Question for John C.

[Roxaway59]

Ideas on Besslers wheel.

Hi I’m new to the forum so I would first like to introduce myself if I may. I’ve never been on any forum before so it may take me a while to get use to things. I first started thinking about gravity wheels when I was in my twenties and that is about 40 years ago now. The only qualifications I have is in electronics and I very often use that to compare with mechanical devices like oscillators. To be honest I have been on the forum many times and I have read many comments of all kinds from people on here. Some are good, and I can tell that I’m thinking similarly to the person writing it and others not so good. A lot of people on the forum have a knowledge in physics and maths that is way past my capability and I will say right from the outset that my thinking tends to be more artistic. That being said I do have a certain amount of understanding in physics and maths. I will eventually be sharing my thoughts on this subject as well as pictures, simulations and videos but please bear in mind that if you reply very technically about them I wont understand a word of it. A lot of the time I will ask if people can replicate things I have done in their more modern simulators to see how they behave. I will share ideas that I believe have real merit or some kind of significance to the Bessler puzzle. My aim here is not just to help find what Bessler did but also hopefully to give a boost to some people on here that have become despondent. I believe that their despondency comes from having too many circular thoughts and the need to explore different ways of looking at the problem. Now and then I have read comments where people address this issue and talk about things in a more grounded way and this is what I like. As I have said, I will be sharing my ideas eventually but here are a few simple believes that I have about his wheel. I don’t believe that his wheel was overly complicated and that raises questions in itself like how can a mechanism be both simple and illusive at the same time. I think the answer to that question lies with the prime mover. Its the prime mover that is simple and the rest of the mechanism takes advantage of it or to put it another way it amplifies what the prime mover does. I have a theory about what the prime mover is. It is a simple mechanism that has the ability to overbalance a bigger weight but then automatically place itself back or shift to a higher level. I’m sure that there will be a lot of people here that know how this can be done but maybe don’t know how to utilise the effect. I am working on a wheel at the moment that I hope will do just what I have stated. If it doesn’t work I will still be sharing it with you because I believe that it, or part of it, is along the lines of what Bessler did and I have reasons why I think this is so. One of those reasons is that it answers the clue that Bessler gave about the weight rising rapidly to the top. On my wheel the mechanism is such that the weight goes from near 6 o’clock to 12 o’clock very quickly. This is partly fact because I have already proven that it works in principal and part theory in that for the wheel to work the prime mover must do its job. If I am right in this approach then us working together could solve the problem.

Graham

[Fletcher]

Welcome Graham aka Roxaway59 (rocks-away - let's hope it circulates :7) .. nicely constructed first post, and formulation of ideas .. I think you will find a lot of agreement with your general synopsis of how B's. wheels were able to be self-moving .. I for one .. the devil is in the detail as always .. in support of your hypothesis I offer this ..

The canary-in-the-coal-mine ..

Go no further than MT48 - a ball transfer '"temporary" OOB machine' - the elevator is fixed geared to lift a vertical height the same as a rim ball falls from 3 o'cl to 6 o'cl and enters the elevator i.e. a one-for-one substitution of balls in-to and out-of the system .. as everyone knows that gear ratio is set/fixed for optimum replenishing rate of balls (equilibrium) etc .. yet the torque produced is insufficient to lift the elevator the required distance to make it a continuous cycle, especially after ordinary system energy losses are considered .. therefore it stubbornly does not move (like so many others) ..

Clearly to be a self-moving machine a Prime Mover (first mover) must be added to "tip-the-scales" so to speak, and B. says as much .. and by deduction that mechanical Prime Mover apparatus/structure must work with the traditional "temporary" OOB portion of the machine (which ordinarily keels) to make the whole assembly unable to keel i.e. gain momentum and to accelerate and self-sustain its rotation thereafter .. IOW's an oscillating feed-back loop that positively reinforces, leading to momentum gain imo ..

The mechanical nuance of exactly how the Prime Mover is physically constructed and acts-out its role (when coupled with many types of temporary OOB wheels) is my primary focus on this discussion board ..

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

I suggest you start your own topic for discussion and sharing of ideas purposes when you are ready to do so .. I look forward to them ..

Best -f

[Fletcher]

Added .. examples of Canary's In The Coal Mine .. B. couldn't have picked more intractable and inflexible examples of temporary OOB designs, that could be made into 'runners' - he picked these examples on purpose for their shock value - to "ground" the argument for a separate and distinct Prime Mover Entity, imo ..

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

John Collins MT ..

Digital Copy .. No. 44 The sphere-method is reintroduced here. The problem shows 2 wheels: A is the main wheel, the axle of which has a gear at B. B drives the somewhat larger wheel C at point D. At side E are spheres which fall out of side G at point H below and into wheel C at point I and then out of C again into A at point F. This problem looks good, but as sketched it does nothing special as long as no other application is present, for the wheel A must revolve several times before C revolves a single time. Thus not enough spheres move from the former into the latter.

Hard Copy .. No. 44. Here the spherical weight method is reintroduced. The illustration shows 2 wheels. A is the main wheel, and its axle has a cog B. B drives the slightly larger wheel C at point D. In the latter wheel, C, at side E, are rounded weights which have fallen out of side G at point H, below, and enter wheel C , at point I, and they are then put back into the wheel, A, at F. This proposed model looks good, but as sketched it does nothing special as long as nothing else is applied: for, the wheel A, must rotate several times before C revolves a single time. Thus not enough spheres move from the latter to the former.

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

Digital Copy .. No. 48 This is a sphere invention having a paternoster with pockets. A is a wheel. As the pocket-paternoster C raises the spheres, it passes over B, the axle of the wheel. At D the spheres are ejected into a channel. At E the spheres fall into the wheel, and at F they are ejected again into the paternoster. Here, an insufficient number of spheres is carried to the wheel A by means of the paternoster. The principle is good, but this figure will bring about no mobility by itself until completely different, additional structures have been provided.

