If you're failing at PM, we're in good company

[ArchCalc]

See attached.pdf. Mostly in English. Some parts repeat.
I especially was excited to read of their recognition of savants back in those days.

[eccentrically1]

It’s nice to be able to read those letters in their entirety, thanks Arch.
I’ve always wondered what Newton might have had to say about it after he read that.

[Robinhood46]

Quote from text;
"such a machine deserves, so it seems to me, some
clog, even if it does not satisfy all that the Inventor promises. If it is perpetual motion, the author well
deserves the reward he is asking for: if it is not, the public can discover a beautiful invention, without those
who would have promised the reward being able to commit themselves to anything; the Inventor having
never required more than a conditional promise."


This is something i have difficulty getting my head around.
It makes me think of spoiled little brats who refuse to acknowledge anything other than PM is impossible.
Even today, anyone, with any scientific rigor, should be asking the question, how did Bessler get his wheels to do what they did, irrespective of whether they were PM or not? Yet the official narrative is still, we don't give a shit, it wasn't PM.

[ArchCalc]

From the descriptions in the letters, I'd guess that poor Bessler was autistic. If he was, I can better understand why all the things he did would seem in that day to be madness.
So I recommend taking everything he said and did, and work backwards to "sanity"and a solution.

[agor95]

It comes down to Perpetual Motion in Bessler Day and Perpetual Motion Today.

So with a wheel turning Today it will be attributed an energy source.
When that is achieved the wheel stops being a Perpetual Motion Wheel.
Even with it being perpetually in motion.

Such a hypothetical is internal quantum zero point energy harvesting.

[eccentrically1]

Quote from text;
"such a machine deserves, so it seems to me, some
clog, even if it does not satisfy all that the Inventor promises. If it is perpetual motion, the author well
deserves the reward he is asking for: if it is not, the public can discover a beautiful invention, without those
who would have promised the reward being able to commit themselves to anything; the Inventor having
never required more than a conditional promise."


This is something i have difficulty getting my head around.
It makes me think of spoiled little brats who refuse to acknowledge anything other than PM is impossible.
Even today, anyone, with any scientific rigor, should be asking the question, how did Bessler get his wheels to do what they did, irrespective of whether they were PM or not? Yet the official narrative is still, we don't give a shit, it wasn't PM.

No one with any scientific rigor is asking how he got his wheels to do what they did because there are too many holes in the evidence.
The short lifts were no good. They didn't prove PM. That's why the long run was set up. Then they screwed that up. No witnesses, no proof.
They locked it in a room by itself.
The signed testaments aren't proof. They're basically an agreement that they couldn't detect any signs of fraud, so wow, it must be PM.
On top of that the maid said they took turns keeping it going. Whether or not it was true, the damage was done.
When you look at the story with scientific rigor, it doesn't exactly present a good case for PM.

[UbWe]

Quote from text;
"such a machine deserves, so it seems to me, some
clog, even if it does not satisfy all that the Inventor promises. If it is perpetual motion, the author well
deserves the reward he is asking for: if it is not, the public can discover a beautiful invention, without those
who would have promised the reward being able to commit themselves to anything; the Inventor having
never required more than a conditional promise."


This is something i have difficulty getting my head around.
It makes me think of spoiled little brats who refuse to acknowledge anything other than PM is impossible.
Even today, anyone, with any scientific rigor, should be asking the question, how did Bessler get his wheels to do what they did, irrespective of whether they were PM or not? Yet the official narrative is still, we don't give a shit, it wasn't PM.

No one with any scientific rigor is asking how he got his wheels to do what they did because there are too many holes in the evidence.
The short lifts were no good. They didn't prove PM. That's why the long run was set up. Then they screwed that up. No witnesses, no proof.
They locked it in a room by itself.
The signed testaments aren't proof. They're basically an agreement that they couldn't detect any signs of fraud, so wow, it must be PM.
On top of that the maid said they took turns keeping it going. Whether or not it was true, the damage was done.
When you look at the story with scientific rigor, it doesn't exactly present a good case for PM.

Considering who witnessed it, that doesn't require scientific proof. Isaac Newton and his friends did their best to discredit Gottfried Leibniz.
He was successful. And now today, how to consider Newton? He basically said Leibniz was a fraud when Leibniz was right.

[WaltzCee]

.
.

On top of that the maid said they took turns . .. .. .

Women don't lie about that sort of thing either.


Anne Rosine Mauersbergerin was an.honorable woman.

[UbWe]

.
.

On top of that the maid said they took turns . .. .. .

Women don't lie about that sort of thing either.


Anne Rosine Mauersbergerin was an.honorable woman.

