Story of Johann Bessler and his perpetuum mobile are described in literature, here at chapter Inertia and Gravity at Wheels mentioned in brief. Bessler did construct a wheel 360 cm high within a palatial building. A honourable commissions did check and document that this wheel did run for months within a sealed room, also did show performance without slowing down. Bessler didn´t allow anybody to look at inner mechanism. As nowbody did pay demanded price for his invention, he destroyed the wheel and took his secret with him into grave.
Turn back wheel
Imagine, we could go back to 1700 and could tell Johann Bessler e.g. stuff about PC. We would describe, how a mouse feels, how to rattle at keyboard, how printers push off paper, what´s going on at the screen. We also could tell him, which parts in general within PCs are installed and which function they do. We should have to tell this with emotions in order to convince Bessler to present this ideal unit for menkind some hundred years earlier.
Skilled craftsman Bessler would be impressed but couldn´t do that job, cause some other ideas by coincidence first had to impress some other inventors and explorers. Opposite however, we could well do what Bessler did, cause we have much better knowledges, tools and materials. Thanks Remote Viewing - looking from distance - we could go back into time and look for decisive characteristics of Besslers running wheel.
Objectives
Years ago I heard of Remote Viewing, but I was not interested in that subject. Now, ´by coincidence´ I met Manfred Jelinski and his book ´Tanz der Dimensionen´ (Dance of Dimensions, only in German, see External Links) was very interesting for me. However, that´s all I know about Remote Viewing. If now I talk about this subject, I only can present my interpretations about these occurances, based at my understanding of ether as described above at chapter Essentials.
Technics of Remote Viewing offer a chance, propably to discover that secret. At least, one could get additional informations and detect effective principles in order to construct a running machine.
So Jelinski did organize some sessions about that subject, first with five teams, some days later did send me minutes of these sessions. Partly here are shown typical pages and I will mention my interpretations about parts and movements talked about. Words of these reports here are underlined (black, so no links). These scripts are in German, mostly only single words are noticed, thus no complete sentences.
Jelinski couldn´t find decisive hints of Bessler-Wheel´s function within these minutes. By his experiences, these first ´exploration-sessions´ can only bring hints for further more detailed sessions. On the other hand I expected, minutes would talk about Teddies within jungle or would describe spinning wheels or might report about thousands of any stories - or there would result texts and pictures about Bessler-Wheel analog to these I presented here at this website.
Nothing of all these minutes did show. However I was totally surpriced, cause practially every word I could understand in sencefull context. Obviously results of Remote Viewing are not ´self-explaining´, nevertheless can tell much for those who are intensively involved with the problem of target. So I dare to present my impressions, once more before there are any real approvals about.
Target
Exercise right side, Jelinski wrote on a paper-sheet, so Bessler-Wheel (1712-1714), construction and functional characteristics while running. Draw most exactely effective parts. At this sheet and an envelope, reference numbers are noticed, here date 170601 (17. June 2001) and two further numbers.
This text did offer a time range rather large within which this wheel or other wheels could have been running. So different descriptions could result. Sheet above and closed envelope won´t matter any more, cause only these reference numbers are mentioned to the teams to be target.
Teams
Each team is build by a ´monitor´ and a ´viewer´. The monitor will guide the viewer by neutral and formalized hints through different stages of the session. The viewer tries to recognize and to notice contents by words or texts or drawings.
As an experience, best results are achieved, when both don´t have special knowledges about the target nore are involved into that subject. Mostly women are better viewers, probalby based at their more sensitive understanding. It makes sense to work with several teams same time at a target. Congruent results will be more important, on the other hand there will come up more and better hints e.g. for more precise targets at following sessions.
As function of mind will be reduced some kind (like at day-dreams), viewers do hard with writing and drawing. It´s also hard to concentrate at this work (like efforts - mostly in vain - at dreams in order to see sharp a nebulous picture). So sessions will mostly be finished within one hour.
Spontaneous reaction
Same moment the target (only by these reference numbers) is mentioned to viewers, flash-like they have the answers ´in their mind´s eyes´. Same moment, they allow motoric of arm and hand to express these impressions quickly and spontaneously. Resulting of are some scrawl lines, e.g. that wavy line here (but each viewer draws different lines).
Viewers are trained and now concentrated to allow their spirit this ´excursion´ into universal knowledge and to make available impressions within ´resonant-box´ of mind at its best. Informations should be ´stored´ most clearly within that ´main-storage´ (however not by digital signs but by holographic pictures). This process can be supported by soulmates of ´other side´ or soulmates could hinder, ´unsuitable´ contents are taken.