Hard Copy .. No. 48. This is a round-weight invention, with a bucket conveyor. A, is a wheel of whose axle B, the bucket conveyor C. Passes as it raises the balls, and ejects them into a chute at D. At E the balls fall onto the wheel, which ejects them back into the bucket conveyor at F. Not enough balls are supplied by the bucket conveyor in this invention. The principle is good, but the figure as it is will not give birth to any motion until completely different structures bless this marriage.

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

[agor95]

Welcome Roxaway59

It is good to have a person with electronics qualifications. For any mechanical action should have an electronic analogue.

Most follow in Bessler's path by prototyping and building an understanding how components move.
In a way each build improves the persons imagination to help visualise the next notion.

I look forward in seeing your thoughts via your coming posts.

Also someone finding the illusive yet simple concept.

Regards

[WaltzCee]

.
.

.

click on new topic

[Roxaway59]

Hi Fletcher, imagine an inverted pendulum that tips to the right. Its at its maximum speed at 6 o'clock but then has the ability to flip back to 12 o'clock. That differs from a mechanism like MT48 because the time taken for the pendulum to fall to 6 o'clock is a lot longer than it takes for it to get back to the top. I know that John Collins is working on a mechanism that he believes is along the lines of what Bessler did like myself. The way I see it if a thousand of us believe that we are working on the mechanism that Bessler created and 999 of us are wrong it only takes one of us to be right. Also if a lot of us are working along a similar train of thought then maybe that is the right approach and it just needs tweaking. I simulated my idea as much as I could in 2d but it is a 3d device so I could only simulate the main aspect of it. I then built 2 models, one of which was very basic and the other was more detailed and the more detailed one showed that the idea had promise but that it probably needs something else to give it a chance of working. That something else is what I am calling the prime mover. One of the reasons why I think this is along the lines of what Bessler did is that if it doesn’t work the way I am approaching it there are still certain other possibilities. I don’t think I have ever had that with other designs I have worked on. Usually I’ve hit a brick wall with a sign that says your flogging a dead horse. I wasn’t kidding when I said this is the first time I've been on a forum so it may take me a while to work out how to start my own thread. Thanks for the advice and I look forward to sharing ideas.
Graham

[agor95]

Hi Roxaway59

I've been on a forum so it may take me a while to work out how to start my own thread.

Your own thread 'Topic'. look along the top of the web page for this line.

Board index Public Forums General Discussion

Click on the 'General Discussion' link.

Click on the 'New Topic' in red.

The subject line will be the Topic Title.
The contents of the post is a good place to state the purpose of the thread/topic.

Regards

[Fletcher]

I have similar sentiments Rox-away (my handle could be Rox-in-my-head, lol) - seems we're both 59'ers ..

The more the merrier I say ..

The way I see it if a thousand of us believe that we are working on the mechanism that Bessler created and 999 of us are wrong it only takes one of us to be right.

Also if a lot of us are working along a similar train of thought then maybe that is the right approach and it just needs tweaking.

Covering all bases - a constant and ongoing process of learning, evolution, and refinement of thoughts (individually and collectively) .. and a pure pressure of numbers game .. of course it helps to weed the garden regularly and this discussion board can help cover much more ground and provide practical skills and deduction/analysis than we each individually have at our disposal .. well, that's the theory and sometimes the reality of open dialogue and sharing of resources, and experience ..

I look forward to you sharing your ideas, pics and sims, and discussing them .. should be interesting ..

[John Collins]

Glad you made it Graham, this is the best place to give and receive ideas and objective criticism.

JC

[Roxaway59]

Thanks agor95 and WaltzCee for that I will have a look today and start a thread. Also I would like to say thanks to you John. When we build a web page we never really know who will be influenced by the information and subject matter we put on it. I can remember quite clearly sitting at my pc decades ago now and stumbling upon the story of Johann Bessler. I remember the feeling it gave me as I felt the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. As I sat there in a surreal trance I almost felt like there had to be a catch and the conveyor of the story must surely and cruelly put the sudden added twist in that meant it wasn't true. As I felt the mists of fantasy billowing up all around me I had to remind myself that this was not a novel, it was a history lesson. Strange then that this particular snippet of history was so neatly tucked out of sight. I have my own thoughts on that but I will leave that for another time. The encounter with the Johann Bessler story rekindled something in me that I thought was dead and buried and I dared once again to start thinking about something that apparently only foolish people think about. Well I never have been the kind of person who can stand being told what to think.

Graham

[WaltzCee]

.
.
You're welcome Graham.

Hopefully this doesn't come across as 'telling you what to think', yet your posts sound like a story, in the sense of being contrived.

As I felt the mists of fantasy billowing up all around me I had to remind myself that this was not a novel, . .. .. .

. .. . .. or is it?

[Roxaway59]

Hi WaltzCee what I have wrote and will be writing in the future is only contrived a little in that I don't want to be misunderstood so I am writing carefully. I use humour sometimes because that is just my way but everything I am saying is truthful. I took everyone's advice and started a new thread.

[WaltzCee]

.
It should be good, Graham. It's obvs you're well versed in John Collins' work. Your styles are similar.

[agor95]

Hi WaltzCee what I have wrote and will be writing in the future is only contrived a little in that I don't want to be misunderstood so I am writing carefully. I use humour sometimes because that is just my way but everything I am saying is truthful. I took everyone's advice and started a new thread.

Best to put an :-) too let members know the sentence is a joke.
Jokes do not travel between cultures to well. Said the windows, it's a pain :-)

Regards

[WaltzCee]

.
.

Best to put an :-) too let members know the sentence is a joke.

good advice.