The Bessler Wheel, mystery solved.

[fletcher]

Hey gurangax .. you are good at quoting Bessler's clues.

Bessler said he was terrified that just one word could give his principle away.

Do yo know what that word is ?

Can you give better & different clues than Bessler did, ones he perhaps didn't think of ?

Today we are more versed in physics speak, laws of conservation of energy, momentum, angular momentum, thermodynamics, & Noether's Theorem of symmetries - Bessler didn't know all these 'limitations' & symmetries, or terms - he just wanted to solve the age old problem of the true PMM - he did use two English terms when writing his notes in German in MT (beside his wood cuts) that we recognise - they being 'force' & 'movement' used in the descriptions of MT's 28 & 29 - my point being that he did not refer to nor describe energy & angular momentum or stuff we grapple with every day - just force, movement & momentum (used in other publications) - s'Gravesande hadn't formalized his theory of KE = mv^2 (later adjusted to 1/2mv^2 with the SI system) & gravity as mass x acceleration wasn't defined well either - he never described his wheels as gravity wheels, just said there was imbalance, & that they couldn't reach/find 'punctum quietus' or force equilibrium once in motion.

Knowing what you know about physics & technical descriptives used today which conservation law do you believe Bessler's principle invalidates ?

My money is on CoAM, if its true !

ETA: seems Charly2 wants your words too.

[gurangax]

Hey gurangax .. you are good at quoting Bessler's clues.

Bessler said he was terrified that just one word could give his principle away.

Do yo know what that word is ?

Can you give better & different clues than Bessler did, ones he perhaps didn't think of ?

Today we are more versed in physics speak, laws of conservation of energy, momentum, angular momentum, thermodynamics, & Noether's Theorem of symmetries - Bessler didn't know all these 'limitations' & symmetries, or terms - he just wanted to solve the age old problem of the true PMM - he did use two English terms when writing his notes in German in MT (beside his wood cuts) that we recognise - they being 'force' & 'movement' used in the descriptions of MT's 28 & 29 - my point being that he did not refer to nor describe energy & angular momentum or stuff we grapple with every day - just force, movement & momentum (used in other publications) - s'Gravesande hadn't formalized his theory of KE = mv^2 (later adjusted to 1/2mv^2 with the SI system) & gravity as mass x acceleration wasn't defined well either - he never described his wheels as gravity wheels, just said there was imbalance, & that they couldn't reach/find 'punctum quietus' or force equilibrium once in motion.

Knowing what you know about physics & technical descriptives used today which conservation law do you believe Bessler's principle invalidates ?

My money is on CoAM, if its true !

His wheel is run by gravity not CF, you have misunderstood the weight swinging which gain force. In fact I think everyone else misunderstood it. There is no violation of laws, it is pure gravity attraction powered.


regards

[fletcher]

I think many here are familiar with the "falling chimney" or 'falling stick" examples - a mass on the end of a lever will fall faster with more KE than the same mass falling in free fall ... IF ... there is another larger mass pinned closer to the fulcrum to leverage against i.e. that inner mass is retarded & the outer is advanced/accelerated - I can show you the sims if you wish ? - the total KE at bottom of fall is never higher than the GPE lost however.

You must mean something else ?

[gurangax]

in this word "all the inmost parts, and the perpetual-motion structures, retain the power of free movement, as I've been saying since 1712."


it become clear of what he meant only when you know about his weight excess principle. The fact is its so simple! i dont know what one word that will describe it. But I know what the thing is.


regards

[gurangax]

I think many here are familiar with the "falling chimney" or 'falling stick" examples - a mass on the end of a lever will fall faster with more KE than the same mass falling in free fall ... IF ... there is another larger mass pinned closer to the fulcrum to leverage against i.e. that inner mass is retarded & the outer is advanced/accelerated - I can show you the sims if you wish ? - the total KE at bottom of fall is never higher than the GPE lost however.

You must mean something else ?

Well regarding sims since you ask about it earlier can you simulate tomasz design with one bar and with wm2d? Its nice that someone come up with the design so I dont have to show anything yet.


regards