Gravitational shortcut

[daxwc]

Google translate has word "horse" too but the translation is unreadable.


The German word for "horse" is "Pferd."

[daxwc]

So this is the word that is supposed to say horse. "Pferde"

I can't use ChatGPT till tomorrow.

[daxwc]

Me: what is the best image translator for old german handwriting.

Copilot: One of the best tools for translating old German handwriting is Transkribus2. This software uses artificial intelligence to transcribe and translate old German scripts, such as Kurrent, Sütterlin, Fraktur, and Antiqua, into readable digital text. It can automatically recognize and convert handwritten documents into normal text, and you can also manually transcribe or correct any errors from the automatic transcription3.
Transkribus allows you to train specific text recognition models to recognize the exact handwriting in your material, making it a powerful tool for deciphering historical documents3

20

en
1
No: 20. hir sollen
die vöhrigen Hebel noch
was sonderliches arbeitt
und besondern Gewicht
auf heben ud herauß
zur Überwage wenden
also daß darvon
der Seitte H. immer
schwere seyn solle,
welches der Freun
vermeynte, Ich aber
Es vermeinte, jedah
Ihm aber
die Pfeede
forne anzuspan
erinnerte.

Text Recognition powered by transkribus.ai

Word for word:
No. 20. Here should
the previous levers still
some special work perform
and a particular weight
lift and outward
toward the imbalance turn
so that thereby
the side H always
heavier should be,
which the friend
assumed, I however
thought it otherwise, yet
him however
the horses
at the front to harness
reminded.



No. 20. Here, the previous levers should still perform some special work and lift a particular weight and turn it outward toward the imbalance so that side H should always be heavier. This is what the friend assumed, but I thought otherwise, though I reminded him to harness the horses at the front.


JC's looks closer than ChatGPT

[johannesbender]

Its all interesting to see translations that aren't exactly the same as the one's we know , but i cant help to think that - he would not have written anything special about the real wheel though .

I remember when i was in school , i could write in fairly readable handwriting when i took my time to write something , but when i had a day where i was writing something fast it would mostly be unreadable , this happened a few times when i realized my homework was due for the same day and i thought it was on another day - i would write like a speed demon and get it finished well before that bell/alarm rang , the funny thing about it is when the time came for the teacher to inspect and deliver points on my work , he/she would have had to call me up front to come and read what i have written because he/she could not read it at all , the shock i experienced when i realized that some times i could not read it either is just too funny since getting points or no points at all was at stake.

[johannesbender]

I wonder what he changed or were busy changing/finalizing , i think there is a difference in the notes too .

[johannesbender]

This was also a good demonstration , a hands on experience to learn from , if you don't screw D to lift at 6 and 12 every time it wont be able to torque around back to a reset position , if you only screw D to move right at 9 and 3 every time then it is not going to torque back to 9 and 3 to reach a reset position since it would have to lift at 6 and 12 to continue further.

So it shows that it would have to lift instead of just having more one side for such a design to work (which we know is true (GPE)).

[johannesbender]

I have an new found inkling for hope , and i have been thinking it over for about a week or two , but i would have to find a way to simplify it down because currently i am not sure how to go about a simplistic test .

[johannesbender]

I know one of the actions to be true in real life , and i know even in sim world also without it - it wont work , it is an issue of fact or fiction but i can only reach that conclusion through a real test , no sim would be acceptable but i don't know if i can really build it in full , perhaps i could manage it partly and draw a conclusion before wandering in to something i cant manage yet.

[johannesbender]

Still have not been able to confirm a real world test for this yet , sim world shows it should be doable , the logic of it all seems right , and due to experience i don't really doubt it especially since i am not trying to violate any law of nature instead using it (as usual) , but i am not able to build a test with the same amount of efficiency as the rest here , anyway i dont like replying here if i cant show anything - because it sounds like a bunch of empty words and unnecessary typing to me ..

[thx4]

Hi JB, if I can be of any help, please don't hesitate.

[johannesbender]

Thank you thx4 you have always been very good at this , and i know the rest of the members here are also very capable and experienced in this unlike myself , its not even a overly complicated build i just don't have the means at the moment.

[Roxaway59]

JB wrote -

but i am not able to build a test with the same amount of efficiency as the rest here , anyway i dont like replying here if i cant show anything - because it sounds like a bunch of empty words and unnecessary typing to me ..

If you have an idea that you think is interesting and worth checking out I for one would always like to hear it JB.

Are you able to provide a diagram of your idea?

Graham

[johannesbender]

Roxaway , thank you , the thing is i know some of it to be correct , so its partly known to me through past experience and build tests that certain factors of the mechanics is 100% true (real world factual confirmation tests) , but i have come to add certain correctional design aspects and combinations of which my previous attempts were completely off the point , and it should in theory be as close to a working design that i ever came up with so far , i am not asking if the design on paper is going to be quite good , i don't like words to replace actions and real results so i have to create a test like i said i would ,but i am not capable of building it yet ..

[johannesbender]

Example A : You may calculate this example in all its perfection , and the result will be that the initial GPE of example A does not create a motion , in fact the mathematical outcome would be zero rotation , so an initial GPE itself does not create a motion unless a Torque also exists , and if there's no restoration of that torque there will be no potential for motion restored.
(although in real life you wont build and have the perfect conditions of the image)

Example B : You may calculate this example in all its perfection , and the result will be that an initial Torque would create motion , but Torque that is not restored does not create a "runner" .

Example C (imaginary): if a PE source was to be a driving force , in calculation you should find that an initial PE may create a motion , but PE that is not restored does not create a "runner" .

(the following conditions of "state A" and "state B" are not to be directly associated with the visual examples A and B and the imaginary example C)

The prime ingredients would by conclusion be a combination of certain "state" conditions , for example , "state A" + "state B" , where a "state A" is a restoration of a driving force and a "state B" is a driving force , to the effect of whatever A and B may be in method or totality.

Usually failures which showcases a motion , have an initial "state B" (driving force) , but never achieves a "state A" condition (restoration of driving force) .

It is said that reaching the condition of "state A" is impossible without an additional energy (COE) ,because there is an equal energy resulting from the driving force of a "state B" condition to that which a "state A" condition requires and can only be reached when there are no losses , in the real world if we include losses which is an involuntary condition - there is an insufficient energy from a "state B" condition to supply a fulfillment for a "state A" condition .

For me personally without insult or disrespect ,failures to my understanding is that which does not achieve reaching both the conditions of a "state A" and "state B" (a driving force and a restoration of that driving force), as far as i am concerned the laws describes "state B" and "state A" fully , and the laws allows the calculation and prediction to satisfactory result for a "state A" and a "state B" .

In my opinion the laws fully shows the requirements for a "state A" (restoration of the driving force) , so there is no shortcomings to the laws in this regards.

The laws are not to blame imo , in context with the Bessler story - if Bessler managed without fakery , then "he is correct and so am i" has more behind it than some think , and perhaps it says more about human nature than i am willing to because when one is off on ones own tangent instead of staying the course on the ship , does not make the ship head for an iceberg.

If there is real truth to it , I don't believe any law would be changed or broken , only a correction of dumb views and ignorance .

[Fletcher]

Hey jb .. conservative gravity, & ..

No dissipative energy losses situation ..

mgh <=> m1/2v^2 i.e. GPE <=> KE ..

John Colins AP .. Bessler to Wagner ..

"I don't want to go into the details here of how suddenly the excess weight is caused to rise. You can't comprehend these matters, or see how true craftsmanship can rise above innate lowly tendencies (as does a weight above the point of application of a lever)" – AP pg 357