@All,
  This is a link to 2 builds that I am doing. One I am patenting as it is my own invention.
 It is nice having a place where I can post my work without someone trying to take it over.
 And Stephen will need to ban me since I do not like AB Hammer and his friends. Something about posting
no open work that is intended to work perpetually.
 Besides, I know what I was doing wrong with Bessler's wheel and am about a 1/4 or 1/3 of the way to having it built.
  Almost cut off 3 fingers working on it so that slowed things down. It does take 2 hands and a pay check to build.
 And the 2nd link is to the small shop I'm working in. It'll do for what I'm doing.
 And since I am building at my expense, I guess people like AB Hammer who can only show pictures of his armor and non-working wheels can be jealous. There is a museum for non working devices, my work will not be found there.
 And TK, it doesn't matter who you are, you don't know the first thing about engineering. If you did, you would be all over me like a dog in heat. I think that's all you know  :-)

ttp://www.woodworkingtalk.com/f9/besslers-wheel-58361/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1OPf_KPXbQ

  @All,
  This is a link to 2 builds that I am doing. One I am patenting as it is my own invention.
 It is nice having a place where I can post my work without someone trying to take it over.
 And Stephen will need to ban me since I do not like AB Hammer and his friends. Something about posting
no open work that is intended to work perpetually.
 Besides, I know what I was doing wrong with Bessler's wheel and am about a 1/4 or 1/3 of the way to having it built.
  Almost cut off 3 fingers working on it so that slowed things down. It does take 2 hands and a pay check to build.
 And the 2nd link is to the small shop I'm working in. It'll do for what I'm doing.
 And since I am building at my expense, I guess people like AB Hammer who can only show pictures of his armor and non-working wheels can be jealous. There is a museum for non working devices, my work will not be found there.
 And TK, it doesn't matter who you are, you don't know the first thing about engineering. If you did, you would be all over me like a dog in heat. I think that's all you know  :-)

ttp://www.woodworkingtalk.com/f9/besslers-wheel-58361/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1OPf_KPXbQ

j_lindgaard1 I am sorry you have had to battle with cancer.  The couple of pieces in the pictures and video look like works of love.

The problem with perpetually unbalanced wheels is that gravity persistently shows itself to be a conservative force.  No matter how anyone designs a gravity machine, over the course of one full cycle everything in the machine will have traversed a closed path sometime over the course of that cycle.  That's up the stairs down the stairs so to speak for each and everything in the machine.  That means that the net energy available to the machine over that full cycle adds to zero.

 I also know you don't build anything yet harass me for what I work on.
It's my hobby and I plan on enjoying it. Why I'll continue my work in a forum where people do build. They understand it takes time.   

edited to add; @All, almost cut off 3 fingers working through my medical problems. For people that have no serious health concerns, and no builds to show, expect what TK and his friends post.

j_lindgaard1 I am sorry you have had to battle with cancer.  The couple of pieces in the pictures and video look like works of love.

The problem with perpetually unbalanced wheels is that gravity persistently shows itself to be a conservative force.  No matter how anyone designs a gravity machine, over the course of one full cycle everything in the machine will have traversed a closed path sometime over the course of that cycle.  That's up the stairs down the stairs so to speak for each and everything in the machine.  That means that the net energy available to the machine over that full cycle adds to zero.

  Thanks Mark.
 It took me a while to realize specifically what Bessler knew. Lack of cooperation from other forum members made things more difficult than necessary.
 With 2 opposing bellows, work is measured by how much a bellow opens and the mass of the water moving.
The transverse (lateral) movement of the water takes time. And if the orifice is too small, then it creates an obstacle.
 With a sufficient opening between bellows, water will flow rather quickly. There is more to it than that but to understand a new concept and realize it's potential can take a little time to think it over.

  Jim

Jim, I am glad that you are enjoying your efforts.

I try to do what I can to keep analysis simple.   When it comes to cyclical machines seeing what happens to each significant piece in one complete cycle is useful.  It avoids a lot of mucking around that can lead to misinterpretations and mistakes.  I liken it to a scavenger hunt where we skip all the steps in the middle.  All that matters from an energy perspective is where we start and where we end each cycle.  In the case of overbalanced wheels, over one complete cycle everything ends up back where it started.  Under the assumption that gravity is indeed a conservative field as our current understanding of science asserts it is, that means that there is zero net energy we can extract each cycle.  Now, if one isn't quite so sure that gravity is a conservative field there are at least two options one can take:  Build up an entire machine to see if one can make a self-running apparatus, or try and figure out a condition under which gravity might not be conservative, and then test under those conditions to see whether gravity stubbornly remains conservative or not.

