Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Was Bessler for real?  (Read 132736 times)

Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #45 on: December 05, 2011, 11:15:03 PM »
There are MANY, MANY people who truly want you to be successful, and millions who desperately NEED you to be successful and give this information out to the people. What we don't need is constant claims that you have something without ever showing us a working device. I for one would bow down and acknowledge your greatness if you truly came up with an answer. However, until such time as you demonstrate a working model, you somewhat resemble a large bag of hot  air.


I myself have built devices that are able to raise a weight from the bottom half of the wheel to the top half of the wheel, making the top half continuously heavier than the bottom half, but this does NOT mean I have been able to sustain rotation. You have a working device when you actually have A DEVICE THAT WORKS, and not until. We will sing your praises when you finally demonstrate that you do. Until then, silence is golden.
David

garrypm

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #46 on: December 05, 2011, 11:22:31 PM »
Hello

johnny874

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 958
    • Bessler_Supporter photobucket account
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #47 on: December 06, 2011, 01:07:29 AM »
A surprising number of people on this site are fans of Bessler. So I tread carefully when I say he had a background in watchmaking.

The problem I have with Bessler (leaving aside for the moment that his machine or something similiar has not been replicated) is that no-one has been able to demonstrate mathematically (theoretically) how such a machine is possible.

Ok. So they may be difficult to build. Fine. In that case show me a mathematical model indicating viability. A model showing anything other than net torques and forces adding up to zero.

When one considers powerful financial motivation and a background in watchmaking, fraud remains a real possibility.

When considering why an inventor would destroy their invention (for reasons of secrecy or because they were worried about being eviscerated and hung) all I can say is that 'evisceration' trumps 'patent infringement' every time.

Even if my view is wrong (it is after all only an opinion, based on the same facts available to everyone else), we have to ask ourselves what 'use' a perpetual motion machine would be...even if someone had managed to build one (sometime in the two most recent centuries of intense scientific progress).

Perpetual motion machines, even if they functioned as intended, would not in most cases be capable of performing useful work (I use 'work' not in the sense of moving something from one place to another, or the 'term of art' scientific sense, but in the sense of doing something useful for human beings aside from spinning aimlessly around).

That is why the United States Patent Office automatically rejects applications claiming perpetual motion. Because even if they worked and generations of nobel prize winning physicists were all fools, they would still be useless.

Perpetual motion machines attract scientific nutters like a powerful magnet (I include myself in this category as I find them fascinating). Accordingly, Bessler was one of us. For that, even though skeptical of his machine, I still love him.

  Read my last post in FYI. I give a basic description of how hydraulics easily accounts for one of his wheels.
Unfortunately, AB Hammer has continuously psoted I am a fraud for that concept. It could be his lack of schooling and experience in engineering. This is why I do my best to be patient with him.
  What does need to be remembered is that what Bessler knew is not currently an accepted principle in engineering in the fashion he used it. But then, when has a fluid been used to perpetuate the motion of a wheel. I believe this is what most people fail to consider, it is not what we know now, but what Bessler knew then. And as for myself, the concept of using fluid and pumps is found in his drawings if a person has schooling and/ or experience using mechanical drawings to work from in building components for machines. I myself have plenty. Both school and work.
 
                                                                                                                    Jim
 
edited to correct spelling

christo4_99

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #48 on: December 06, 2011, 09:36:06 AM »
It is a wonderful thing to know that somehow, somewhere you made a choice that nobody else ( or very very very few ) have made .

circle

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 42
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #49 on: December 07, 2011, 06:01:04 AM »
i will put my two cents in here
use deductive reasoning
cancel out that which can not be
let all that was seen to be be reflected in your speculation; every effort was made to document truthfully
let all that was described be understood deeply; be honest with yourself when evaluating your guesswork
moreso than anyone else you yourself can lead yourself astray and thereafter you yourself are a defacement of truth;
be quick to identify errant thought, errant logic, errant insight
having a true understanding of german cultural history is probably essential to unraveling the data
two essential points; springs had first been added to clocks little more than 50 years before the first wheel
understanding how weight was measured can give a needed insight
the german history describes an investigation with all the rigor of a modern investigation with the one caveat; that none view within
i solved it five days after finding that it existed
several of the days were spent in the effort of determining if enough data existed to determine what was within
it does
on a seperate note
here in this image is the work of airy detailing the mathematical foundation it is built upon

