Weights

[graham]

I'm hoping 2007 to be a lucky year.

Arn't we all ?

Graham

[scott]

Best of luck to you Jim!

[Flywheel]

if this has been posted before, then sorry cause I can't read a whole page like that, I just can't.

I think it's simple why bessler use cylinders, let me list the whys:
1)it's easier to make
2)if it's simply rolling in a straight line then it has more mass and thus weigh more, probably making the wheel more powerful and more impressive
3) he probably piveted something at the ends and that would be easier to do with cylinders
I think those are good enough reasons.

About the change from a liquid to solid thing, maybe he used cornstarch and water? If you mix those to at just the right amount it becomes a liquid, but whenever you hit it it becomes a solid for a second, you should try it!

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/371779/th ... g_oobleck/

[Thomas]

Based on the things Bessler did and said, I have many opinions regarding what may or may not be true. If I were in his place under the same circumstances, I know what kind of things I would say and do to protect my secret until the time (sale of the wheel) was right to reveal all.

Regarding the cylindrical weights, has anyone ever considered this. These cylindrical weights were distributed evenly around the perimeter of his wheel, basically causing a flywheel effect. Bessler hid the ends of these weights from view to add to our confusion. These weights were round perhaps to make us think they rolled. What I'm saying is, these weren't the weights that contributed to the motion of his machine.

Tom

[wheelrite]

I think its likely there were two shapes of weight, cylinder and sphere, maybe the cylinder ones were shown to put us off the scent, ie they infer rolling (not true) and maybe instead they had a through hole length wise and were moved up and down a pole(spring?) if the pole were hinged it could be a pendulum part time. Or if threaded on rope could be affected by the rope loosening, twanging etc.
Bessler made some issue of 'form' and the shape of weights seems important, are we missing some little know trait of one of these forms? maybe a pendulum with a swinging cylinder?, or flipping/rotation cylinder?, or in combination with a sphere(pair of pairs)? so many possibilities.
Regards
Jon

[Fletcher]

That is a possibility but somewhere in answer to a witness he said that no such subtifuge was used & that the weights were the essence of his PM principle, in & of themselves [paraphrased].

So if force of gravity [i.e. accelerartion due to gravity of an object] is the same for all objects with mass [regardless of the amount of mass] & the PM principle comes from the weights themselves, then a differential force must have been created thru movement, that wasn't directly tied to acceleration due to gravity.

As we all understand, objects always have Inertia which is proportional to its mass. Here's the interesting bit. If you apply a make believe constant acceleration force to an object its rate of increase of velocity is proportional to its mass i.e. the more massive the slower the rate of change of velocity, in all directions.

However, gravity ignores an objects mass or Inertia & a constant accelerating force due gravity changes the velocity of ALL objects at the exact same rate of change, when falling in the field. Most unusual to say the least.

So, if gravity [acceleration due to ..] is just a field of force which pushes things downwards at the same rate of acceleration [simplistic analogy] then there is nothing to be gained by way of direct differential from the force of gravity, as there isn't one, & mechanical leveraging/repositioning alone can't give that differential to create constant OOB.

That leaves the only other major player - Inertia - which could be said to be a bodies resistance to change in direction or velocity. Energy [1/2mv^2] is required to change a body's inertia so the amount of energy to do that is directly proportional to the body's momentum increase or decrease.

Imo, somehow Bessler was able to use gravity to get something moving/swinging [knowing that the momentum gained from gravity would be exactly recovered later]. Then, some arrangement of CoG neutral weight pairs was caused to morph/rotate [from the CF generated] creating an Inertial Hammer to do work via Kinetic Impact. The design of the Inertial Hammer [as it gained momentum] had little effect on the swing mechs Center of Gyration, not slowing it much. The Kinetic Energy from Impact was channelled to change the swing mechs CoG allowing it to swing to a higher Potential Energy State within the wheel, with the process repeating on the back swing.

An "Inertial Impellor" literally.

[graham]

That leaves the only other major player - Inertia - which could be said to be a bodies resistance to change in direction or velocity.

Nice post.

