Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Gravity powered devices => Gravity powered devices => Topic started by: John Collins on May 23, 2008, 08:43:26 AM

Title: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 23, 2008, 08:43:26 AM
I have a feeling that little is known here about Johann Bessler, also known as Orffyreus, so I will just say that further information is available from www.free-energy.co.uk (http://www.free-energy.co.uk).  This web site which has been on-line since 1997 is the result of a lifetime of research into the life of the inventor.  I have tried to spread information about him but it is a slow process and time is short with the incredible rising oil prices.

John Collins
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: eavogels on May 23, 2008, 10:31:00 AM
I just wondered why so often people are referring to MT - drawings.
I finally found them all listed here:

http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html (http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html)

For those like me that just started to become interested in gravity wheels an Bessler.

/Eric
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 23, 2008, 10:32:21 AM
Most appreciated my friend, I think I shall look in to that straight away, strange because I was looking around for more information on him, thanks
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 23, 2008, 11:58:32 AM
Quote
I just wondered why so often people are referring to MT - drawings.
I finally found them all listed here:

http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html

Sorry about that, I called the drawings MT, short for Maschinen Tractate, which I took from Bessler's own writings. For convenience I have a habit of shortening all of his book titles.  So Das Triumphans... becomes DT.  Grundlicher Bericht becomes GB and Apologia Poetica becomes AP!

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 23, 2008, 12:13:29 PM
Sorry about that, I called the drawings MT, short for Maschinen Tractate, which I took from Bessler's own writings. For convenience I have a habit of shortening all of his book titles.  So Das Triumphans... becomes DT.  Grundlicher Bericht becomes GB and Apologia Poetica becomes AP!

John

May I ask, is there any other interesting things that Bessler has said that cannot be found on the internet? Anything that might lead to a new discovery? You see I'm currently working on his wheels and have already combined some of them, I was just wandering if I could get any more help...
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 23, 2008, 12:55:38 PM
That's a difficult question.  The information in my own book, "Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?" and the four Bessler books has been discussed widely on various forums and is probably largely on many websites, and most fully at www.besslerwheel.com (http://www.besslerwheel.com) but there are many letters and certificates which I reproduced in my book which although discussed piecemeal here and there are not as far as I'm aware actually reproduced anywhere.

There are many lists of 'clues' taken from my book as well a Bessler's, which are designed to itemise the most useful bits of information making it easier to compress the clues into an easily referenced list, but there are still large pieces of information which it is better, in my opinion, to read in context.

I have reproduced all of Bessler's books and included English translations with each and you can get them from my web site at www.free-energy.co.uk (http://www.free-energy.co.uk) if you wish to get all the facts, but you may be content with discussing it here or elsewhere.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 23, 2008, 01:23:26 PM
That's a difficult question.  The information in my own book, "Perpetual Motion; An Ancient Mystery Solved?" and the four Bessler books has been discussed widely on various forums and is probably largely on many websites, and most fully at www.besslerwheel.com (http://www.besslerwheel.com) but there are many letters and certificates which I reproduced in my book which although discussed piecemeal here and there are not as far as I'm aware actually reproduced anywhere.

There are many lists of 'clues' taken from my book as well a Bessler's, which are designed to itemise the most useful bits of information making it easier to compress the clues into an easily referenced list, but there are still large pieces of information which it is better, in my opinion, to read in context.

I have reproduced all of Bessler's books and included English translations with each and you can get them from my web site at www.free-energy.co.uk (http://www.free-energy.co.uk) if you wish to get all the facts, but you may be content with discussing it here or elsewhere.

John

Ah ok thank you, and which book is the best one for Besslers clues about his wheel?
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 23, 2008, 06:34:06 PM
Another difficult one to answer!  The truthis that each book has a number of clues in it.  I discuss some of themin my book, but there are four drawings in DT, 141 drawings with English translation of the notes in MT.  One drawing in GB and one in AP.  There are numerous clues in the textof AP and probably that is the best one to start with as Bessler discusses things a lot more in that book.

Kind regards and good luck,

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: AB Hammer on May 23, 2008, 06:45:43 PM
 John Collins

Thanks for posting. Your books are valuable for our search.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 23, 2008, 10:14:28 PM
AB When are you helping me with the analysis?
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: AB Hammer on May 24, 2008, 12:11:24 AM
@ Alex

 I am working on a copy paste set up through my web sight, for that seems to be the only way to post pictures. There are 143 of them so it may take a little while. At this time I am at home running a fever and I fill like $#!+. But is think I can keep setting up the pages, as long as I don't wright much.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 24, 2008, 07:53:14 AM
Quote
Just curious, do you offer the 4 books as a set ? Could be interesting to read someone's insights into Bessler who has researched him.

Yes anything is possible.  Just email me with any proposal to get them.  My main aim is to get as many copies of the books out there so that as many people as possible are working towards a successful reconstruction of Bessler's wheel.

I have stated that I'm certain that it will be reconstructed and verified before the end of this year.  I am utterly conviced of this.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: rlortie on May 24, 2008, 08:06:42 AM
I just wondered why so often people are referring to MT - drawings.
I finally found them all listed here:

http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html (http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html)

For those like me that just started to become interested in gravity wheels an Bessler.

/Eric

Hello Eric,

You may have just started to become interested but you have been around a while,  you joined Besslerwheel.com in March 12, 2004 as "eavogels  and in four years 2 months you made two posts:

Hi.
Thanks. It seems that Minato mde a break through: http://japan.com/technology/index.php
Eric.

Hi all.
I'm a new member to this group and I find the BesslerWheel a very interesting device. I'll read all earlier messages to catch up.
I do research with FE as well and right now the Bowman Perma ...

You see, I keep track of those that I respect and acknowledge as having some smarts and mean business in the quest for O-U!  ::)

Regards from one of your charter members,

Ralph Lortie
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 24, 2008, 04:07:27 PM
Yes anything is possible.  Just email me with any proposal to get them.  My main aim is to get as many copies of the books out there so that as many people as possible are working towards a successful reconstruction of Bessler's wheel.

I have stated that I'm certain that it will be reconstructed and verified before the end of this year.  I am utterly conviced of this.

