BesslerWheel.com

[wheelrite]

at each end of a pendulum's swing it is 'weightless' for a very small amount of time before it reverses direction.....is this thinking corrrect?, would it be possible to lift/affect it at this critical time with another linked weight ?
any ideas or elightenment anyone?
Regards
Jon

[TommyK]

Yes. If your pendulum is hollow you can plant an internal weight to give it a kick at the zero point of it's swing, which actually raises it past the zero point by inertia.

Edit.
I wanted to add this for those who might not have seen it before.
It is in the USPTO under 6,237,342



My device is very similar to it.

---

grav.jpg
Description:
Filesize:	81.72 KB
Viewed:	1043 Time(s)

---

---

half.jpg
Description:
Filesize:	86.05 KB
Viewed:	898 Time(s)

---

[Patrick]

Hi wheel;
In my opinion, I think that is an awesome/excellent question. My answer to your question is, yes, I believe this is possible. The pendulum is temporarily weightless but for a small fraction of time, too small to take advantage of on a small scale with the known methods of current technology but certainly possible on a large scale. If you could extract/extrapolate the 'moment of suspension' the weight could be freely manipulated in a number of ways and over a considerable distance without any hinderance from gravity and/or/neglible friction. Think of an analogy of a jetliner accelerating at angle, then dropping, creating a weightless condition for the occupants temporarily; how can the occupants experience weightlessness when they are clearly within the range of the earth's gravitational 'pull'/effects? This is simply your pendulum extrapolated on a large scale. Imagine sitting on a very large pendulum, at the 'moment of suspension, you become, similarly, temporarily weightless, as in the jetliner example.
Your question leads to a monumental hypothethis:
Why can we not witness a momentary suspension on a small scall; and why then are the effects of gravity negated for a full several minutes inside the jumbo jet?
The answer: time is related/relative to size/mass.
How can this be demonstrated? Take a small toy car and fling it across the room; it flips 'quickly' and inconsequentially. Watch a car flip over in the movies; it almost appears to be in slow motion...kaboom etc. Look at the earth spin from outer space....ssslllooow very slow...yet we are told it rotates at about 25,000 miles per hour! The more massive an object, the slower it moves? No, of course not! However, the more massive an object, the slower it 'appears' to move.
{Time is a mass related concept inherently intertwined/interrelated to the characteristics of the subject experiencing it. (ie. it is related to their size relative to the object, distance from the object, comparable sizes of the two objects, etc.,etc.)}
Where does that leave us with the pendulum? Look closely at MT123. A large enough pendulum action gives a momentary suspension of a fraction of a second. Enough time to affect/effect an input at the area labelled 'F'. This time/size concept is the reason you cannot build a Besslerian wheel on a small scale, say, 12" in diameter. You need the temporary weightlessness to manipulate the input for transdirectional/inertial weight transfer to the opposite side of the wheel. Once this is achieved, you are in business. I do not believe Bessler was able to achieve this particular method of sustained rotation; but rather surmise that he succeeded with a brute force/mechanical manipulation; perhaps he was very close with MT123. I do have a theory/idea of how to implement a maximum-amplitude-pendulum-weightless mass transfer resulting in sustained motion but I think I need a slightly larger wheel to test the concept. For the time being; I think your question points to an area that is worthy of further investigation.
--Patrick

[Patrick]

...

[VergingOnDone]

I'm changing my post because I'm still building my wheel but, the general idea is that stopping the Torque Governer Wheel will affect the pendulum at the outside of each swing, but the pedulum is still weighs the same at all times.

[Jonathan]

Though I really like this idea, and think one could use it, it would be more constructive if we used the correct terminology. At no point is anything on earth truely weightless, be it a pendulum or the people riding on the Vomet Comet (as they call it).
Patrick, you are entirely incorrect, or seem to be. Earth has a small angular velocity, that is why it appears to move slowly. But the earth is very big (not to be confused with massive which implies that mass has anything to do with it), and the distance traveled by a point on the circumference is a function of the size (radius, not mass) of the object. For earth, w=.001745329 rad/s and r=6,378,100 m, so the tangential velocity anywhere on the equator is v=11,132 m/s.
Your example of the cars makes no sense because the laws of physics do not scale linearly. Just because a ten story bug would collapse under its own weight doesn't mean that small bugs can't exist.
That pendulum weightlessness we all know of isn't that at all, it is a moment were the velocity of the pendulum is zero, gravity is indeed still working on it.
As to the small ball inside a hollow pendulum bob, I don't think it would fly up and give some extra moment to the pendulum. I think this because the ball is subject to the same decceleration from gravity that the bob is, so there would be very little relative motion between them. Of course this would depend on the topology of the interior of the bob.

