Scotland revisited

[Senax]

Fletcher, I went back to your pendulum experiment. Both pends. are the same length, so the period has to be the same for both. Since the lower one swings farther, and the time is the same, it has to be moving faster. It's a great demonstration for the old question-----------------Sam

PS I hate to admit it, but, I think you are right about pendulums not working; or, if there is a way, I don't know how to do it.

You are not alone Sam .. we have all tried straight pendulums, and variations of them, with no success. We often keep going back to them in one guise or another, with the same stubborn result - they stand still - or they can't be lifted high enough to reset etc,, and then they stand still.

I don't like being the bearer of bad tidings but there it is .. I try to not hide from it and I for one certainly can't escape that reality (not that I haven't tried, many times).

What I can offer is something that helped me mentally re-frame the problem we all face, so I could better manage expectations and not be doomed to repeat past mistakes i.e. analyze, learn, and move on.

And it is this ..

ALL Out-Of-Balance (OOB) devices are just different ways of making pendulums (fancy tho they may be) .. whether they be single mechs or multiple mechs. Once given some lateral travel further from the axle they have positive torque and accelerate and rotate until the wheels CoG is below the axle (position of least GPE), then their inertia carries them on thru the balance point and upwards gaining GPE. They have negative torque after passing thru the PQ point (CoG beneath the axle) because whilst they have inertia they also have 'g' decelerating them in equal measure to what was given.

IOW's we can move objects sideways and create torque and rotation, but we always have to lift them vertically upwards to be reset closer to the axle again to have repeat conditions. And at best it is ZERO SUM GAME. No asymmetric torque, no NET positive directional force, to continue rotation. Geometry can not be fooled. Law of Levers can not be fooled.

This inescapable realization lead me to some conclusions ..

1. JB's wheels did have OOB similarities, I would even say they were mainly OOB wheels (of various formats). The Driver Motive Force that gave imbalance conditions.

2. JB had something mechanical inside that was activated and its action did provide the NET positive directional force to allow an ordinary OOB wheel to reset etc. And this was the magical device (not really - just unusual mechanics) that turned his OOB non-runners into "runners". IOW's his non-runner fancy pendulums into "runners".

.................

FWIW .. You may not remember but I did build sims and a mock-up of a Ramelli wheel with short levers offset to one side at 45 degs upslope (all facing same direction and same slope). Around them (the roller carrier) I hung a looped chain to act as the Driver. The Ramelli had no torque (couldn't have any torque). The chain was offset to the side of the axle. It did rotate a little but the chain would still find its position of least GPE and settle at this PQ point. Just like any ordinary OOB wheel or fancy pendulum arrangements that rely ONLY on OOB. It visually was about the perfect OOB arrangement with chain continually out to the side - it couldn't reset - that was the clincher moment for me for 'naked' OOB "pendulums".

Anyways good luck to you all the same !

..............

I'm off in the next week or two to FIji to do some R & M etc, getting organized now. After 3 years away. Departure was delayed due to a small op 2 wks ago and now its school holidays so having trouble re-booking and getting my connector flights. My house there is a tech free zone and I don't have a smart phone so will be MIA for a month or two. Best of luck to everybody. What we do have going for us as a group is resilience and perseverance in spades. And we know we need it lol.

I'm glad you drew attention to the pendulum aspect of the two car demonstration, Fletcher.
My interest in it was revived by my interest in Cold Fusion and the analogy between Gravitational Field potential and Electric Field potential.

When a chemical process drops down an electrical potential well or canyon on the surface of a catalyst the reaction is speeded up relative to material traveling over the surface. Returning to the surface the electric potential is paid back so the catalyst is unchanged.
Now a 360° pendulum shows the same effect.
The lower half is the fast low road car and the upper half is to the slow high road car.
The important point is that gravitational potential is borrowed but returned. Gravity doesn't need to be used up (one of the frequent criticisms of BesslerWheel research).
It is simply acting as a catalyst.

[agor95]

You are not alone Sam .. we have all tried straight pendulums, and variations of them, with no success.

For that to be true you would need to interview all the current and past members.
Also have a list of all possible pendulum configurations showing no success.

Based on my Elimination posts; We have built or designed many combinational pendulums of straight, curved, fixed or flexible.

Have we done this in a systematic and collaborative way?

Is there are complete set of results present on this site?