John

Well I badly want to get this wheel, I know that if you combined those certain wheels, soon its got to come to you, plus reading what he says about each wheel and his clues, it can't be far off...

Also, for those who laugh at using cardboard, I think its easier than wood, and if I get this wheel, my first working wheel will be cardboard...
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: eavogels on May 25, 2008, 11:30:00 AM
Hello Eric,...........Regards from one of your charter members, ..........Ralph Lortie
Hi Ralph.
Good to meet you here. I will learn about the Bessler Wheel because I want to combine these technique with permanent magnets.

So to be sure I get as much as possible available info on Bessler I just bought all 5 books from John. Getting 5 books for the price of 4.

Regards,
Eric.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 26, 2008, 01:26:45 AM
@ John Collins

G'day John,

I remember reading somewhere that Bessler used a stork bill as a spring or something. Have you heard about this and what is the reference, it could be important because the German word for stork bill ( Storchschnabel ) has other connotations. It could be a mistranslation.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 26, 2008, 08:17:19 AM
You're partly right Hans, Bessler does use the word Storchschnabel and draws one too.  But there is no explanationof it being used as a spring.  He only ever comments on the use of a spring in response to a question about them.  He said that they were used but not in the way you might think, he also says that storksbills were used but again not in the usual way.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 26, 2008, 08:25:08 AM
I agree in part Eric, but rather than different kinds of wheels being matched to the drawings I am looking at different drawings containing different parts of the same wheel.

I think he used different designs of mechanism to drive his different wheels but they were all based on an original simple concept.  I think that once the concept is understood we can devise different ways of using it and I think that Besler's wheel designs evolved from the original concept and that each was an improvement on the previous one.

John

PS Thanks for the 5 book order Eric - they're on their way to you.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 26, 2008, 09:20:17 AM
You're partly right Hans, Bessler does use the word Storchschnabel and draws one too.  But there is no explanationof it being used as a spring.  He only ever comments on the use of a spring in response to a question about them.  He said that they were used but not in the way you might think, he also says that storksbills were used but again not in the usual way.

John

Thanks John,

I would really like to see the passages you are talking about. You see in German Storchschnabel is the common technical term for a pantograph. The device and the term was around before Bessler. The first pantograph was constructed in 1603 by Christoph Scheiner, who used the device to re-create diagrams, but he wrote about the invention over 27 years later, in "Pantographice" (Rome 1631). This is why I am so interested. The implications are obvious.

Hans von Lieven

EDIT: For those of you that don't know what a pantograph is, here is an excellent web page where you can play with one in a java applet. You will immediately see how that applies to Bessler.

http://www.ies.co.jp/math/products/geo1/applets/panta/panta.html
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 26, 2008, 10:07:21 AM
I'll get back to you with that information Hans.  Please allow me several hours to respond as we have a family troubles to cope with.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: fletcher on May 26, 2008, 10:02:39 PM
A further thought in that context hans & john - the pantograph is similar to the variations of the 'A's drawn in MT - as you know Bessler, while numbering & lettering his designs in MT, uses two styles of 'A's throughout his series - sometimes he uses them as you see them now [standard font] & then suddenly he changes to the pantograph looking versions [with the drop v cross-bar instead of the -- cross-bar] & they interchange throughout without seeming pattern.

It is also probably no coincidence that the pantograph form looks very much like a section of storksbill or scissor lift or jack section.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 26, 2008, 11:37:33 PM
A further thought in that context hans & john - the pantograph is similar to the variations of the 'A's drawn in MT - as you know Bessler, while numbering & lettering his designs in MT, uses two styles of 'A's throughout his series - sometimes he uses them as you see them now [standard font] & then suddenly he changes to the pantograph looking versions [with the drop v cross-bar instead of the -- cross-bar] & they interchange throughout without seeming pattern.

It is also probably no coincidence that the pantograph form looks very much like a section of storksbill or scissor lift or jack section.

Fletcher, very very clever, spot on my friend, spot on, I noticed his A's too and couldn't understand why he wrote them like he did, you are absolutely right there, I think you have just hit on something big which will help me and other people and yourself to get closer to his wheel, I'm so impressed with what you just said...

I came up with this about a month ago, could this be some way he used it?

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

Its not quite the same but...
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: utilitarian on May 27, 2008, 12:02:39 AM
I have a feeling that little is known here about Johann Bessler, also known as Orffyreus, so I will just say that further information is available from www.free-energy.co.uk (http://www.free-energy.co.uk).  This web site which has been on-line since 1997 is the result of a lifetime of research into the life of the inventor.  I have tried to spread information about him but it is a slow process and time is short with the incredible rising oil prices.

John Collins

It's great that you compiled this info about Bessler, but your conclusions could not be more wrongheaded:

http://www.free-energy.co.uk/html/why_gravitywheels_work.HTM (http://www.free-energy.co.uk/html/why_gravitywheels_work.HTM)

You basically state that because wind and water are conservative forces, and they can be used to drive a wheel, then so can gravity.

Well, water and wind are not conservative forces.  You are dealing with streams of molecules in motion, which have kinetic energy, and that kinetic energy can be transferred to a wheel.  This is fundamentally different from conservative forces such as gravity, elastic, or magentism.  Everything you conclude is based on this flawed assumption.  Sure, you can write volumes based on this one flawed assumption, and everything would seem really rosy, until you actually try to make something work.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 27, 2008, 07:42:54 AM
I used wind and water as analogies for gravity, utilitarian.  My point is that even though they are not regarded as conservative forces, as gravity is, they act like conservative forces.  Conservative forces are measured by the work the force does on an object in moving it from A to B and the path is independent or irrelevant.  This is so in gravity and in the wind and water analogies.

You are saying, in effect, that wind and water forces are non-conservative forces.  In non-conservative (or dissipative) force, the work done in going from A to B depends on the path taken. Examples: friction and air resistance.  Although the wind may dissipate at any time, as long as it continues to blow the windmill reacts to a conservative force.

Yes its true  there are streams of molecules in motion, which have kinetic energy, and that kinetic energy can be transferred to a wheel but this is on a micro(nano) scale whereas we are dealing with straightforward empirical evidence viewable with the naked eye.

