Pair of Pairs

[Jon J Hutton]

Patrick,

Thanks but I did abandon the idea because it stalls way to easily. instead Im putting all my effort on the toy page....Im redoing my design and it's taking longer than I planned.

Paul,

Im having a hard time following you line of thought on 143. Can you shed any light on what you are talking about?

[pstroud]

Ken,

I have been very curious about the statement of freinds groping the axle and feeling holes in it.

What you state about it being a previously used axle from another experiement holds some merit. In my opinion, an axle with holes should have control lines / rods going through it. I don't recall any statements of control lines / rods going through the axle in John Collins books from Bessler.

So, what were the holes in the axle for? Someone should have made a statement of lines / rods sticking through the axle holes. I would think that a hole in the axle without anything going through it could only be used by a mechanism designed to plug itself into the hole to gain some torque when needed.

Everyone, what are your thoughts on the hole in the axle??????

Preston.

[Paul]

Jon J Hutton wrote:

Im having a hard time following you line of thought on 143. Can you shed any light on what you are talking about ?

Yes, here I send a WM2D file example of what probably represents the "toy page"(and MT143). I think that the "kernel mechanism" of the Bessler wheel is this but it is difficult apply this mec to the wheel. Good luck

Paul

EDIT:
With the parallelogram the arm with the most outside weight rises because of the little movement of the central weight (I suppose the anvil in toy page).

[Paul]

Another interesting approach (maybe less than the previous one) is this....
the heaviest weight rises.

Edit: This approach is very interesting. IF I am correct it is possible to obtain PM by this system and few more mec.

Paul

[Paul]

If you use one spring instead of the central weight (anvil) you obtain a system that maybe can perpetuate the rotation of a wheel. The more external weight tend always to go UP unbalancing the wheel for a greater period every 180°.
Yes.... I think this is "IT"

Edit: mmhh no, it is not yet complete. there is need of other mechanical parts

Edit 2nd: Try this sim. and look what happen. Obviously there is a motor, but, if I am not in error, this is interesting. Maybe to work correctly various copies (pairs) of this device disposed on 360° are necessary.

Paul

[ken_behrendt]

Guys...it, indeed, pleases me to see that you are concentrating your efforts on decoding the cryptic meaning of the "toy page". Yes, I am now 100% convinced that page holds the key to the entire Bessler mystery. Figure out that hint and the general solution mechanism will surely be found.



Preston wrote:

So, what were the holes in the axle for? Someone should have made a statement of lines / rods sticking through the axle holes. I would think that a hole in the axle without anything going through it could only be used by a mechanism designed to plug itself into the hole to gain some torque when needed.

Most likely Bessler had control lines running through four holes bored through the solid axle. Each hole would have been at 45° to its nearest neighbor(s). These control line (which I hypothesize were made from catgut, a tough leathery material made from stretched and dried animal intestine) would have linked weights on diametrically opposite sides of the wheel's drum. For a long time, I resisted this possibility in favor of independent, mechanically isolated weight shifting mechanisms. Such mechanisms are still a possibility that I have not entirely abandoned, but, for the moment, I'm considering this idea of an interconnection between opposed pairs of mechanisms.

However, assuming that there were interconnections between opposed mechanisms in Bessler's wheels, it would not have been necessary to route the control lines directly through the axle. The addition of two extra pulleys per opposed set of mechanisms would have allowed the control lines to pass above and below the axle. You can be sure that this modification would have been made well before Bessler allowed his paying customers to reach inside of the drum to "grope" its axle. I believe that he left the bored holes in the axle to demonstrate to the skeptical that the axle was solid and contained no hidden power source. However, that would not have been the original purpose of those holes.


ken

[pstroud]

Hi Ken!

So the axle could have had holes with control wires running through it while spectators / friends groped it while the wheel was empty before any lines were run through the holes. This is possible.... The axle holes without any speculation from Bessler or fans of its use it certainly something I am curious about.

My personal wheel does have 4 holes in the axle, which I have utilized on occassion. They are not being utilized at the moment which could explain why my wheel it not spininning.....

Ken, Just curious about something. If you really believe that there were 4 holes in the axle with control lines connecting to 8 wegiht mechanisms, why do your current designs not reflect this principal?

Preston.

[barksalot]

Ken

I too think the toy page has something important in it. I think I have decoded it.

For the last month or so I have been trying to make my sweet mechanism work with the MT137 but does not seem to match up with anything there.

Put 4 of them on the wheel today and nothing. Whats nice is they dont seem to create any counter torque when the weights shift.

I have a few more variations of configurations to try.
another week or two and I should know if it works or not.

[ken_behrendt]

Preston asks:

Ken, Just curious about something. If you really believe that there were 4 holes in the axle with control lines connecting to 8 wegiht mechanisms, why do your current designs not reflect this principal?

I've vascilated back and forth between considering Bessler's wheels to contain 8 mechanically isolated shifting mechanisms (each containing either one or two weights) and systems which would consist of four opposed "pairs of pairs". Unfortunately, the Bessler literature gets very vague and ambiguous when it comes time to get down to the details of his mechanism.

