 'excess weight') that I have described, and they sought it in things that were already familiar to them" – AP pg 366

"by all intelligent people, who, with true understanding, have sought the Mobile in a place no different from that in which I eventually found it" – AP pg 367

First quote confirms that his wheel turns by overbalance and that the energy source does not require replenishment.

Second quote confirms that his wheel turns by overbalance, but that his principle utilises something that 'the wise ones' were not familiar with.

Third quote reaffirms that his wheel was similar to already familiar OOB wheel designs.

In these quotes Bessler describes the similarity between his wheel and classic OOB wheel designs. However, nowhere in these quotes does Bessler dare mention what 'the wise ones' were not familiar with. We know from comments in MT that the missing element is a prime mover (and its source of energy). Once again Bessler seems happy to discuss the weights inside his wheel (he even allowed them to be handled), but he never dares hint about how the weights were actually powered.