Finally I shall be presenting the strongest evidence that Bessler's machine was real and not a fraud, and in that case there will follow discussion about how we can explain it within the laws of physics, and that is what all I am trying to do now.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: utilitarian on May 27, 2008, 08:22:00 AM
My point is that even though they are not regarded as conservative forces, as gravity is, they act like conservative forces.  Conservative forces are measured by the work the force does on an object in moving it from A to B and the path is independent or irrelevant.  This is so in gravity and in the wind and water analogies.

Wind and water are not conservative forces and do not act like conservative forces.  No offense, but you have no idea what you are talking about.

A force is about acceleration.  It is measured in Newtons, and one Newton is equal to the force required to accelerate the mass of 1kg by 1 meter per second, squared.  Neither wind nor water can do this.  All wind and water can do is bring the object they are impacting to a speed equal to the speed of the wind/water, but no faster.

Maybe Bessler had a working wheel, and maybe he didn't, but your theory is not going to explain anything.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: rlortie on May 27, 2008, 08:34:03 AM
Air and  Wind have gradient; Changes is atmospheric density attempting to equalize.
Water has gradient; In the form of depth and fall.
A battery has gradient between negative and positive poles.

It is said that anything containing a gradient can supply potential energy.

Gravity has gradient between ground level and free orbiting space. Probably the highest percentage of gradient of  the above mentioned. Yet we call it a conservative force.

Sure somebody is going to say; yes but the sun is responsible for  wind and water usage, Even charging a battery relates to  sun in one form or another. But if it were not for gravity none of the above would exist!

My bottom line is; Gravity has potential, we just have not learned to utilize it yet.

 Remember there was once a time when nobody wanted anything to do with that black gooey stuff called oil.  We learned to utilize it and now look at the pickle we are in.

"If someone can write about it, man will eventually build it" Jules Verne science fiction writer.

If you have not figured it out yet; I am a strong advocate of  John Collins beliefs, I  may not totally agree with some of his debating analogy, but I stand behind him and am very optimistic that we will soon discover and build gravity powered machines not unlike the discovery of the internal combustion engine.

Ralph 


Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: rlortie on May 27, 2008, 09:04:59 AM
utilitarian

All wind and water can do is bring the object they are impacting to a speed equal to the speed of the wind/water, but no faster.

Ah ha! this is true but Sir Isaac Newton left us a loop hole where as mass can be moved faster.  You seem like an educated man, so I will let you attempt to figure it out. If the Laws of motion is read and part three is scrutinized by the perceptive and discerning one will realize the validity and awaken to the fact that masses can by moved and accelerated) to uncontrollable speeds,

[In the International System of Units (also known as SI, after the initials of Syst?me International), acceleration, a, is measured in meters per second per second. Mass is measured in kilograms; force, F, in newtons. A newton is defined as the force necessary to impart to a mass of 1 kg an acceleration of 1 m/sec/sec; this is equivalent to about 0.2248 lb.
A massive object will require a greater force for a given acceleration than a small, light object. What is remarkable is that mass, which is a measure of the inertia of an object (inertia is its reluctance to change velocity), is also a measure of the gravitational attraction that the object exerts on other objects. It is surprising and profound that the inertial property and the gravitational property are determined by the same thing.}

[Mechanics," Microsoft(R) Encarta(R) 97 Encyclopedia. (c) 1993-1996 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.]

 I do not state this lightly and refer you to 'sGravesande's  exceptional  writings as well as that ofGottfried wihelm Leibniz.

Ralph   
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 27, 2008, 09:55:36 AM
G'day all,

For what it's worth I would like to follow up on the pantograph idea. Amongst the drawings in the Maschinen Traktate there is one  drawing out of character. I am talking about MT 138. This is where he goes into pantographs using children's toys as an example. Picture C and D are toys that use the pantograph idea. Also picture E, what Fletcher calls, quite rightly, a scissor lift. Again we are talking about an antique toy that was known as the Nuernberger Schere ( Nuremberg scisssors).

What puzzled me for a while was the drawing at the bottom, which didn't seem to mean anything, until I remembered an antique toy constructed along a similar vein. There were a number of variations of it.

It uses a pendulum to achieve the same effect as C and D.

I made an animation here of the principle behind the device. I think that Bessler hid some of his clues in this particular drawing. As to the interpretation of A and B, I can only guess. I wish I had access to a good scan of the original MT 138. Perhaps that would tell me something this redrawn sketch does not show.

Anyway, here it is, tell me what you think.

Hans von Lieven

(http://keelytech.com/overunity/besslertoy.gif)
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 27, 2008, 02:59:16 PM
Quote
Wind and water are not conservative forces and do not act like conservative forces.  No offense, but you have no idea what you are talking about.

A force is about acceleration.  It is measured in Newtons, and one Newton is equal to the force required to accelerate the mass of 1kg by 1 meter per second, squared.  Neither wind nor water can do this.  All wind and water can do is bring the object they are impacting to a speed equal to the speed of the wind/water, but no faster.

Maybe Bessler had a working wheel, and maybe he didn't, but your theory is not going to explain anything

Surprisingly I was aware of all that and you are not the first to argue the point.  Oddly, you acknowledge that Bessler may have had a working wheel, so how do you explain it - or can't you even be bothered to try?

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 27, 2008, 03:43:51 PM
G'day all,

For what it's worth I would like to follow up on the pantograph idea. Amongst the drawings in the Maschinen Traktate there is one  drawing out of character. I am talking about MT 138. This is where he goes into pantographs using children's toys as an example. Picture C and D are toys that use the pantograph idea. Also picture E, what Fletcher calls, quite rightly, a scissor lift. Again we are talking about an antique toy that was known as the Nuernberger Schere ( Nuremberg scisssors).

What puzzled me for a while was the drawing at the bottom, which didn't seem to mean anything, until I remembered an antique toy constructed along a similar vein. There were a number of variations of it.

It uses a pendulum to achieve the same effect as C and D.

I made an animation here of the principle behind the device. I think that Bessler hid some of his clues in this particular drawing. As to the interpretation of A and B, I can only guess. I wish I had access to a good scan of the original MT 138. Perhaps that would tell me something this redrawn sketch does not show.