This process for brain (bound at materia) is much too fast, processing by mind (make datas aware) must be stretched in time. That spontaneous scrawling above, thus is only a clue for following analysis of sudden impressions above. This viewer here for example, did draw that wavy line again and again for remembering, did differ groups of contents by cross lines.
To each section, notes are made for each first emotional impression, but also mind is allowed to judge about (however both differed strictly). This viewer here e.g. noticed slacking falling got lost soft and judges that to be naturally. Afterward follows powerfull cutting energic like steal hard and this would be artifical. It would concern movement energy flux returning of natural source. He feels up and down endless uneven changing hard and soft or returning resumption flowing weaker becoming harder supported and this would be similar to natural, above this his mind states to have no idea about.
First impressions
Now, these are words rather common, an other viewer does add light increasing with back-curve sharp leftsided, afterwards uneven back-bended to left hard, followed by opening to right change of direction running ahead dynamically lifely symmetric and lastly towards ahead then snap-off structure until end disappeares into floor.
A third viewer states hooked begin S-shaped towards down soft, then upward diagonal to right upside small bow narrow back to left soft and a concept / idea / spiritual sense is present. An other viewer names soft and hard up and down swinging upwards with a bend until around an edge softly downward falling slinging back and ahead like slow-motion as first impressions.
Sceptic readers will state, here are offered most precisly descriptions - about a spinning wheel or thousands of other machines or procedures. Similar to this, indeed a spinning wheel could be described by someone, who did see it for a short moment, first time in his live, so didn´t know shape nore function before. Nevertheless, no viewer did talk about Teddy in jungle.
Only by retrograte view one will recognize, incredibly exacte this target is characterized by few words. Nevertheless, it will be problem for questioner to give technical fitting answer to these explanations.
On the spot
At a further stage of session, three viewers were rather impressed by the target´s room (a castle of Duke of Hessen) and did describe it by analog pictures. One must know, viewers mostly look at the target diagonal from upside. On the other hand, viewers must take care not to ´awake from day-dream´. So it is rather hard for viewers to write and drawings are mostly rough sketches.
This viewer here did hear outside bubble of pneumatic hammer, outside forest green gras, walls like boards silver border. An other viewer states massive thick walls stones inner wall even like panelled light ivory-coloured like polished natural stones. Within the room at the wall upside flexible plastic rubber-like, however only appearing at one drawing. I can´t interprete this definitely, may be there was an other machine installed or spare parts - ´soft-hard´ - kind were stored there.
Jelinski however does know by experience, persons often are marked by points, like here these small parts like natural. So, here members of commission could stand around the machine. At an other drawing, again nine points are marked and stated by connection towards outside.
Again there the point upside left is situated some further backward, is drawn other kind than the others and marked by strong heat was here. Further down carbonized vaste and aside of burnt is stated.
In the middle of the room at all three drawings is a construction hot pulsating chamber or elevation stands at the middel jittery energy and chamber pulsate receiver strong heat. Jelinski does know by experiences, viewers often describe energy by terms of ´hot´ or ´heat´.
Interesting are remarks like glas melted sealed (Bessler did close the wheels, so nobody could look inside). Left side down there is pointed out shielded a (sealed ?) door, at this a unit (lock and bolt ?). There are humming talking loudspeaker (knocking of running machine through the door ?).
Brain of this viewer did state (marked by AI resp. AOL), here is something hidden and he assumes dead body. Brain of an other viewer guesses a showroom and person. Brain of third viewer feels this very exciting cause pulsating results increase-of-masses drive, however his problem: can´t detect source of mass-surplus (interesting this equalation / mix-up of mass / energy, see Ether-Continuum-Theory here).
By kind viewing one could be enthusiastic, cause viewers indeed were ´on the spot´, could exactely describe szenario around Bessler-Wheel inclusive this commission. On the other hand, anywhere at the globe there is a showroom, shielded from visitors, a spinning wheel automatically is moved, humming all times, while a loudspeaker explains, how in early times people - here represented by a dead dummy - did achieve mass increasing at spool of thread.
Movements and parts
This viewer here describes a part to be like iron however no iron much finer even large fine + solid to touch at not metallic mirror-matt. A suggestion could be, the effective masses are well shaped weights of stone.
Like all other viewers then he talks about kind of movements. To him it seems coming from upside stop some airy diagonal dip into motion´s direction some rounded sits down dips in a surface / ground softly bended, which makes impression of silent as if calming occures.