_________________
Disclaimer: I reserve the right not to know what I'm talking about and not to mention this possibility in my posts. This disclaimer also applies to sentences I claim are quotes from anybody, including me.

[Patrick]

Hi Jonathan;
Keep up the studies.
--Patrick

by the way,
11,132 m/s = 11.132 km/s
11.132/1.609=6.919 miles/sec
6.919x60 = 415 miles/min x 60 = 24,900 Miles per hour.

[Sevich]

It's starting to get better and better....(Soap opera revisited)

[scott]

Hi Wheelrite,

Thanks for your post. I too have thought a lot about this question. First let me point you to a post I made on the old discussion board, particularly to the section called "Rhythmic Weight Change."
http://www.besslerwheel.com/wwwboard/messages/435.html

Indeeed, from the point of view of the pivot, a swinging weight is lighter at the end points and heavier at the bottom of the swing than if the mass were at rest. How to synchronize a set of swinging weights with the revolution of a wheel is another matter... But I must say to my mind such an arrangement does seem like a feasible, if not trivial engineering problem to solve.

On a related note, here's a site called "Amusement Park Physics" which describes the "weightlessness" phenomenon at the end points of the swing:
http://www.learner.org/exhibits/parkphysics/pendulum.html

And on a tangentially related note, here is an interesting article about synchronized oscillators (a phenomenon first noted by Huygens in 1665):

[Jonathan]

(I've only just been informed that Patrick said something that wasn't there when I got here, Sevich's post makes more sense now.)
I'm sorry I've upset you, I didn't mean to be mean. I knew that 11km/s=25000mi/h, I said that because what you said seemed to be in disbelief of such a large number, and I was showing (using SI since it makes more sense) how it is in fact very simple to prove and makes perfect sense once you do.

[Patrick]

Hi Scott;
I read your notes from Nov 13/02 and I think that you have touched on a possible solution in principle except without the ratchet mechanism. I agree with this statement you made:

[VergingOnDone]

Bessler's wheel had little if not anything to do with weights being unbalanced or near one side or the other. Remember it is more of a distraction to witnesses who heard banging. This is not the power of it! The action is in the pendulum and Torque Governor Wheel used between stored energy and released energy in the movement. I'm still building my wheel with this in mind and the principle is sound, that's why I'm being so vague... but I am 100 percent certain of the movement -I have demonstrated it to my family, the only thing left is the powering the stopping arms with self reloading springs which I'm still thinking on. When you have little or no tools no time and little money it takes way longer than you think!

[Jonathan]

I don't remember what Patrick quoted Scott saying at all, I'll have to look for it.
VergingonDone, I really think you should share this idea of yours. If there is a problem with it, it will be found sooner and cheaper that way. If there's no problem, you'll have finally ended this madness of ours.
EDIT
I found what Patrick is talking about, I think I must have missed those last two paragraphs (in the link), I wish I hadn't because I think that is very interesting.
http://www.besslerwheel.com/wwwboard/messages/435.html

[Sevich]

If these links are true, which I believe they are!! ..Then mechanical Perpetual Motion or Gravity driven devices as well as magnetic PM will all be obsolete in the not too distant future. This device has no moving parts! http://www.rexresearch.com/sweet/1nothing.htm http://colossus2.bcf.bcm.tmc.edu/~wje/free_energy/sweet_vta/sweetvta.txt

[coylo]

Well Sevich, this "negative electricity" stuff seems way out of my league. My mind only works mechanically. I thought the story from the this link...
http://colossus2.bcf.bcm.tmc.edu/~wje/free_energy/sweet_vta/sweetvta.txt
was doing well until.......

"God revealed to Floyd sufficient information to build a machine to provide energy that resembles electricity. However, God did not provide solutions to the frustrating string of problems that would surface in converting the idea into a working device."

This really tarnishes its credibility.