Anyway, here it is, tell me what you think.

Hans von Lieven

(http://keelytech.com/overunity/besslertoy.gif)

I like this pantograph theory, I think this is on the right track, your mechanism there looks very interesting, I'm not quite sure what it has to do with the spinning top at the bottom though...

When I was younger I used to play with one of them, the bottom of it is heavier than the top part, yet when it is spun the light part lifts the heavier part right up through CF...

There is also someone who went in front of top scientists at NASA to demonstrate how an extremely
heavy weight can be lifted lightly by a man...

The weight was spun on the end of a stick thing then lifted it up, what was happening was that as the weight span, CF through its weight up and the weight become light, but those ignorant scientists told him to basically get lost as its impossible, they stuck with what Newton said and denied this new discovery...

I can't remember much about it, maybe you have seen it?

Ill try to find the footage...
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 27, 2008, 07:44:22 PM
@ alexioco,

That's just it, I think the spinning top is an interpretation of the re-draw artist. Like I said I would love to have a look at the original.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 27, 2008, 08:23:05 PM
@ alexioco,

That's just it, I think the spinning top is an interpretation of the re-draw artist. Like I said I would love to have a look at the original.

Hans von Lieven

What do you mean by re-draw artist?
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 27, 2008, 08:56:46 PM
That is NOT Bessler's original drawing Alexioco.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 27, 2008, 09:52:10 PM
That is NOT Bessler's original drawing Alexioco.

No but its the same though, but still, something might have been missed, I would like to the the original drawing too, then we could have a better idea, I think I saw it once before in a post somewhere, can't remember where though
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: am1ll3r on May 27, 2008, 10:26:34 PM


When I was younger I used to play with one of them, the bottom of it is heavier than the top part, yet when it is spun the light part lifts the heavier part right up through CF...

There is also someone who went in front of top scientists at NASA to demonstrate how an extremely
heavy weight can be lifted lightly by a man...

The weight was spun on the end of a stick thing then lifted it up, what was happening was that as the weight span, CF through its weight up and the weight become light, but those ignorant scientists told him to basically get lost as its impossible, they stuck with what Newton said and denied this new discovery...

I can't remember much about it, maybe you have seen it?

Ill try to find the footage...


Alexioco have a look here...

Eric Laithwaite may be your guy

http://www.gyroscopes.org/1974lecture.asp
10. Denis lifts a 18lb gyroscope with a 6lb shaft running at 2000rpm.

and

http://www.gyroscopes.org/heretic.asp

thanks

Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: fletcher on May 27, 2008, 11:26:45 PM
Hi Hans .. an excellent idea you have there - the contemporary tilting bird toy with partial linear pendulum action does indeed act in a similar fashion to C & D [the hammermen] of the toy page - I too wondered how you made the association with the hand drawn figure at the bottom of the toy page - I assume you think it looks somewhat like a pendulum bob of sorts - John has speculated before that it possibly was an after thought in an attempt to further strengthen his claim of priority should his secret be discovered prematurely, so it was obviously an important addition with a clear purpose in mind.

I have a copy of John Collins MT which faithfully reproduces Bessler's woodcuts [used for printing purposes] - I can tell you that it is virtually indistinguishable from Bill McMurtry's [ovyyus, on BW.com, or at www.orffyre.com] coral draw rendition - to all intensive purposes it very much resembles a child spinning top [string wound], IMO.

N.B. it appears it could be a whistling variety, though some say that the exterior markings resemble an eye, though for what purpose he would mark it like that I have no idea, other than to pointedly say "information for those with eyes able to see" - "for your eyes only", in contemporary terms, aka, a discerning mind - JMO's.

The rather more obvious conclusion to draw is that it represents a component of Cp forces & inertia as necessary for the functioning of his wheels - many feel that this is the correct interpretation, assuming that the figure is indeed a spinning top - so I would also be interested in your thoughts after having studied the woodcut reproduction - if you don't want to lay out a few dollars for John's book then perhaps the Kassel library can oblige ?
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Dgraphic911 on May 28, 2008, 03:23:50 PM
Members only section of BW, which most of you now are

Al & Hans, bills scan of mt 138, at bottom of this page.

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=17250#17250.


@hans, i'd be very interested in  your translation of the inscription and the resemblance to writing style of bessler. Is it even him?

Or was this just a test board that was carved on to test skill/practice. And now its the holy grail of bessler clues.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: utilitarian on May 28, 2008, 06:06:38 PM
Surprisingly I was aware of all that and you are not the first to argue the point.  Oddly, you acknowledge that Bessler may have had a working wheel, so how do you explain it - or can't you even be bothered to try?

John

I can neither prove nor disprove that Bessler had a working wheel, since I was not there and did not have a chance to examine it.  If he had one that works, it was not based on gravity, but something else.  A gravity wheel alone can never work.

Furthermore, have you even considered what water and wind are?  Water power is directly derived from gravity, as it is merely falling water.  So to compare water and gravity makes no sense.   And to call falling water a conservative force is ridiculous.  You have waves of molecules transferring their kinetic energy to the wheel, that is all.

Wind is not much different.  It is affected not only by gravity but atmospheric pressure and other factors, but the end result is the same - series of molecules transferring their kinetic energy. You cannot compare it to a force like magnetism or gravity.

If you are aware of all these arguments, I am surprised you do not have a better answer for them.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 28, 2008, 06:22:55 PM
I can neither prove nor disprove that Bessler had a working wheel, since I was not there and did not have a chance to examine it.  If he had one that works, it was not based on gravity, but something else.  A gravity wheel alone can never work.

Furthermore, have you even considered what water and wind are?  Water power is directly derived from gravity, as it is merely falling water.  So to compare water and gravity makes no sense.   And to call falling water a conservative force is ridiculous.  You have waves of molecules transferring their kinetic energy to the wheel, that is all.

Wind is not much different.  It is affected not only by gravity but atmospheric pressure and other factors, but the end result is the same - series of molecules transferring their kinetic energy. You cannot compare it to a force like magnetism or gravity.

