Was Johann Bessler a fraudster?

[daxwc]

Roxaway59 : I believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty and there is no proof that Bessler was a liar and a fraudster.

Roxaway then there is lots of people in jail right now that are innocent in your eyes.

“Johann Bessler's maid, Anne Rosine Mauersbergerin, took him to court after leaving his household in 1727. She accused him of mistreatment and testified under oath that she, along with Bessler's wife and brother, had manually turned the wheel during demonstrations, implying that the perpetual motion machine was a fraud. This legal case added to the controversies surrounding Bessler's claims and fueled skepticism about his invention.”

So the maid's testimony could be seen as compelling evidence casting doubt on Bessler's claims, but whether it constitutes definitive proof of fraud is debatable

[Roxaway59]

Actually dax I know with absolute certainty that there are people in jail who don't belong there and here in the UK one reason why they dropped the death penalty was because they kept hanging people only to find later that they were innocent.

Graham

[daxwc]

I agree Graham, but you can't say there was no proof. Whether it constitutes definitive proof of fraud is debatable.

Bessler was dismissed in his own time, which would have been the easiest period to uncover fraud if it existed. We lack many of the newspaper articles written about him, as well as the gossip and eyewitness accounts that might have provided further insight. Most people today argue that, because he wrote extensively about the Bible and God, he wouldn’t have been deceitful. However, many of us turn a blind eye to the fact that he was a known conjurerer, and both his wife and mother-in-law were considered witches. He was undoubtedly a polarizing figure in his era. That said, one could argue that God grants the right to "be born again," offering redemption and the possibility for change.

[Roxaway59]

Yes dax that's one of the reasons why I said that this event could be classed as a perfect storm.

Because there just is not enough proof to say that Bessler was a liar and a fraudster.

However there are some unexplained things attached to the story that just don't make sense.

I would say that the demonstrations that were performed in front of witnesses were very impressive including the sealed room one.

Am I the only one though who pictures Bessler in a magicians outfit tapping the stands that the wheels are mounted with a stick and announcing - Ladies and gentleman I am about to demonstrate before you a spectacle that has never been seen before......

I don't know there just something off about it but I have to say he did something very impressive either way.

Graham
Playing devils advocate.

[Fletcher]

So dax, just to be clear about this ..

B's. former maid took him to court over alleged mistreatment ! The state/crown did not take him to court for fraud !?

IIRC he was acquitted of all charges, but his reputation was sullied because of it. And the maid said she had to sign an oath to B. not to reveal how the runners worked on pain of terrible things. But at the court case she said she and B's. brother Gottfried, and his wife, turned the wheel via a crank from another room. No other witness corroborated her claim of turning a crank from another room, however Gartner and Borlach had suggested such many years earlier.

fwiw the Merseburg translocation tests ( 1715 ) were to counter the crank in the next room claim of G. and B. - the later Kassel test was a long duration test under Karl's lock and key with guards on the doors etc, specifically designed by KARL to counter arguments of internal wind up energy storage mechanisms.

Altho Karl and B. later fell out somewhat Karl never came forward and recanted his former claims of the runners being real or dissed B. for hoaxing, albeit a clever one - we know either way his reputation was at stake, money was not the issue ..

So back to my main observation - the maid signed an oath to B. not to disclose how the runners worked ( whether she saw it or was told by B. ). So she gets up in court ( in an action she initiated about mistreatment) and claims she and others crank turned them from another room ( self-serving her claim of mistreatment ? ).

How to reconcile these 2 positions covered by sacred oaths. She never revealed how the runners really worked, thus making up a lie or repeating what she had been told to the court in the later years to help her case of mistreatment. It is also possible that B. told her that they were moved by crank and then got her to sign an oath not to reveal that as a clever deflection. Which she later went back on in court but never actually participated in turning any crank attached to a runner - iow's plausible deniability for B. if someone tried to buy her off to find out how they worked while in his employ.

Any observations or insights ? ..

[Kattla]

IDK , kinda want to give Bessler the benefit of doubt.

Still, some of his actions could suggest his selfrunning wheels were fraud.

1. The maids confession. Well, that was his maids action, not his.

2. When the sale was close to be realized, he destroyed his wheel. Could have been worried that his fraud would be
revealed by an angry buyer. And also put those who stood behind him , ie Karl, in a bad light.

