Johann Bessler information

[Dgraphic911]

@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

[hansvonlieven]

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

[John Collins]

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

[John Collins]

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

[hansvonlieven]

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