NATHAN COPPEDGE--Perpetual Motion Concepts

Continuous Motion With Conventional WheelsA conventional perpetual motion wheel is typically a vertically-oriented or 45-degrees oriented wheel, typically with hammers, pendulums, or some other application designed to influence the wheel and cause it to move. These are widely discredited, and even in my own work, I consider them to have less merit than a variety of more original designs. For example, horizontal wheels and levers operated on the horizontal may have an advantage that the famous Bhaskara Wheel did not have. Nonetheless, the wheel of Johann Bessler holds some fascination, because it supposedly worked. So, the Bessler Wheel is the focus on this section, below and when you get to the diagrams page. Conventional wheels, as opposed to some other designs that make use of clever geometry or double-principles, encounter several difficulties: [A] What rises must fall [B] Degrees of motion [C] Friction The devices listed in my diagrams section are intended to overcome these three difficulties with flying colors (although in the first case, the statistics do not support the claim). FIRST DESIGN: Vertical Wheel Using Spirals and Double-Difference: Continuous motion is effocated through use of a spiral wheel, in which, as usual, one end rises and the other falls. Fixed arms reaching into the middle of the wheel are used to support pendulums, one being heavier than the other. The lighter pendulum is heavier than the difference between the heavy pendulum and the wheel. The pendulums are attached using flexible cords or chains, allowing them to move in spiral motions, the lighter one dragging upwards and counteracting the pressure of the heavy weight upon the wheel, and the heavier one spiraling downwards along an upwards spiral and moving the wheel in the process. Note: I know of no existing example of this device being built.SECOND DESIGN:A Bessler Wheel type design attempting to solve all the conventional problems with this type, such as (A) How to generate motion, (B) How to continue the motion through 180 degrees, (C) How to continue the motion through 360 degrees, and perhaps (D) How to avoid friction The device (or apparatus, more accurately), uses a bar weight to simulate equilibrium, then uses uniquely angled boxes in an attempt to throw the bar weight off balance. In spite of these clever techniques, it appears that this design is marred by the trouble of the conventional wheel-type designs, distinguished from the lever type invented by Nathan Coppedge NEXT: Wheels Diagrams nathancoppedge.com |

STATISTICS: Vertical Wheel Using Spirals and Double Difference VOLITION: 2(2 active u /1 dual-axial u) EQUILIBRIUM: 16 (1 u / 1 stem / 16 subcycles / cycle) EFFICIENCY: 1/8 ( 2 Ve / 16 VE ) VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: Earlier I used faulty math to defend the idea that this device has a rating of 8. The revised value seems more accurate to me (1/8th). |

STATISTICS: Bessler Wheel Without Analyzing Diagram VOLITION: 1 or 3(3 active u /1 or 3 dual-axial u) EQUILIBRIUM: 1 or 1/2 (1 u / 1 or 2 stems / 1 subcycles / cycle) EFFICIENCY: 1, 2, 3, or 6 ( 1 or 3 Ve / 1 or 1/2 VE ) VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: This is the most ambiguous design I have encountered so far. My intuition is that if it is a minimum of 1, this actually means that it doesn't work. The max is impressive, though. More typically, however, this type of rotation with rolling balls classifies as dual-axial, limiting the rating. |

STATISTICS: Conventional Wheel Attempt 2 VOLITION: 1/4 to 2(2 active u / 1 - 8 dual-axial u) EQUILIBRIUM: 1 (1 u / 1 stems / 1 subcycles / cycle) EFFICIENCY: 1/4 to 2 ( 1/4 or 2 Ve / 1 VE ) VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: This is another design that depends on whether the uni-directionality is effective. Conceivably the rating might go up to two infinity if it could be proven that the device moves on its own. |

STATISTICS: Bessler Wheel Type Analyzing Diagram VOLITION: 6(~6 active u / 1 dual-axial u) EQUILIBRIUM: 4 (1 u / (1 stems / 4 subcycles / cycle) EFFICIENCY: 6/4 ( 6 Ve / 4 VE ) VOLITIONAL STATEMENT: According to my creative equations, this device might be over-unity if an infinite rating is not required. Perhaps if I had more information on how it operates I would grant it a 7/4 infinity rating instead of 6/4 non-infinity. But that would depend on making the vertical wheel principally uni-directional, which in my formalisms is impossible. Bessler would have to be very clever to make this work. |