Dbowling

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #50 on: December 07, 2011, 06:13:36 AM »
Circle,
Can't wait to see what you have built. When will you be showing us?
David

rlortie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
    • 'Arrache'
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #51 on: December 07, 2011, 07:10:46 AM »
Yes! please do show us so we can all get it over with and I can retire.

Ralph E. Lortie
CEO  'Arrache'

christo4_99

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #52 on: December 07, 2011, 07:00:05 PM »
I had asked at some point to be banned and since then all my posts have to be approved by a moderator . I recently conceived a design that lends understanding to 100% of Bessler's clues and 100% of the eyewitness accounts so I feel that it is imperative that my voice be heard on this subject . As far as the build is concerned I am reluctant because I have no privacy as I am working on the back patio of my home and friends come and go also acquaintances . My reason for wanted to post at all is that I want to give credence and some validation to those who have searched for PM and not found it , assuring all that it is not a waste of time as is commonly thought . In the light of my understanding it irritates me to see people pinning Bessler's name to everything just to draw attention to invalid ideas . It seems that any given person gets more attention for sharing bad ideas than say someone like me who has been on the true path for some time and has finally arrived at a valid and hopeful concept but is not willing to share it per se as far as technical details . What I am willing to share is the refutation of the untruths commonly held on this particular subject . If I were a very religious man I would be claiming that as far as the PM principle is concerned God has blessed Bessler and I exclusively with this understanding . But since I am not religious I will just say that I have arrived here out of luck and deliberate seeking of the truth . The fact that I strongly believe that Bessler was sincere was no small influence . I cannot stand to see anyone doubting him ... for he tells us in very specific terms that it is in our own interest that we beware false teachings of men . Fletcher on besslerwheel once said to me that Bessler left us no way out of the wilderness but I say yes he did ! Best of luck to all who seek PM !

AB Hammer

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1253
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #53 on: December 09, 2011, 02:39:03 AM »

 
Unfortunately, AB Hammer has continuously psoted I am a fraud for that concept. It could be his lack of schooling and experience in engineering. This is why I do my best to be patient with him.
 
                                                                                                                    Jim
 

Jim Lindguard/P-Motion.......

 Your frauds where your untold number of sign ins even after being banned, breaking forum rules, and the things you say about myself and others.

 Go on with your talk on the ideas and leave myself and others out of your petty attacks. I am building, not talking. Even when I made a statement, was due to those who PMed me with questions on what you where saying.

Alan

johnny874

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 958
    • Bessler_Supporter photobucket account
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #54 on: December 09, 2011, 08:51:19 PM »
    Alan,
 Most everyone knows what I have built. Not sure you can consider open building
to be fraudulent. Have never seen you build anything nor have I seen you discuss engineering.
 Yet you claim the work I have done and am doing as fraudulent based on what ?
Based on nothing. Myself, I believe your accusations about myself are personal. Those are the only
comments you make. And as I have mentioned before, if you believe you can do better, show everybody.
 
                                                                                                Jim
 
edited to add; Alan, I remember when you started with all this crap about my login's. I used wh0wants2kn0w on youtube and Jim65 at museum of hoaxes. Why would that be cause for you to attack me ? And you've never stopped.
 And not sure why you would try and prevent me from finding someone who would be willing to help build Bessler's water wheel. Someone with a router would have an easy go of it. And you know I don't have a place to work. And everybody knows that if the bucket on a water wheel closes, it would pump the water up and out.
 Of course, it could be you want attention but do nothing to deserve any. After all, you are a private builder that can not contribute anything lest you give away your secrets.
 