Do aliens exist?

Am I getting copyright money for the use of '?' ?

These are the unknowns that we assume we know.

Regards

[Sam Peppiatt]

argo, arog, agor, I'll get it right yet. No, I think Fletcher is right. Levers can't work or pendulums. But maybe some thing else would. Maybe your big internal roller, the one with the one to one gear ratio. Calling it a zero sum game, is a mistake, I think---------------------------------------Sam

[Sam Peppiatt]

senax, I'm a dunce, sorry---------------------Sam

[agor95]

Well Sam

There is a problem for striking out levers and pendulums we are striking out a lot of the devices here.

Just a notion; A pendulum is looked on as a mass on the end of a rod with a small pivot connected to a stand.

But really the pivot point has the mass of the Earth connected to it. So which end has the greater mass?

P.S. try 'ag or 95'

Regards

[Fletcher]

argo, arog, agor, I'll get it right yet. No, I think Fletcher is right. Levers can't work or pendulums.

But maybe some thing else would. Maybe your big internal roller, the one with the one to one gear ratio.

Calling it a zero sum game, is a mistake, I think---------------------------------------Sam

@agor .. I was simply saying that in my strong opinion ALL OOB (Out Of Balance) Wheels, whether composed of single or multiple levers with weights, "straight" (=pure/simple) pendulums, or complex pendulums (like your recently posted YT vid of Julius Sumner Miller) boil down to just a complex pendulum. A pendulum nonetheless. And as Julius Sumner Miller shows they can all be expressed by quantitative and known mathematical expressions which accurately predict their behaviour. There appear to be NO exceptions or abnormal behaviour that can't be explained about ANY pendulums, whether simple or complex.

So my conclusion is that no abnormal behaviour can be observed with ANY Strictly OOB wheel format. They will ALL be conservative with NO asymmetric torque or torque bias produced from ANY arrangement (of pendulums and lever-weights per se, with or without inter mech connections etc).

Having said that Sam is right - the evidence for B's. wheels is overwhelming imo. Sam said .. "maybe some thing else would."

Clearly something else did produce a torque bias (a positive directional force) to accelerate the (OOB) wheel to operating speed and maintain it (and do Work when required). The hunt is on for this physical anomaly. In another thread thx4 is investigating escapements (it's been suggested from time to time), suggested to him from analyzing the Toy's Page "tilting" (oscillating) action. He thinks it might be a sophisticated clockwork mechanism. And if so would be sub-OU needing energy input etc but perhaps could run for a long time.

My opinion is that it is true OU, not needing periodic rewinding or energy input to top up, once revolving of its own accord. It just simply must turn and continue to turn until it breaks or parts wear out.

Sam also said .. "Calling it a zero sum game, is a mistake, I think." To qualify what I said. The straight (pure/simple) OOB Wheel is ZERO SUM GAME with no energy dissipative losses considered. Sub-OU when ordinary system losses are accounted for.

IMO the physical Prime Mover is the Game Changer that makes the two combined elements (OOB system + Prime Mover), artfully brought together, true OU. And therefore it is no longer a ZERO SUM GAME for the combination, and can never be until it stops revolving.

Note .. an OOB system on its own is what we always produce and they are always conservative and zero sum games, imo.

Hope that clears it up where I stand.

[agor95]

I was simply saying that in my strong opinion ...

To simplify your strong opinion.

All Out Of Balance devices are sub-OU and they need a Prime Mover.

The Prime Mover is what we seek.

My Conclusion

The abnormal behaviour we seek needs to be an interaction between two components the OOB + The Prime Mover.
That is agreed with most members.

What I am thinking is both these components are sub-OU individually.

However their interaction with acceleration of gravity causes their center of mass to be at different locations to a axis of rotation.

The main interaction of the sub-components is with the above acceleration.

There is limited interaction between the two and that interaction required the positive use of their inertia one against the other.

Regards

[Fletcher]

Tick .. Correctamundo !!!

[agor95]

Now we are reaching for abnormal behaviour.

It does not have to be in the Prime Mover.
So using hard structures could be possible.

We need this difference in COM location.

However the difference could be temporary and for that a spring delay could be implemented.

Other connections could be temporary.
For examples pegs that appear in and out.

Ropes allow components to be pulled some distance from their source.

In all this the masses involved need to follow natural paths [curves]. So their motions conserve their speed and not cancel it out.

