Was Bessler for real?

[christo4_99]

 This is my kind of topic ! Ok ,the evidence says that Bessler's wheel hands down was the most likely candidate in history to be authentic .
By the same standards even today the tests that the wheel was put through would convince  almost everyone that it was true Perpetual Motion . The problem as I see it is our imaginations can't quite put the same finger on the process that Bessler's did .Perhaps he had an advantage that we can't have . Perhaps his principle came from some place other than mere man . I have an idea that Bessler had more than one reason ... three to be exact for tying his principle to God .

P.S. I have promised in the near past that if I can get this idea of mine to work it can be tied to Bessler , actually in more ways than two. So to me statements like ABhammer just made are still assumptions , although logical and likely or even probable ,assumptions nonetheless and should not be taken as fact .

[quantumtangles]

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.

[WilbyInebriated]

Perpetual motion machines, even if they could be shown to work, would not be able to perform useful work.

what evidences do you have to support this?

[Pirate88179]

The atom has electrons that orbit without slowing down.  Even your keyboard is made of them.  Are they not perpetual motion?  If not, why not?  Do they slow down over time?  If so, how much time?

I have no idea if Bessler was for real or not...from what I think I know, gravity is a closed system and therefore can't be made to do any OU work.  But, I am the first to admit I don't know everything and have an open mind.  But again, I ask about the atom.  I have argued this with my old college physics profs way back when and never received a decent answer.  Do electrons slow down?

Bill

[fritznien]

Bill electrons are funny things, everything under quantum mechanics is.
first the electron dose not loose energy as it "orbits" so of course the orbit will not change.
more important its orbit is nothing like the orbit of a planet around a star.
your prof should have been able to explain some of this.
I know enough about QM to know i am not qualified to explain it.
may i suggest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics for a start.
the wave particle nature of sub atomic particles is a real mind blower.
fritznien