If you are aware of all these arguments, I am surprised you do not have a better answer for them.

A gravity wheel alone can work, through the use of movable weights, and there are endless ways to make them move, so how can you possibly assume that its impossible for a pure gravity wheel? Have you tried every combination?

If weights in a wheel are positioned like so

(http://i31.tinypic.com/r7910i.jpg)

Then the wheel has to move, now if those weights are kept like that as the wheel turns, the wheel will perpetuate, now get a second lot of weights to keep those weights up, the weights that keep those weights up can also move in way to keep the wheel over balanced...
There must be thousands of ways to do this and the answer will be very simple once known...

I mean, if you study it, the weights only have to move from the shaft to the rim and we have perpetual motion...

Maths and science are good, but they wont prove anything, but a creative mind will, then the maths can be looked at...

Alex
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: utilitarian on May 28, 2008, 06:45:10 PM
A gravity wheel alone can work, through the use of movable weights, and there are endless ways to make them move, so how can you possibly assume that its impossible for a pure gravity wheel? Have you tried every combination?

I do not have to try every combination.  Sadly, to make a gravity wheel spin, what comes down, must go up.  You can never get more energy from a falling object than what is required to lift it to the place where it started from, so after frictional losses, you will always come out in the red, no matter what combination you try.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Gustav22 on May 28, 2008, 06:49:55 PM
All arguments about energy and work are futile because the physics priests redefined the meanings of these words to make them fit to their explanations ....
Regarding gravity driven systems, for me the best way to figure things out, is to find the system's center of mass and try to establish, where it is located relative to the wheel axis.

However, I agree to the fact that a wind and a water wheel can only work, because such arrangements make use of a 'medium' (wind and water) which permits the force of gravity to create a torque on the wheel.
Consequently such a medium has to be provided.
Let's provide it then, shall we?
Some recyclable mass, able to oscillate, should suffice.

Scissors mechanisms as suggested by Bessler and others come to mind.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Dgraphic911 on May 28, 2008, 07:01:56 PM
I do not have to try every combination.  Sadly, to make a gravity wheel spin, what comes down, must go up.  You can never get more energy from a falling object than what is required to lift it to the place where it started from, so after frictional losses, you will always come out in the red, no matter what combination you try.

A gravity wheel alone can work, through the use of movable weights, and there are endless ways to make them move, so how can you possibly assume that its impossible for a pure gravity wheel? Have you tried every combination?

If weights in a wheel are positioned like so..........




Interestingly enough you are both 100% correct.

Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: utilitarian on May 28, 2008, 07:23:34 PM
All arguments about energy and work are futile because the physics priests redefined the meanings of these words to make them fit to their explanations ....

Physicists have defined these meanings because they are consistent with what is observed. Had the physicists observed something else, then they would have defined the meanings accordingly.  They are not making this up.  You cannot get more energy out of a falling object than what is required to lift it to its original position.  If you doubt this, take a see-saw and play with it.  Take two objects of equal weight and see if you can make one lift the other.  Sure, you can try to use leverage, but then one of the objects does not go as high.

In a nutshell, this is why gravity wheels cannot work.  You can try to confuse and trick yourself with elaborate setups, but all they will do is fail in elaborate-looking fashion.

Look, all this is educational in some way, I suppose, but honestly, gravity wheels are a waste of time.  I am wasting my time even writing about them, but I am hoping that through my effort, you guys will waste less of your time.  You guys could be learning about things that actually have a chance of working.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 28, 2008, 09:32:00 PM
Physicists have defined these meanings because they are consistent with what is observed. Had the physicists observed something else, then they would have defined the meanings accordingly.  They are not making this up.  You cannot get more energy out of a falling object than what is required to lift it to its original position.  If you doubt this, take a see-saw and play with it.  Take two objects of equal weight and see if you can make one lift the other.  Sure, you can try to use leverage, but then one of the objects does not go as high.

In a nutshell, this is why gravity wheels cannot work.  You can try to confuse and trick yourself with elaborate setups, but all they will do is fail in elaborate-looking fashion.

Look, all this is educational in some way, I suppose, but honestly, gravity wheels are a waste of time.  I am wasting my time even writing about them, but I am hoping that through my effort, you guys will waste less of your time.  You guys could be learning about things that actually have a chance of working.

Making an object go higher than what it started at is over unity and yes you are correct, how can it go higher than it started without energy? But weights going from the rim back to the axle is not going higher than it started...
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 28, 2008, 11:21:28 PM
G?day all.

@Dgraphic

Thank you for the link to the original page of MT138.

The inscription is written in old German script later known in slightly modified form as Suetterlin. It reads:

5 Kinder Spiele in welchem Joch auch was besonderes Arbeit, wer Sie auf andere Weise zu applicieren weiss.

I have included an enlarged picture of the comments below.

The key to the translation lies in the interpretation of the word Joch, the common meaning is yoke, but in this context it could also mean fulcrum or pivot.

The literal translation is:

5 children?s toys in whose yoke (fulcrum, pivot) something special works (is at work), for whoever knows how to apply it in a different manner.

So much for the translation.

General comments:

The woodcut (if that?s what it is, more on this later) is almost certainly NOT the work of Bessler. The annotations with a high degree of certainty are. The depiction of the figures and the comparatively crude execution are in stark contrast to the other illustrations and point to an earlier period, at my guess at least a hundred years earlier.
If it is indeed a woodcut that would support my argument, but without close examination of the original I cannot tell.

As to the figure on the bottom, that is not part of the drawing but was added by Bessler in his own hand to the print. This puts an entirely different complexion on the meaning, and invalidates my earlier analysis. What I think now is that Bessler showed an inverted pendulum in the shape of a spinning top that is hollowed out on the centre with a cylindrical bore. Such a contraption is notoriously unstable and needs little force to upset one way or the other. Ideal when you are trying to disturb an equilibrium with very little energy. I have drawn my interpretation next to Bessler?s drawing. See below.

As to the woodcuts, they were not anymore in common use in Bessler?s time having been superseded by etchings and engravings long before. Especially for technical drawings etchings had been in use since around 1550 and were preferred because they were clearer and easier to produce.