johnny874

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 958
    • Bessler_Supporter photobucket account
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #55 on: December 10, 2011, 04:12:00 PM »
   Dr,
  Myself, initially I thought he was a fraud. But when I heard a few of his clues like his wheels had many cpmartments, I started taking him more seriously. One reason for this is that many compartments suggested to me that his wheels did not carry dead weight, like a flywheel.
 Also, they were covered with a cloth. Then while waiting to build, Alexioco got me more interested in his drawings. The intelligence they demonstrate is admirable. I have been told by some respected members of bessler wheel dot com that there are no runners in his drawings. Yet even Bessler said you should pay attention to detail.
 I think what Alexioco made me aware of is Bessler connecting diferent parts of his meachincs with modern bloack and tackle.
 And recently I found out that Liebniz signed off as someone who supported Bessler's claims. With someone like Liebniz supporting his efforts, there would have been no reason for anyone wanting to take his head off. For those who are not familiar with Liebniz, he co-invented calculus with Newton. Also, he noticed that Newton's work did not account for all of the properties that matter has. This observation lead to his famous mv^2 which is momentum and what is considered to have lead to modern science as we know it today. Liebniz had much to lose if he were supporting a fraud.
 I have heard that only a working wheel is proof. This is not the case. Even with a working wheel, there will be those that doubt someone could have done it 300 years ago because of prejudice. Simply put, they think people back then weren't as smart as we are today.
 
    @All, what got me into perpetual motion was my hearing loss. It's sufficient enough to where people think it's a learning disability. It makes things more difficult than necessary. Yesterday when I was being prepped for surgery, a nurse remembered me and told me about her son. He is deaf in one ear and because of this, some students will tell him to focus. One of his teachers thought he wasn't paying attention like he should in class. But with a hearing loss, often is the case that being able to see someone speaks makes a difference. And this is one of the reasons why being successful with Bessler is important. It will give me an opportunity to make known some of the problems people with a hearing loss have to endure.
 Because of the extra time I have, I have studied trigonometry with emphasis on rotation and leveraging. With a perpetual device, the energy it develops will initially need to be turned inward. And when you look at Bessler's drawings, they show such a design. A few even show what I believe to be a piston. I'm not sure if pistons had much use in the early 18th century. But his work suggests to me that he knew of quite a few things which we take for granted today as we see them all the time.
 And sometimes when considering someone's work like Bessler's, sometimes what is obvious is what is missing. Everyone is aware he built windmills. What I wonder is why no mention of water mills which performed the same work. Hitting to close to home ? Maybe.
 I also like his clue, if you can make 2 stones fly as one. I've often believed this was in reference to something like a trebuchet or catapult. Of course, when you are throwing the weight from a catapult, it is at the end of a long lever. And in numerous drawings numberd in the 30's, he shows levers that span the diameter of his wheel.
 Even so, since Dr wants to put to rest if Bessler was indeed successful, I would say yes. And this is one reason why I am doing what I can to demonstrate some of his engineering.
 At present, I have started doing blueprints for the build I will start after Christmas. There were some details I have not been comfortable with but have found solutions. I would post them, but I think unless someone finds schematics interesting, they would be bored by them. Still, not sure how well my rotary tool will hold up. It really is under powered for something like this.
 Almost forgot, I think one of his clues had something to do when levers/weights fall and threshing. In the third drawing down, http://www.besslerwheel.com/drawings.html , if you notice the 4 wood beams that are numer 6 are what is used for threshing wheat. If memory serves me right, it is for removing the husk. Also, they work one at a time. In considering a water wheel, 2 on each side would be needed. One would close the top of one pump while other would close the bottom of the next pump. And by having them work similar to the drawing, one can be higher than another, it would allow for the pumps to be closed without  interfering with the operation of the next one. This is because the pumps when moving inward would be like a wheel collapsing in on itself. But allowing one pump to be over the other, they can be closed at the same time by using a lever or scissor. You see, as they close, they would move away from each other. One of the tricks neceassary for a wheel.
 If anyone is interested, I have the cost for wood at under $50. Something I will be able to afford once I start getting my disability checks  :-)   As for the weights, those are something I can make as I have sufficient lead and a ladle. Making a mold won't be that difficult. Have some experience working with bearings and pouring them. It's called rebushing.
                                                                   
