Was Bessler for real?

[quantumtangles]

@QT,

As far as cern (sic) is concerned I dare to speculate that there is no higgs (sic) and things ( constituent parts of matter ) (sic) are infinitely smaller and infinitely undetectable ... just as there is no limit to how large something can be . Cern is a waste of money and time .

Never wrestle with a Pig. You will both get dirty but the pig will enjoy it. By the same token, always avoid 'scientific arguments' with people who only express 'opinions'. They never allow their opinions to be contaminated by trivial considerations such as data, equations or empirical evidence.


The point here is that facts are more much more important than opinions when discussing matters of science. For this reason, I have not responded to the majority of your 'opinions'. What would be the point? I will get muddy and you will enjoy it. However, your last sentence (another opinion) went beyond the pale. It was a blow below the belt and in that sense a response may be justified.


Newton identified and explained the force of gravity in terms of its effects. But before Professor Higgs and others came along and published papers in the 1960s, the question...'what makes particles have mass' remained unanswered.


CERN is vitally important, inter alia, because discovery of the Higgs boson (somewhere in or about the 125 Gigaelectron volt range), would constitute the first reliable experimental evidence in support of the hypothesis that particles are imbued with mass in consequence of the presence of this boson. This is really important science, which could have widespread theoretical and practical implications (should the Higgs Boson be confirmed with 5 Cigma probability). If the particle is confirmed, it may then be a matter of time before these bosons can be separated in a magnetic field or Bose Einstein condensate of some sort. The implication just might be that the mass of a particle could then be manipulated using these bosons. Real science.


On the one hand, you support 'research' into PM machines (which cannot possibly work for reasons I had to lower my IQ to explain), and on the other hand you oppose serious research that could and probably will change the way we view the world and also enable us to build marvellous machines that actually work (such as, for example, the computer your luddite views were expressed on).


The upshot is that you advance quackery whilst opposing serious science, the most likely explanation for which being egoic. Which is to say, you wish to be 'the one' who makes a working Bessler wheel, and if you cannot do so (which of course you will not be able to do), in the meantime you would like a coterie of acolytes to marvel at your every enigmatic word during the great Delphic process of building the machine to end all machines. A trillion dollar masterpiece which your oracular genius has finally enabled the world to understand.


Ghastly.

[johnny874]

@QT,
YOU DON'T KNOW . And if I say I DO know then what ?

   Christo,
Why not use your real name which is Chris ? As to that statement, IF is a mighty big
word when you have NEVER shown anything. Posting claims is proof of nothing
but your desire for attention.

@Quantum, gravity is not the converter but the force to be manipulated/converted. it does
need a medium. I'll let blow hard know it all Christo explain this unless Christo really
doesn't know anything about engineering and/or basic science.
And what he missed, Bessler built things besides perpetual wheels. Doubt they were a die hard quest for
him but he found engineering interesting. Also, gravity in 1687 (when Bessler was born) was a newly discovered idea than many people experimented with. And today ? A lot of people just post without taking the time to learn. Not sure how much interest you've had in science or engineering but it does help to have read up some on it. As such, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is not the issue. One reason is if a wheel can sustain a sufficient over balance to continuously generate force, then any energy loss due to entropy or the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics would be accounted for.
Myself, I think Christo might be like AB Hammer and wanting to use religion or a connotation there of to make their views seem more important than the reality of Bessler merely being a man ahead of his times. And in the early 1700's, mechanical engineering was in it's infancy so little use to for such talents.

edited to correct year Newton published his book, En Principia. At the time, Bessler was a lad of 7 years.
The industrial revolution was just starting in England. It's start ? They spun 10 bobbins of thread at one time.
Before this, spinning ginnies were used to spin it one bobbin at  a time.

[christo4_99]

I'll just build it . Nuff said .

[silent]

So over 10 years later, how did the build go?

[onepower]

quantumtangles

Gravity is a one trick pony. The only trick it can do is to convert potential energy to kinetic energy. But you always have to supply potential energy in the first place in order for this conversion process to happen.

It's debatable, the force of gravity is proportional to the mass of an object and the mass is dependent on a property of mass called inertia. However nobody knows what inertia is and whether it's a property of mass or the space a mass occupies.

I read through the Bessler literature and did some experiments a long time ago with no luck. However I have learned quite a bit since then and may take another crack at it. I have come to understand that the laws of physics always apply however how we apply them in reality matters. The way Bessler was talking he wasn't just using the weight of objects, mass displacement or leverage to move them as most assumed. As we know that cannot work however what Bessler actually implied was that he was using the weight of an object against itself in some way.

This is a good website...https://besslerwheel.com/
The clues section is interesting...https://besslerwheel.com/clues.html

I think it's funny, a few hundred years later nobody has any better idea what the Primary Fields (Electric, Magnetic, Gravity) and inertia are than in Bessler's day. It's a black hole of knowledge few seem intelligent enough to crack.

AC