There is rumoured to be another copy of Maschinen Traktate somewhere in England. If true, it would be interesting to see if those copies are annotated. Does anyone know about this?

In my view the pictures in Maschinen Traktate are NOT Bessler?s work. The handwritten comments in all probability are.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 28, 2008, 11:59:54 PM
G'day all,

I have been asked to repost my analysis of Bessler's use of the pendulum in his wheels.



Regards the wheel at Merseburg, and incidentally the wheel at Weissenstein which shows a similar arrangement I would like to say the following.

(http://www.besslerwheel.com/images/Merseburg_wheel2.jpg)

If you have a look at the drawing you will notice that on the left hand side it shows the same wheel shown from the side. There are actually two pendula involved, one in front of the wheel, one behind the hammer mill the wheel is driving. Both are driven by the main shaft without any other connection to the machine shown.

The same arrangement is here at the Weissenstein wheel.

(http://www.keelytech.com/overunity/weissenstein.jpg)

I have used the Weissenstein illustration for my analysis as it is a better depiction of the principle and a clearer scan of Bessler's original drawing (courtesy University of Goettingen). Only the colour and my comment regarding the centre of gravity have been added, otherwise the picture is original.

A closer look at the pendulum reveals that in reality it is not a pendulum at all. The two counter weights at the top shift the centre of gravity of the device very close to the fulcrum. This arrangement virtually cancels any pendulum effect. So what is it and why is it there?

It is my assessment that it is a very sensitive indicator of the balance of the entire device at any given point.

Like this:

(http://www.keelytech.com/overunity/balance.jpg)
Can you see the parallels?

So what was Bessler doing there? The answer is as simple as it is obvious.

Bessler used the device to set and adjust his weights inside the wheel during construction! After the wheel was built there was no further need for it and in fact in some of Bessler's designs he dispensed with it altogether though it is my guess he would have still used it during construction. A further indication that my analysis is probably correct is that in the earlier Merseburg wheel the device is much cruder in construction, indicating that Bessler was very much aware that the more precise the device the more accurate his measurements became. Hence the much greater care spent in its construction in the Weissenstein wheel.

It utterly amazes me that in almost 300 years no-one I know of has ever commented on this and that even today people that study Bessler still call it a pendulum when it is very clear that it is not.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 29, 2008, 12:51:03 AM
Very good, one question though, if the toy page wasn't done by Bessler, then how can this help us with the prime mover as no one had found perpetual motion before Bessler...

Whats an inverted pendulum?

Also thats a good point about something that is balanced but unstable, making the balance point weak seems a good idea, I have always thought that if inside the wheel the mechanism was unsteady, it would have more chance, I think for part of a working wheel is that everything must be independent and not controlled as something that is controlled is more weak I think, and if you think about it, something that cannot balance would be very tricky to hold in your hand without it either falling out or collapsing....

Thats probably why Bessler said that "a knock could bring the wheel to a grinding halt"...
He also said "the wheel must come into being" might mean that the weights had to work with each other but was unstable and relied on itself to keep itself up...

Basically everything must of been free...
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 29, 2008, 12:57:35 AM
Only because Bessler used someone else's drawing as an example that does not mean he is not trying to show us something.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 29, 2008, 01:04:38 AM
Only because Bessler used someone else's drawing as an example that does not mean he is not trying to show us something.

Hans von Lieven

by the way I edited my post
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 29, 2008, 01:18:58 AM
The picture below is an inverted pendulum. It needs a very small push to upset it's equilibrium.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 29, 2008, 01:21:54 AM
ah yeah, so once pushed gravity will help take it out of equilibrium, how does the yellow ball balance at the top? This is getting rather interesting  :)
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 29, 2008, 01:25:59 AM
If it is perfectly perpendicular it will stay
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 29, 2008, 01:30:02 AM
WOW now that is called a WEAK balance, if that was the only balance a wheel had then it would perpetuate with ease... So about the spinning top, you say it might represent an inverted pendulum?
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 29, 2008, 01:32:55 AM
Yes, possibly with some mechanism inside that upsets it's balance in certain positions
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on May 29, 2008, 01:42:05 AM
Yes, possibly with some mechanism inside that upsets it's balance in certain positions

May I add?

If you get a long inverted pendulum {strong spring} with a 5 pound weight on the end, then under the pivot attach a short pendulum with a big weight that weighs JUST enough to keep the small weight up, then once a small force is applied to the top weight it will fall down then come up again...

It would have an upward force equal to its downward like Bessler said...
Also calculate the distance the large weight has to move to lift the small weight...
Could this be something?

Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Dgraphic911 on May 29, 2008, 03:41:16 PM
@hans

Thank you very much for your translation and thoughts on the toys page. I was of some of the same thinking but without the knowledge to give myself any legitimacy i would have been recieved as a looney bird. I believe that in your translation we are being told to look at an "action" about a point that they all share. And that i can grasp a little better than the holy grail philosphy that the wheel is represented in that picture. 

I was meaning to try and find specific translations that i feel are materially being misunderstood in some of the early Mt's. I will try and find them and their texts. If you have time to peek at a few more.


Dave
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 29, 2008, 05:39:18 PM

I was meaning to try and find specific translations that i feel are materially being misunderstood in some of the early Mt's. I will try and find them and their texts. If you have time to peek at a few more.


Dave

Not a problem Dave, I see what I can do.

Hans
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 30, 2008, 08:58:04 AM
Quote
I can neither prove nor disprove that Bessler had a working wheel, since I was not there and did not have a chance to examine it.  If he had one that works, it was not based on gravity, but something else.  A gravity wheel alone can never work.

Furthermore, have you even considered what water and wind are?  Water power is directly derived from gravity, as it is merely falling water.  So to compare water and gravity makes no sense.   And to call falling water a conservative force is ridiculous.  You have waves of molecules transferring their kinetic energy to the wheel, that is all.

Wind is not much different.  It is affected not only by gravity but atmospheric pressure and other factors, but the end result is the same - series of molecules transferring their kinetic energy. You cannot compare it to a force like magnetism or gravity.