Yes Fletcher you're looking in the right place for the answer.
I am building , albeit slowly, my inertial suppression device .
I shall provide the details of my success or failure here on the boards.

Graham

[DrWhat]

Well done Fletcher. You hit the nail on the head. This is what we are trying to achieve. I have built wheels to achieve this outcome. In theory they would definitely work but in practice they don't. So I just keep going. I believe I'll get there soon.

[rlortie]

Fletcher,

An "Inertial Impellor"

An interesting and provocative term. It leads the my mind into innovative thinking which has lead to one more concept which I must try.

"Inertial impeller" compared to a centrifugal pump may prove to be an interesting approach. I do believe you have recharged the old brain cells!

Ralph

[wheelmaster]

Imo, somehow Bessler was able to use gravity to get something moving/swinging [knowing that the momentum gained from gravity would be exactly recovered later]. Then, some arrangement of CoG neutral weight pairs was caused to morph/rotate [from the CF generated] creating an Inertial Hammer to do work via Kinetic Impact.

If you have more to say on this subject I am all ears. I am building a wheel that works along that line of thought that should prove your theory.

[wheelrite]

Fletcher, you said 'Imo, somehow Bessler was able to use gravity to get something moving/swinging [knowing that the momentum gained from gravity would be exactly recovered later]. Then, some arrangement of CoG neutral weight pairs was caused to morph/rotate [from the CF generated] creating an Inertial Hammer to do work via Kinetic Impact. The design of the Inertial Hammer [as it gained momentum] had little effect on the swing mechs Center of Gyration, not slowing it much. The Kinetic Energy from Impact was channelled to change the swing mechs CoG allowing it to swing to a higher Potential Energy State within the wheel, with the process repeating on the back swing.'
Does this tie in with the striking of the anvils and them 'hopping' across a notch on the beam to affect the cog? as I pondered in my post on page http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewt ... 5&start=15
this would make a very noisy wheel as reported, and can a large round weight of high mass that moves only a little be described as a fat lazy wandering cow?
Best Regards
jon

[wheelrite]

Maybe you can lift 4 pounds with one pound if the heavy weight is spinning(as per eric Laithewaites demonstration that its easier to lift a rotating weight), could be this is what the spinning top toy indicates on the toys page? and the twisted man showing were the weight is lifted by attachment to a parallelogram frame?
Is a cylindrical weight pierced through the centre(not longways) and spinning the same effectively as a disc or sphere spinning?
There seems to be a large reduction in effort required to raise a spinning mass, I wonder if its around 4 to 1 if spinning and the leverage of the parallelogram is used?
Any thoughts?
Regards
Jon

[Fletcher]

Jon .. here is a simple & interesting experiment you might like to do. It will take about 5 minutes to set up & get a result.

Find a old bike rim. Bang in a nail in your garages rafters & from it tie a string that will hang down to eye level. At the end of the string tie it to the axle of the wheel rim so that the wheel rim hangs horizontally, approximately.

Take a firm grip of the axle so the wheel rim is now vertical & give it a fast spin & let it go.

The axle will now stay horizontal & the wheel rim vertical [thereabouts] until the rotation slows noticeably.

Now repeat the experiment with a fish scale inserted in the string line [preferably where you can easily see it]. Record the scale reading b4 you start the experiment & check it again after the gyroscope is spinning away merrily.

Is there any difference in the scale reading ? Was it easier to lift vertically when spinning or was it just less awkward because the weight wasn't trying to torque thru your fingers ?

[Patrick]

I like all the comments about cylindrical weights. I found an interesting wooden toy recently at thrift shop. See the image below:



Maybe the weights themselves could be manipulated/hollowed out to cause a unique leverage effect against the three axles.

For example see the videos below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzhbFuorWZg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-9JOYSdPkM

an interesting method of addressing the "weights themselves" as being the primary motive force.

--patrick

[Fletcher]

Hey Patrick .. I was wondering if you can shed some further light on this wooden toy ? My eyes aren't what they used to be.

Looks like two axles ? Each axle passes thru a cylinder [one end only] & as it rolls down the slope they give the opposing axle a wack ? I can't seem to see how the third cylinder is attached ?

Perhaps you can help explain its setup ?