  Mark,
  Many years ago, I use to do simple tests for conservation of momentum. And as you mentioned, when something moves, it needs to be moved to it's original position after every cycle. Bessler's wheel does this.
 You see, I have taken much criticism for how much math I employed. A couple of people just hated it. But it does show where potential exists. And with what I am working on, it comes to life. I tend to think of an over balanced wheel as a differential equation.
 It is as Bessler said, there is a motion to be found in his drawings.
 With Mt 27, the 2 opposing levers will have only one weight out of balance. The weight that is 90 degrees to the bellows is considered in balance. And if the bellow on top opens 2 inches and the wheel is 40 inches in diameter, the center of mass for the shifting water will move about 24 inches.
 That's 12 inches of over balance. What needs to be considered now is the total mass of the water. If it is 4 lbs., then 8 inch lbs. of force as a minimum is needed to open the bellow. And a 1 lb. weight using leverage can have 2 lbs. of force which means the weight needs to drop 5 inches.
 This leaves you with a net gain. It will work. It took me 6 months to realize Bessler used water then another year or 2 to figure out precisely how he did it.
 Needless to say, a few people pretty much hate me for sticking with it and realizing Bessler's wheel. Some people's credibility is based on Bessler's wheel not becoming known.
 BTW, I will be building Mt 127 on the way to a 4 weighted wheel.

   Jim

Jim, if we enforce First Principles and examine carefully we will find that there is no overbalance over the course of a complete machine cycle. 

Enjoy the project anyway.  The woodwork you have done looks very nice to me.

  May not need to build it. I sent a letter to the editor of a local newspaper explaining how photosynthesis works.
The reason this matters is that the CO2 emissions from coal fired power plants could be reduced to safe levels which would allow for the slowing or even stopping of Global Warming.
 It is interesting that a plant can produce O2 from water and carbon dioxide while man and his technology can not replicate it.
I guess nobody ever took the time to understand the process. I did take the time to explain what has been missed. I am hopeful they will print it so it can be reviewed and tried.
 If so, I guess I'd be a little bit ahead of everybody.

  Jim

Jim, I have offered you my sympathies for your hardships.  I have encouraged your efforts that you find rewarding.  I do not speak for anyone else here or anywhere else, nor does anyone else speak for me.  If you have or have had personal conflicts with other people, that is between you and them to work out.

I have explained why no overbalanced wheel has ever worked, and why no overbalanced wheel can ever work.  The inner details and complexity of any particular device are irrelevant:  It's the conservative nature of gravity that clobbers these devices every time.  Whether I would like to or not, I cannot change nature.

Good luck with your efforts.

Jim, I'm sorry if I did not make myself clear.

No gravity / overbalanced wheel can possibly work because:

1) Gravity is a conservative field.  If a mass travels over an arbitrary path from a starting point back to that same point no gravitational energy is gained or lost.
2) All gravity wheels operate cyclically.  Over the course of a complete cycle, each and every element of the machine follows some path that ends up back where it started at the end of the cycle.
3) All real machines have real energy losses, such as friction.

1) Removes the need to perform detailed analysis of the path that any element of a proposed over balanced wheel might follow.  Levers, cogs, balls, fluids, magnets can move in arbitrarily complex ways, but as long as any element eventually ends up back where it started, there is no gravitational energy that can be extracted by that element's travels. 
2) Establishes that all elements of a gravity / overbalanced wheel eventually end up back where they started at the end of a cycle.  The machine might be designed so that a cycle is one, a few, or many rotations of the wheel proper, but eventually anything and everything ends up back at the identical starting point.

1) + 2) taken together mean that there is no energy that can be extracted from a gravity / overbalanced wheel cycle to cycle independent of the configuration or complexity of the design.

1) + 2) + 3) taken together mean that no gravity / overbalanced wheel machine can self-sustain.

I see that you contend that "gravity is no more conservative than any other form of energy".  Your statement is an extraordinary claim against First Principles.  It is up to you to show an example where the First Law of Thermodynamics can be shown to be false.  If you can achieve such an amazing feat you will change physics as we currently know it forever.