3. When he needed energy for his own house, he started making a windmill/turbine. It could have been that he'd sworn to himself
never to make another wheel , but this i do not know.

All in all, I really don't have enough data to be his judge.

[justsomeone]

A couple questions.

If a fraud, was it worth risking loosing his head?

If a fraud, was it worth gambling on whether he could pull the wool over Karl's eyes?

If a fraud, would it be more impressive that he committed it or that he discovered a working wheel?

[John Collins]

Along with Karl’s testimony that he had seen the interior of the wheel be aware that Bessler would have been in imminent danger of prosecution, arrest and execution should it ever turn out that was proved to be a fraud.

Crimes against people regularly ended with imprisonment or execution, but crimes against the nobility warranted much stiffer penalties including not just execution but torture. Such examples were vital to the maintenance of law and order. If Bessler had been found guilty of a serious fraud against the most important person in the kingdom, Karl the Landgrave of Hesse, his life and that of his family would have been forfeited. Other attempted frauds against other powerful leaders at that time mostly ended in execution. Even mild acts against the nobility could result in long terms of imprisonment. But of course Karl publically exonerated Bessler.

Karl was no push-over.In his younger days when he took over the realm, Karl instituted the idea of providing mercenaries and his primary concern was to create an army for himself which would always be ready for war, and he made many sacrifices for it during his years as ruler. He spent a fortune equipping his troops with the best of everything. His primary concern was to create an army for himself which would always be ready for war. He fought in several wars, acting as both ruler and general and always led from the front.

(From https://en.topwar.ru/252064-gessenskie- ... -neft.html)

JC

[johannesbender]

Luckily Carl did not execute that guy in MT 43 but send him packing , which i think would have been Besslers fate too.

[Robinhood46]

I asked Dax's partner how much energy would need to be stored for the 54 day tes.
-------------------------------------
Conclusion:

To maintain continuous rotation for 54 days, Bessler's wheel would need to overcome significant energy losses due to bearing friction and air resistance. Based on the assumptions, approximately 95.75 million joules (or 26.6 kilowatt-hours) of energy would be required to counteract bearing friction alone. This estimation underscores the challenges of sustaining prolonged rotation with 18th-century technology.

-------------------------------------------

I'm not too sure how realistic that is, but it's a lot of energy to be hiding in his wheel. Not to mention it didn't stop turning at the end of the test, it was stopped.

[Fletcher]

Calculating a lower threshold of energy losses over 54 days at 26 rpm ( best case scenario ) - air drag energy losses will make up in excess of 95 percent of the total dissipative energy losses, with bearing frictions the balance ( inconsequential for this exercise ) - does not consider any deformation/elasticity losses as the disk is solid with no moving internal parts colliding etc ..

.. Asking CGPT .. " Best case scenario. We have a solid vertical disk with a center axle mounted on support bushings. The disk is 4 meters in diameter and 45 centimeters thick. It is made of brushed aluminum and the axle made of iron is 2 cm diameter. This axle extends 10 centimeters into bronze u shaped bushings on each side of the disk. Assume the disk weighs 100 kilograms. It turns at 26 revolutions per minute for 54 straight days. Assume normal air density at ground level. The air drag losses will be dominant contributor to energy wastage. How much energy in joules is lost to air friction drag per second, per minute, per hour, per day, for 54 days? "

CGPT Answers ..

Energy Lost to Air Drag

Per second: E per second = 469.8 J

Per minute: E per minute = 469.8 × 60 = 28,188 J

Per hour: E per hour = 28,188 × 60 = 1,691,280 J

Per day: E per day = 1,691,280 × 24 = 40,590,720 J

For 54 days: E 54 days = 40,590,720 × 54 = 2.19 × 109 J

Final Answers

Per second: 469.8 J

Per minute: 28,188 J

Per hour: 1,691,280 J

Per day: 40,590,720 J

For 54 days: 2.19 × 10⁹ J (2.19 GJ)

Total loss in 54 days = 608.3 kWh

Sobering ..

[Robinhood46]

So how do we make it make sense?
Somehow he managed to store that kind of energy in the wheel, and a bit of rab in case he can't convince them to stop the test after 54 days?
The committee purposely selected to detect energy from outside of the wheel causing it to turn, were all complete idiots?
Carl is even more of an idiot, because he even looked inside and couldn't see any cheating going on.

