Posted by ovyyus (150.101.145.242) on October 12, 2003 at 23:59:19:
In Reply to: Re: John Collins/PS posted by John Collins on October 12, 2003 at 23:07:57:
Hi Michael,
I have to say that I agree with John. As a method of proof, burying a complete wheel would be both useless and very risky - IMO, of course.
When Bessler referred to 'burning and burying', in relation to his expected arrest, I believe he was referring to documentation that explicitely described his secret (which he would have burned) and select original printing plates which also described his secret (which he would have buried because he might perhaps need them later).
I think it's very possible that Bessler encoded published documents with information relating to his invention, there are plenty of clues that point in that direction. But his code, should it ever be cracked, may not deliver a step-by-step construction guide at all. I think it's possible he was just too paranoid to risk even the possibility of someone breaking his code and robbing him of his reward. Codes are risky. In this case his encoded information may only be more generalised descriptions intended to support any future case of priority AFTER the secret was already known.
Regards, ovyyus
: I understand where you're headed here Michael, but I can't really help you as I don't know any details such as you ask. Personally I am convinced that the "poem" is basically a poetic description of the way the wheel worked. Although I repect your ideas I think that you're mistaken in thinking that believing that Bessler would have buried a wheel. He believed that it was important to sell his machine but just in case someone also invented one or somehow stole his idea, he needed some simple way to prove his priority in the design of the machine. Burying a working model was fraught with danger. Someone might stumble across it accidently and anyway he did not own any land at that time and would not do so for some ten years on. Burying such a device in someone else's land seems quite unsafe. It was already an established practice to hide such designs in innocent looking pieces of paper, I already mentioned that Christopher Wren and Gallilleo did it and so did others who wished to prove priority in their discoveries. I'm absolutely certain that Bessler hid some kind of proof in his published works, otherwise why all the clues? Besides when you think about it how does burying a wheel with a view to digging it up if needed to prove that he did it first, prove that? People would just say that he quickly constructed it himself. There is no proof of priority such as there would be in a pre-published piece of literary work.
: John
: : Michael, you asked if there were any mountains, rivers , salt mines etc in the region, The answer is yes, but I don't see how that helps as he wrote Apologia in 1716-17 and did not get to live in Karlshafen until about 1726 and that is some distance from Kassel (by horse in those days)where he was living. The area is very attractive with hills and winding rivers and tree-clad slopes. Mining is carried out some further distance away in the Erzeberg region and is really too far to consider.
: : Hi John,
: : Actually it's not to far to consider if going off of what I was thinking, about "something" being placed in the center of three main geographical points of reference. A couple of other questions;
: : Is one of the mines up high, like in a cliff wall, and can any of these hills be seen from here? Do any of the hills have three different elevations relative to each other. In other words are they connected to each other, but have three different elevations.