In fact, it is entirely possible that the "toy page" is nothing more than a final frustration for the reader in search of real answers which does not apply to his wheels! However, I suspect that this is not the case and that it does contain a vital clue.

Actually, my current designs do have cords or catgut "control lines" interconnecting opposed two weight mechanisms within a wheel. I do not show them as passing through a central axle because I am using a relatively tiny pivot pin through which one can not readily pass pulley lines. I could probably overlap pulley lines and make them all appear to pass through the pivot pin, but keeping some separation between them makes it easier to keep track of them on the model wheel.

It's also possible that those holes that spectators "groped" could have been left over in the axle from some earlier failed design that required control rods to pass through the axle. There are some illustrations in MT that show such rods passing through the wheel's axle.

Although I think that the "toy page" holds the key to the Bessler mystery, unfortunately, due to the lack of details, interpreting it is largely a matter of one's subjective insight. In the final analysis, either you've got a design that uses some principle shown on that page and which works, or you have a design that shows some principle on the page and does not work. When you get the correct design, you will know it and probably almost immediately...



barksalot...

Good luck with your efforts. It sounds like you are doing it the good old fashioned way and actually building a wheel with mechanisms to replicate what you think the toy page is telling the reader. That's a slow and arduous path to take, but can, with great luck, produce results...


ken

[Michael]

Ken I wouldn't hedge all of your bets on one page, Bessler said a lot of things held "something" special thoughout the m.t. notes and in fact also said at the right place/s he won't say anything at all but will reveil just in picture format.

[Jon J Hutton]

Finally after redoing my design using the toy page I was able to add max wind resistance. and .3 on rotation dampeners and use a 2 lb weight to lift a 3lb weight the same distance that the 2lb weight traveled which started the process over again.... but it is really really weak. Because of this Im sure that there is another one of Besslers clues that will make it more useful. Just logging in to update my work.

[Paul]

I would like, as to the usual one, remind to you:
1) Gravity is not an energy but it is a field of force
2) For a body in the gravity field is important the level, not the way (path).
3) Gravity is a conservative force.
4) In a closed loop the result is always 0.

Convince you ... Bessler has deceived everybody !

Paulito

[ovyyus]

Paul, interesting point of view, can I ask - how do you think Bessler accomplished his wheel demonstrations?

[Paul]

If the fraud is done to art rule it can elude a great deal of observers. The Bessler history would not be the first case. None of us was present to the tests. All the writings which talk about this fact could be pure inventions. If the historical writings "say" the true, a system like spring or descending weights could have been used to give sufficient energy to the wheel. During the 2 month test, Bessler, after 15 days stopped the system and it could have reloaded the spring or the weight. Was the wheel under load during the 2 month test ?
Bessler could furthermore have used some other form of energy (electric chemistry or other).
If the Bessler history was true I do not think that the solution is in his drawings or his words. He certainly did everything to hide his true discovery.
Sorry but I cannot really think that in 300 years of researches no one has found a mechanical solution which exploits the same principle as Bessler wheel.
From the only gravity force it is not possible to obtain energy. What goes down must get back up, unfortunately the science is right.

Who uses the motion of the planets as example makes a mistake: in that case it is huge masses which rotate by inertia. If it is not like that I do not think that it is the gravity to keep the motion. An initial energy (big bang) has put the planets in motion and the order of bigness of the time of the human is an instant compared to those masses in inertial movement.

Trust me, if the Bessler history is true, to have his wheel turned he did not use gravity but something of other.

Paul

EDIT after john response (sorry john): Or he has used the gravity forces but not with solid weights. Water could for instance be used to gradually move its mass from a point to the other. (if I do not make a mistake, Bessler says something about "the weight is here and is not here" something like this ?).

[John Collins]

I understand your position Paul, but I believe that it is harder to accept your own point of view and go with current physics as it is taught, than to believe that Bessler found a way of using gravity to turn his wheel as long as it remained within the field of gravity, bearing in mind the number and extent of the tests carried out. I believe that the inclusion of Karl in the story makes the likelihood of fraud extremely remote.

I have proof that Bessler left constructive information about the way his wheels were built. I know that you are certain that Bessler's wheel could not have depended on gravity but I remain certain that they did. I also have some idea of the principle behind his machine and it is definitely not one I had thought of before. I cannot claim authorship of this idea since I got it from Bessler, but to me it seems entirely possible that no one has thought of this feature in 300 years.

There is also a particular requirement which I am aware of which makes success unlikely without its inclusion in the design. That is why Bessler kept repeating that no one had succeeded before because no one had been so determined to succeed. By this I believe that he meant that he tried every single design and made no assumptions. I will post more information on this as soon as I have finished my latest design and build and can see if I am right.

A final comment - the word 'connectivity' that Bessler uses in MT has several allied meanings and it might help to look in a synonym dictionary for other similar meanings.

John Collins