When everyone else involved needs to be completely wrong, or dishonest, for a theory to hold water, you really need to question the validity of the theory. It has never been proved that everyone was wrong, just assumed because we can't prove that they are right. The assumption they are right should be the predominant choice until proven false, which implies building a wheel that isn't perpetual motion that turns for 54 days.

[Fletcher]

I agree RH46 .. " You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time " comes to mind ..

It's like saying the specially and carefully designed wheel tests were a grand coverup or a grand conspiracy - fact is people are too lazy and undisciplined to go to those lengths .. Redheffer might have fooled some of the people for some of the time, but he got caught out - there was a guy by the name of Milo over at Overunity.com many years ago that scammed everyone claiming he had a runner - he had this simple OB wheel - it was just when video's of "working PM wheels" were beginning to be made and posted - it didn't take to long for an experienced member to spot the fake - Milo used an old magicians trick of a thin nylon string hanging down over the edge of the table with a weight pulling on it, so it accelerated the wheel etc .. when the frames were blown up and the nylon exposed he disappeared overnight - he didn't try to build bigger and better wheels, and pass harder and harder tests ..

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

Hey Tarsier .. can you take my best case scenario which should understate the real air friction losses over 54 days run time, and ask our AI friends and then check their math please for an hour run time etc .. I'd hate to quote it without your independent opinion, being you familiar with power, energy, and usage etc .. Let's get a lower-end ball-park once and for all !

I did follow thru the math it provided regarding air density and coefficient of drag for a disk it used etc but didn't have the time to check it over properly .. ta ..

[daxwc]

Alchemists who claimed they could turn base metals into gold but failed often faced severe consequences, especially if they had deceived royalty or powerful patrons. In many cases, their fates depended on the ruler's temperament and the political climate of the time.

For example, during the reign of King James I of England, alchemists who made fraudulent claims could be charged with fraud or treason. Some were imprisoned, heavily fined, or even executed. The severity of the punishment reflected the betrayal of trust and the waste of royal resources.

One notable case is James Price, an 18th-century English chemist and alchemist. He claimed to have discovered a method to transmute mercury into gold. When pressured by the Royal Society to replicate his experiments, he instead took his own life, likely fearing exposure and disgrace.

In earlier periods, rulers like Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor, were fascinated by alchemy and often protected alchemists, even when their claims were dubious. However, if an alchemist was proven to be a fraud, they could face imprisonment or worse.

The treatment of alchemists varied widely, but the stakes were always high when dealing with kings and princes.

Yet they still frauded them. It was better then having a real job or sufferings of a peasant. They seen it as worth the risk. Or does the forum think gold can be made by alchemists?

[Tarsier79]

Hi Fletcher.

IMO that calculation is a bit overzealous. Who knows, I could be wrong. E per second = 469.8 J= 496 watts.

Copilot:

So, 496 watts is equivalent to approximately 50.56 kilograms falling 1 meter in one second.

If the wheel were a solid flywheel of cast iron with the same surface area, I would say it would take "very little" being that it was wooden planks around the outside and canvas on the sides, I suspect the inertia is lower and the wind resistance is much higher. Not 450 watts/sec higher though.
While it is extremely difficult to pluck a figure out of the air, my gut tells me somewhere between 25 and 75 watts would be required to keep it running once it was up to speed.... again just a guess.

For your reference, 33W is approx dropping about 10kg on a rope wrapped around the axle, taking approx 3 seconds to drop 1 meter.

how much is 33 watts per second over an entire day equivalent in weight dropping 2m
Copilot:

So, the total energy of 33 watts over an entire day is equivalent to dropping approximately 145,500 kg (or 145.5 metric tonnes) from a height of 2 meters. That's quite an impressive amount of energy!

If it were fraud, and the power was internal, someone was replenishing the energy each night, They would need to replenish enough energy for the wheel to run at least one whole day....lifting 145 tonnes up 2m. How does that fit in a wheel. Just because you use a spring, you still have to apply the same energy over distance.... Not a likely scenario

ADD: I guess 450W/s is probably if you were holding the the wheel from the rim, holding it vertical and spinning around horizontally once every 2-3 seconds.