OK Util.  Firstly you have taken the analogy from my web site out of context.  I specifically mentioned that the conservative effect is localised.  That means that for the windmill blade, the wind is a continuous force pushing against it, like gravity on an object with mass, and at that scale it has exactly the same features as a conservative force.  You will find also that in wind physics, the wind is clasaified as a conservative force.  As a localised feature it is irrelevant where or how the wind originated.

Secondly, these are analogies; ways of looking at problems and likening them to other similar instances to try to understand them

I have been arguing this pont for ten years and if you cannot accept it that's fine,  but there are many who do.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 30, 2008, 06:31:39 PM
Thank you for your translation, Hans.  Good work.

Your version:-
Quote
5 children?s toys in whose yoke (fulcrum, pivot) something special works (is at work), for whoever knows how to apply it in a different manner.

 This what I made of it but I don't speak German.

Either "5. Children's game in which there is something extraordinary for anyone who knows how to apply the game in a different way.?

Or alternatively, ?Fifthly - the children are instrumental, through their play, in causing the force - through some particular impulse - to be transferred from the abandoned foot to be applied to the other."

Any comments welcomed.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 30, 2008, 08:41:17 PM
Thank you for your translation, Hans.  Good work.

Your version:-5 children?s toys in whose yoke (fulcrum, pivot) something special works (is at work), for whoever knows how to apply it in a different manner.
 This what I made of it but I don't speak German.

Either "5. Children's game in which there is something extraordinary for anyone who knows how to apply the game in a different way.?

Or alternatively, ?Fifthly - the children are instrumental, through their play, in causing the force - through some particular impulse - to be transferred from the abandoned foot to be applied to the other."

Any comments welcomed.

John

G'day John,

I am sorry, but you, or your translator, is trying to read something into this passage that simply is not there. Bessler is being very specific here. I have given you the literal translation, not an interpretation. The difficulty in your version arises because of the interpretation of the word "Spiele" which your translator reads as games. This would be a fair and accurate translation if we were talking about contemporary German. But we are not!

Modern German makes a distinction between game (Spiel) and toy (Spielzeug, or game apparatus, if you wish). Medieval German and Renaissance German (which is really what we are talking about here) did not make such distinction. The word "Spiel" applies to both and the interpretation is context dependent. There are two clues as to what is meant here. First, the obvious one, the pictures of toys. Secondly the use of the word "Joch" for which I gave three possible, but related, meanings. Since a game cannot possibly have a "Joch" it is clear that he is referring to an object! Which means that the correct translation of the word "Spiel" here is toy and not game.

It is not enough to speak German in order to translate Bessler. An intimate acquaintance with the language usage of the period in question is also required.

I will give you now my interpretation of what Bessler is saying here.

"There is something special in these 5 toys in the way they move, which can be applied in a different way".

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 30, 2008, 09:49:03 PM
Footnote to the above:

Modern words where the word "Spiel" still applies in its old meaning : Spielkarten (deck of cards), Glockenspiel (a musical instrument) Schachspiel (chessboard plus figures). In each of these terms the word Spiel applies to an OBJECT, not to what is being played with it.

Hans
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 30, 2008, 11:52:03 PM
Thank you Hans.  May I quote you in my book?  :-)

John

Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on May 31, 2008, 01:18:57 AM
G'day John,

Certainly you may quote me. After all I've put it out there haven't I?  ;D

Hans
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: eavogels on May 31, 2008, 08:54:03 AM
Thank you Hans.  May I quote you in my book?  :-)
Oops, I just bought the 5 books from John. Who made those translations? If one line is already different, what about a whole book?
/Eric
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on May 31, 2008, 09:15:48 AM
Eric, the translations are good.  The text in the toys page is handwritten and difficult to read. The original translation done by Mike Senior, resident in the UK, who has a degree in 18th century German literature, was almost identical to Hans' version.  I was posting my own efforts at reading the text because I thought that some words might have been incorrectly read, not incorrectly translated.

The text in Maschinen Tractate was also handwritten and open to interpretation but you will find very little difference between the MT English text in my book and that available at www.orffyre.com, as both were done by another translator in the USA, but with the most minor 'corrections' by me.

The other books Grundlicher Bericht, Das Tri and Apologia Poetica are printed text and although Apologia Poetica has suffered from ink migration over the centuries since it was published, it is a possible to read 99.9% correctly and intuitively work out the remainder correctly.

Translations used in my book," Perpetual Motion;An Ancient Mystery Solved?" were taken from professional translations published some time ago but regarded as accurate.

Hope this helps.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: eavogels on May 31, 2008, 09:49:18 AM
Hope this helps.
Yes, it does. Thanks.
Eric.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Dgraphic911 on May 31, 2008, 10:16:39 PM
I purchased Johns Book PM AAMS and was very disappointed when i read the whole thing and the plan for the wheel was not in their anywhere.  :-[

But seriously, I hope everyone understands that the groundwork that has been layed and the incredible amount of research that has been done by John and others like Bill, is priceless and brings anyone up to speed much much faster. John is being very much open minded to his credit. We are talking about 300 year old texts in a language that noone has used exclusively for 60 plus years. Johns books are a very valuable part of this search and an excellant source of information.

The fact that he is also being open minded about alternative ideas is really exceptional. I think that Hans and Stefan(he said he studied Suterlin ?) would be a very nice addition to helping look at these MT's translations. I know that both Hans and Stefan are also very busy with many other things so i make no assumtions as to whether they would have time.

I don't think its going to be spelled out in the MT's but whether he did all or some i am very interested in any slight variations or sutle nuances in writing style that may suggest something other that what we have now. Whether the translations are the same or slightly different i think it would also reinvigorate discussion about the MT's. Some feel the Mt's should just be disregarded as failed attempts but IMHO he is trying to hint at something. Look here, or there.


Anyway, John, keep up the great work. (if hans will looK at the early 1-25 Mt's translations i would be more than happy to pay the PDF file fee to have it sent to him.)  US$ boo hoo

@all who don't own johns books, Buy them they are priceless.

@Hans and Stefan.  I'm sure i speak for some when i say that any help, at your leisure. Would be Greatly appreciated. Even if its only some small slight variation in one of the MT's translations. We seekers are always hungry for any new information or path of thought.