Are you willing to discredit Newton? Your attacks question his credibility.

[WaltzCee]

.
.

The dog creeps out of his kennel
just as far as his chain will stretch.

mangy mutilated pagan mutt.

[eccentrically1]

Newton had nothing to do with it. He probably threw the letter away after reading it.
It doesn't matter who witnessed it, they couldn't testify it was actually PM. The signed testimony was only that they couldn't determine how he did it.
The only way to know for certain would have been to buy it. Karl might have left a clue somewhere but that's another rabbit hole no one has gone down.

[MrTim]

It comes down to Perpetual Motion in Bessler Day and Perpetual Motion Today.

So with a wheel turning Today it will be attributed an energy source.
When that is achieved the wheel stops being a Perpetual Motion Wheel.
Even with it being perpetually in motion.

Such a hypothetical is internal quantum zero point energy harvesting.

The definition of PM has been changed in the last century to state it is impossible to achieve if you don't follow their conditions (basically, you must create energy from nothing.) Therefore, a self-turning wheel that performs work until stopped (by internal or external reasons) is not, by their definition, "perpetual motion". Even if faced with a working device, most would never admit the definition they adhere to is wrong... ;-)

[UbWe]

It comes down to Perpetual Motion in Bessler Day and Perpetual Motion Today.

So with a wheel turning Today it will be attributed an energy source.
When that is achieved the wheel stops being a Perpetual Motion Wheel.
Even with it being perpetually in motion.

Such a hypothetical is internal quantum zero point energy harvesting.

The definition of PM has been changed in the last century to state it is impossible to achieve if you don't follow their conditions (basically, you must create energy from nothing.) Therefore, a self-turning wheel that performs work until stopped (by internal or external reasons) is not, by their definition, "perpetual motion". Even if faced with a working device, most would never admit the definition they adhere to is wrong... ;-)

Why I've done the math. When my equations are shown to be correct, I'll be proving gravity has energy. This includes;
The atmospheric pressures can be factored following f(x) = Δy/Δx. y = Venus is 1350 psi/93 bars. x = (1+.02395)^x. The exponent will be the times further from the Sun than Venus squared. That allows for the inverse square law to show a decrease in the strength of the Sun’s gravitational field. The Earth is ^191 while Mars is ^403. This allows for Earth to be 93/(1+.02395)^191 = 1.01214 bars while it is 1.013 bars. And for Mars to be 93/(1+.02395)^449 = 0.0022 bars while it is .00658 bars.

This along with my math on Bessler's Wheel;

f(x) = momentum = mv - ∫ (2/3)*(.23/1) Δy/Δx explain why there is force (f = ma) as a start will work to prove that gravity has energy. Such work
will require 2 different frames of reference for gravity that has been quantified mathematically. It seems I am the only person while as a fraud in this forum can do what no one else can.
Just an FYI, no one has proven gravity has energy. If my work proves out, why am I hated for pursuing such work and Bessler's Wheel?

[JUBAT]

> If my work proves out, why am I hated for pursuing such work and Bessler's Wheel?

*IF* is the big word, but you are not hated for pursuing such work and the Bessler Wheel. You are highly disliked for your negative personality traits, false accusations, and stirring up trouble. Working on the Bessler Wheel everyone is okay with.

By the way, I must remind you that your wheel doesn't spin and none of mine did either. We are brothers at failing to make a working Bessler Wheel. I think that's kind of a nice thought, don't you? :)

[UbWe]

> If my work proves out, why am I hated for pursuing such work and Bessler's Wheel?

*IF* is the big word, but you are not hated for pursuing such work and the Bessler Wheel. You are highly disliked for your negative personality traits, false accusations, and stirring up trouble. Working on the Bessler Wheel everyone is okay with.

By the way, I must remind you that your wheel doesn't spin and none of mine did either. We are brothers at failing to make a working Bessler Wheel. I think that's kind of a nice thought, don't you? :)

I went to Junior College in Tacoma. Ted Bundy's mother worked for that college at that time. You might be like Ted Bundy but his mother was a victim of her son. Is there any chance you'd like the Green River Killer? They both were "real" Americans like you. You are brothers, right?
Even Alaska has;
Paulson's escape and her assistance in catching Alaska serial killer Robert Hansen was the subject of “The Frozen Ground,” a movie released in 2013. Paulson spoke with the actress who portrayed her, Vanessa Hudgens, and provided personalized guidance in how to play her in the film.

Is he your friend or was Ted your friend?

As I said Jubat, I'm prepared for when you come for me. That is your right. And then my right will be to defend myself because you will not be in Louisiana.
Outside of Homer you become a menace and I'm ready and waiting.