                                                                            Jim 

johnny874

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 958
    • Bessler_Supporter photobucket account
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #56 on: December 10, 2011, 08:28:49 PM »
   @All,
 Thought I would show a little of what I'm talking about.
At the top is the top view and there is the side view.
In the pic, A is a ring that goes around the outside of the wheel.
There would be 2 of them. With 4 full spokes and 4 - 1/4 spokes, there
would be 8 locations for fulcrums. Both for a lever and a scissor. With
scissors, 12 ounces (336 grams?) could generate 4 times the force.
 This would easily pump 12 to 24 ounces (672grams?) of water or oil.
As you can tell by the drawing, there isn't much to the wheel.
 There is a some what simple way to warp boards. Having a decent fixture
would make it something most anyone could do. What is needed is something
to boil them for 2 or 3 minutes. Then when they are set on the fixture, they
can be "stretched" to the form of the fixture. Clamps would have sufficient
force to fit them to the fixture. It would take a couple of days
of keeping them warm to cure them. This would allow them to keep their shapes.
 This design is for about 20 inches (1/2 meter) in diameter. All 8 spokes
would have a dowel connecting them to the spoke on the opposite side
of the wheel. Support for the mechanics.
 With development in mind, the levers that work the pump would need to
be removeable. This would allow for their configuration or the water/oil tubes
to be modified.
 While oak is a good solid wood, pine is much lighter. And who knows, for how
flimsy pine might seem to be, with stress properly accounted for, it might be
found to be quite durable.
 
                                                                Jim
 
edited to add, pic didn't show for me but did open by clicking on the link for it. Was p.c. I am on.
 And one important detail is the space between the spoke and the outer ring. A
block would need to be placed there to give the spoke a solid placement. This
is shown in the top view.
 Not sure Alan, but this type of building is very different from anything you or your friends have tried.  I guess if you and your friends can't keep up, attack. What a motto.
 Ken, this would be the most likely way Bessler built his wheel. And he did use warped boards. Why ? Because wheels are round and it makes for efficient pumping.
 It's like when John Collins asked about the number 5 appearing a lot after I told him Bessler saw himsel as Hermes. And Bessler being religious gave it 2 meanings it seems. For those who looked for symbolism, they would find religion. Jesus said symbolism was for the devil would be why. And the other ? Only 5 planets are visible with the naked eye. And the only interesting things is mars retrograde motion which would be some what mimicked by a water wheel. The religious 5 possibly was a reference to the pentagram in the rosicrucian which has to do with the freemason's altar.
 I guess when you consider Bessler, the times he lived in, etc., it does seem to make sense.
And myself, I doubt someone who uses the Freemason's symbol in some of their drawings would lie. It's to clear what that is.
 

pinobot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 73
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #57 on: December 11, 2011, 01:29:18 PM »
I believe he used eccentricity, i'm waiting for some magnets to come in for experiments for my vertical gauss rifle idea and i am looking into the Minato principle and i thinks eccentricity could work there too.
Will post a drawing later to show exactly what i mean.  :)


I believe i read somewhere that the people that witnessed the machine said they heard thing falling inside the machine, i believe it weren't weights falling but the whole wheel itself falls.