Thank you,


PS john, can you put the plans in the new book ;D
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: DrWhat on June 01, 2008, 01:05:03 AM
I've said this before and I'll say it again, if you are serious about finding a solution to Bessler's wheel or even if you are generally interested in gravity wheels, you need to get all the publications (from John Collins). These include translations of original Bessler documents, Bessler's drawings, a biography of a large chunk of his life and so on.

When I got the documents I was surprised how much is in there.
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Charlie_V on June 01, 2008, 04:31:59 AM
Someone linked a website about Bessler and I read a little bit about him.  I had never heard of him until now.  It said that his wheels were hollow and that there was something on the inside that unbalanced them.  It also said that it was the inside of the wheel that held the secret, not the outside.

Some guy supported him, letting him live in a castle, but the guy wanted Bessler to show him what was inside the wheel first.  That guy said it was so simple he was surprised no one had ever thought of it.  Now the website gave an animation of what people speculate was on the inside, I'm pretty sure the animation is not correct.  If it was, someone would have a working Bessler wheel by now. 

So, did Bessler leave ANY clues as to what was on the inside?  It seems to me that this secret died with him - after all, it was the inside of the wheel that was for sale.  The website said that in all accounts the machine was very noisy.

Any thoughts as to what was on the inside, did he leave any clues?

Thanks,
Charlie
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Sprocket on June 01, 2008, 05:58:49 AM
Bessler left a considerable amount of info - check this site for details:

http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html (http://www.orffyre.com/mt.html)

Unfortunately, none of these example wheels work as far as I'm aware - they were supposedly produced as "learning material" by Bessler for the school he had planned to open, but never materialised.  Many apparently employ ideas that could lead to a working wheel - Bessler's students (that never were) would no doubt have been told which were useful, we, on the other hand, are left fumbling in the dark...

They are utterly fascinating nonetheless :)
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on June 01, 2008, 05:31:27 PM
Dgraphic, everything I know will be in the new book.  More than half of it is taken up with an explanation of the coded clues, and there are literally dozens and dozens of them.  There will be plans, but I don't know if I have enough to build the replica of Bessler's whel, but I think so.  Any way everytthing will be included.  Thanks for your encouragement guys.

CharlieV, I think you can see that there are a lot of clues about how the wheel worked and I am confident that someone will do it this year and what better time than now?

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: DrWhat on June 02, 2008, 06:29:18 AM
Hi John,

any idea of a date of publication (paper or online?).

Thanks
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: John Collins on June 02, 2008, 07:26:40 AM
Quote
any idea of a date of publication (paper or online?).

I can only say I hope it will be soon and probably August/September this year.

John
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 02, 2008, 08:38:19 AM
G'day all,

I owe you an apology for leading you up the garden path in one of my comments. I had honestly thought that woodcuts were no longer in common use for technical drawings in Bessler's time. This is not so. I have just received a book of Helmholz lectures published in 1825 and they used woodcuts for the technical illustrations. I did a bit of checking.

Deep etching as used today and used in letterpresses has apparently not been around all that long. In Besslers time etchings required intaglio printing whereas woodcuts could be used in a letterpress.

Sorry for the goof.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 09, 2008, 11:27:53 PM
G'day all,

On further examination of MT 138 (see post 29 this thread) I think I know now what figures A and B represent. I believe this to be the front and side view of the same device, a Jacob's ladder. It is an ancient toy, an example of which was found in King Tut's tomb. Bessler mentions the Jacob's ladder in his writings.

This is how it works:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/764310/jacobs_ladder_optical_illusion_toy/

Any comments?

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: fletcher on June 10, 2008, 09:58:19 AM
Many would agree with you Hans, that A & B are profiles of a Jacob's ladder toy - some also think it represents a chain but that doesn't fit the 'toy' description so well - I would say that they are more symbolic than actual representations - Bessler did indeed mention that he had found a way to climb higher on a Jacob's ladder [in DT I think, IIRC] - the question is what was he showing by including them ?

Well if you close the loop of a Jacob's Ladder you would get a circle or wheel with no beginning or end, so to speak - if Bessler did find OU then it would appear that figuratively he did find a way to climb higher on a Jacob's ladder & A & B might be suggestive of something like the Mt9 series for example, where there are falling levers [the top part of B shows a link or lever falling/swinging imo].

When taken into consideration with the spinning top it could be suggestive of Cf's or it could be just something stand alone simple ?
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on June 10, 2008, 04:19:54 PM
G'day all,

On further examination of MT 138 (see post 29 this thread) I think I know now what figures A and B represent. I believe this to be the front and side view of the same device, a Jacob's ladder. It is an ancient toy, an example of which was found in King Tut's tomb. Bessler mentions the Jacob's ladder in his writings.

This is how it works:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/764310/jacobs_ladder_optical_illusion_toy/

Any comments?

Hans von Lieven

Hello  :)

You know I look forward to your every post, yes interesting idea, they could be both, the toy on a whole is very interesting, Jacobs ladder's do interesting things and so do scissor jacks and also spinning tops as the heavier side is lifted hmmmm, there certainly is something about this, and if they can be made into a wheel mechanism it must doe something amazing just to look at let alone have perpetual motion...

If the two are different view of the Jacobs ladder then maybe like fletcher said, it could be attached into a circle or should we say linked/chained together having no begging or end, I'M not quite sure though how MT 9 has anything to do with the toy page, could someone explain?
Title: Re: Johann Bessler information
Post by: Alexioco on June 10, 2008, 04:21:24 PM
This is my interpretation of the toy page in a wheel...

How it works: Small weights lift the large weights to the rim at the top of the wheel, then the small weights rest on the axle which  then allows the large weights at the top of take over, once the large weights make it to the bottom of the wheel, the small weights fall from the axle to the bottom of the wheel lifting the large weights to the axle and causing them to rest on the axle...

(http://i25.tinypic.com/348psvp.jpg)

p.s Because the little weights are further from the axle of the large weights, they will lift, the little weights could be attached to long springs to they bend when the stick out on the ascending side...

Like so;
(http://i26.tinypic.com/ve7uiu.jpg)