P.S. The pegs above are on an inclined plain in relation to the wheel. Their paths are curved and the intersection with the wheel is linear as they both rotation at the same rate.

Conclusion

abnormal behaviour is when an object does something that is not normal. In this case in relation to it's path within a wheel.

Regards

[Senax]

You are not alone Sam .. we have all tried straight pendulums, and variations of them, with no success.

Senax did NOT write that.

In fact the third derivative energy (Precession Energy) is the key to Bessler's success.
Bessler himself realised this when he referred to "swinging". The swinging must only be in one direction else the reverse swing cancels out the effect. The precession couple in the horizontal plane is resisted by the ground reaction via the axle, and ground torque is transmitted back to the wheel thereby turning it.

The situation in similar but not the same as the way that a Ventmobile can drive directly into the wind.
A bit like jujitsu really.

[agor95]

Ha you are correct nested quotes on 26th July.

It was Fletcher that typed those word of reassurance.

It must have got eye strain ;)

Regards

[agor95]

In fact the third derivative energy (Precession Energy) is the key to Bessler's success.

Bessler himself realised this when he referred to "swinging".

The swinging must only be in one direction else the reverse swing cancels out the effect.

The precession couple in the horizontal plane is resisted by the ground reaction via the axle, and ground torque is transmitted back to the wheel thereby turning it.
...

Humm implementing a gyro's precession within a thin rotating wheel (drum) is hard to imagine. Add on the horizontal plane aspect; even more so.

Put there was a spring within the wheel that could be used for a precession effect to key off. However this is all conservative effects.

Have you got any drawings or calculations etc?

Regards

[Senax]

In fact the third derivative energy (Precession Energy) is the key to Bessler's success.

Bessler himself realised this when he referred to "swinging".

The swinging must only be in one direction else the reverse swing cancels out the effect.

The precession couple in the horizontal plane is resisted by the ground reaction via the axle, and ground torque is transmitted back to the wheel thereby turning it.
...

Humm implementing a gyro's precession within a thin rotating wheel (drum) is hard to imagine. Add on the horizontal plane aspect; even more so.

Put there was a spring within the wheel that could be used for a precession effect to key off. However this is all conservative effects.

Have you got any drawings or calculations etc?

Regards

I agree - which is probably why, even though I realised that a 360° pendulum generated 3rd derivative energy I didn't think of it in terms of precession, i.e. a force at right angles to the vertical plane of the wheel (though I seem to remember ME did).

What gave it to me is the video of Laithwaite raising his heavy gyro. The way he was standing suggested he was transmitting a torque to the floor.

We know from the multi-pendulum .gif that Eric's wheel must contain hidden strain energy. Clearly this is being released to assist his raising the offset gyro above his head.

I well remember reading Warnock's Chapter 13 on Thick cylinders and thinking;
"No thanks. That's somewhere I don't want to go."

Since the PTB missed something as simple as the equations of state for water they are very unlikely to ever have analysed the behaviour of the offset gyro adequately.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 6b#p161386

I often wonder about Sjack disappearing without trace.

[agor95]

I remember the multi-pendulum well. It is a good way to show how a gyro tries to conserve momentum.

However moving onto that simple example to the gyro lifting is more complex.

When you prevent precession the gyro rotates up.

If there is a long axle projected to the holder.

Then you get precession and the stopping of that with the person creating counter torque with the ground.
Well the gyro lifts up. The person is using all their body not just the lower arm and hand; which is a weak area.

All this above requires two axis of rotation.

However I can see you are looking at a slight distortion of the masses in the wheel using the depth of the bessler wheel.

I will need to check the multi-pendulum again for the effect you see requires the 1. rotate vertically like any wheel,
2. pivot around a vertical axis.

Think of turning on a bicycle. The front wheel used the multi-pendulum effect to lean into the turn.

P.S. Besslers wheel only had one documented axis of rotation.

Regards

[agor95]

I have a notion that B. wheel could have an outer wheel as seen rotating vertically on it's axle.

Then the masses were rotating around the same axle, but at a slight angle.

So the masses moved from the front to the back during one rotation; within the available depth of the wheel.

As the wheel increases it's rate of rotation then the inertial mass [momentum] also increases.

Could a deflection in the masses front to back path be used to increase the outer wheels rotation?

Regards