christo4_99

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #58 on: December 12, 2011, 06:49:37 AM »
there are too many people attaching "Bessler " to everything they do including me in the past but notice that I have only posted one proposed design in all that I have authored . The only other thing i posted was images of a "mirrored" apologia wheel . I must be clear that I do not intend to publish my ideas anywhere . I am fed up with people who mislead others with stupid ideas and I simply refuse to join in on the hoopla .  I got tired of that a while back and turned to the man himself for inspiration . Bessler knew how difficult it was for him even as a mechanically minded practiced individual to arrive at the PM principle . It is my opinion that his clues are not so vague as most think and his intentions were never so calculated either . It's just our understanding that is limited . I am relentlessly pursuing this quest . Nobody in my family nor my friends  have disowned me for claiming that I have discovered Bessler's principle at least 100 times ! but these online communities have . For me it was a part of the learning process and it has served to express my belief in Bessler as well as the possibility of PM . Inasmuch as I can apologize publicly  I hope that everyone will understand it is not for a lack of integrity that I make claims, rather it is my enthusiasm and full heart which spills from my lips . I can hear the PM gurus chiming in on that one but i am sorry... that's all you get . It occured to me that if the PM principle is discovered ( ;) ) that a lot of people's bullshit will be seen for what it is , all those who even recently are content to add insult to injury by continuing to heap scorn and ridicule on Bessler will be silenced once again . the principle for the reception of which Bessler felt that he owed  God will be attributed rightly so to Bessler ... and not me or any of these who pretend and create pretty websites and such instead of seeking PM. I have nothing against pretty websites but what really is the point if you have the same information as everyone else and top it off with lies and superstitious nonsence ( or useless ideas) ? Folks at Besslerwheel decided on their own that I was Autistic , Narcasistic , delusional , rude , unlikely to find the principle , a newb among other things , a liar and some guy even said something about my hair ( or lack of it ) and my sunglasses ! But don't you see Bessler himself was a fellow somewhat like me ? He was trying to get through to you people that this thing can be done . And that's all I've actually been trying to do . I feel pity for some of you old guys who have spent your whole lives looking at this "information " and getting nowhere . I think God should have pity on you via yours truly ! Everything seems impossible until it's done . From where I stand right now I believe that everyone who has ever believed in Bessler (or PM) should be prepared to feel some tears of joy swelling up in their eyes some day soon ...and if they don't they  just have  not been listening . In closing :Spare me the insults ...they don't bother me anyway . " Grasshopper : I have snatched the pebble from the master's hand . "Master : It was not the pebble which you snatched that was important but the calm spirit by which you concealed you true intent . "

johnny874

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 958
    • Bessler_Supporter photobucket account
Re: Was Bessler for real?
« Reply #59 on: December 12, 2011, 04:39:16 PM »
I believe he used eccentricity, i'm waiting for some magnets to come in for experiments for my vertical gauss rifle idea and i am looking into the Minato principle and i thinks eccentricity could work there too.
Will post a drawing later to show exactly what i mean.  :)


I believe i read somewhere that the people that witnessed the machine said they heard thing falling inside the machine, i believe it weren't weights falling but the whole wheel itself falls.

  pinobot,
 I believe something like this. I once told Alan the only reason I was working on this is because of medical problems. The surgery I had Friday should take care of them. Other things more important to me right now.
 With the long levers, they weights would land on warped boards. They are attached to the pump to help hold it's shape. One clue was weights landing on warped boards. This would be to keep the mechanics and levers from breaking. Why the weights would also be tethered.
 After one weight/lever pumps, it creates a seal. Then when the next lever pumps, the flow will be in one way.
 alan, you always wanted a working design, here it is.
 The pictures are color coded so the levers can be matched from one drawing to the other. The levers would have been nested. This happens by attaching one to each side of the wheel. This will allow the weights to be in the center of the wheel. Leverage on the long lever is caclulated from where the scissor attaches to it to the weight. This distance is compared to the length of the pump. The scissors is comparing distance A to distance B.
 With water, if a 1 pound weight is 12 inches from where it pumps, this is 12 inch pounds of force. This will allow 1 pound of water to be pumped vertically a distance of 1 foot.
 The basis of this design.
 
                                                                                Bye
                                                                                 Jim
 
edited to add; to try for 60 rpm's, the pumps/weights moving across the top can use vacuum. Think of the bellows found in a black smith's shop, when they open, the siphon, when they close, they pump. I think Bessler forgot to mention seeing them when he was in a black smith's shop. But combine that with a water wheel. Of course, if he saw a water wheel by the river, it might have been the rivers flow that propelled it's wheel, not water from above. If so, then the wheel would have been in water. It might be what he saw in nature, a literal and figureative expression. You know, 2 meanings. Either way, it would have been the flow of water around the wheel, just as I belive he used.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2011, 06:22:16 PM by johnny874 »