On the other side he tells about motion coming from upside with following circle movement of some solid stuff as if no weight, on the other hand of some soft and at raising direction of movement he points out warm heat.
An other viewer looks at parts like snappy squared like metal and a movement at the beginning hesitant and cushioned accelerated movement downwards, then cutted movement rattling, afterwards slow motion backward related to time. Within a round box he points out essential is time in motion runs ahead fast then slowly back. He also draws a big thing inside metallic red hot music?, in addition around it grazy smell sweaty sharp smell like smoke and his mind mentions, this would be strange.
So, movements are described well and clear, with mix-up of time / speed - or even no mix-up? Nevertheless, it´s no more talked about a spinning wheel.
This viewer here also gives precise description of parts (box upside right, hard to read): spokes screws bands of metal partly also wood complexe and filigrane very mobile.. Then he states different movements must be coordinated well, in order to achieve effect wanted while wanted effect is movement within time, astonishing too aspect of water was not looked at probably thing must be put into water at the beginning.
In the middle of this picture he draws large thing turns into different directions like 2 wheels connected at the center 1) left to right 2) upward and down.
In the center (marked by arrow from left side up) he marks drive switch cable, which at other sheets he also calls head / "intelligence / control".
Unsuccessfull attempt
Here the viewer however tells also, at this location would be stress excitement nervousity and at the middel of the sheet he tells why: doesn´t run at the moment - experiment interrupted / helplessness. Downside he continues with experiment didn´t work at the beginning thing only hops thing is build not exactely enough relations doesn´t fit "construction plan" is very old but new for us / futuristic. This viewer loves Science-Fiction-Movies, so his mind did conclude this should be something of Stargate. Comforting he notes "head" takes care and will hinder even worse, if necessary.
Also other viewers tell about strong feelings at this location, but also calmness relief excitement and lastly burnt carbonized some kind of finish. So could it really be, viewers at the one hand did see unsuccessfull attempts, at the other hand lastly Bessler destroying his wheel? This wouldn´t be unusual as Jelinski knows by experiences: viewers are ´attracted´ always by most emotional situations of a target.
Further details
Corresponding to tasks, this viewer produces clear conciderations at this sheet (upside left): centric arranged alignment central function small, local movement source center origin generator movement activity.
Further on he mentions (at the middle): ahead / back movement square small parts restless motions, then describes (left side down) a square part dark rubber-like block solid even surface relative light (like pen) 5-6 cm long moving without guidance.
Again it will be problem of questioner, what should be essential at a light pen, moving ahead and back without bearing.
This viewer again points out (downside right): cooperation of all parts fine adjusted regular concept in total is basis.
At an other sheet, again he draws this seven-arm star, at the center however some more soft parts. There he mentions concerning function: production essential (life-), there will result something and concerning knowledges: it is known however background is not known, lastly he notes concerning ahead-back movements: high level law is basic, no autonomous movements, motion of a part alone doesn´t make sense, only in total it will make sense, parts don´t touch each other.
Relationship
An other stage of sessions shows a tool for analysing relations between diverse factors. A viewer e.g. shows control functions between big thing, snappy part / like command, time and head.
About ´snappy part´ he remarks snappy probably will mean hesitating approach, cutted command or strong pressure onto metal hard + square + dark like there from would come commands. That ´big thing´ thereby should be controlled, logically his mind explains this would be like an Ufo.
This viewer, obviously, got off into other regions - while next sheet again exactely he describes wheels including one the other. Analog to this, an other viewer describes control unit as large as a TV assembled of different parts makes go in and out.
This viewer here (right side) shows relationship at a level rather abstract: target (T) for him will mean energy based on (upside right) natural soft technics without harmfull substance, not by (combustion or destroying ?) of natural materia. He assumes (upside left) a concept of intentional doing, like put a stamp on, sign, achieving relation to something other and he calls shape of energy light fine-matter white-yellow-good. He notes concerning time past + future, hard to capture for us, from somewhere else, "time-shifted".
Obviously viewers don´t talk about Teddy nore spinning wheels any more. Of the rest of possibilities everyone may take his own interpretation or valuation, as he likes it. Obviously it´s not easy for viewers to keep up concentration. Some come to phantastics, others to philosophics. The monitor must try to control the approach, e.g. must allow mind of viewer from time to time to ´let off steam´. These notes do show large spectrum: not clear, not important, very exciting, totally stupid, doesn´t matter, some boring. This does show, after some time viewers would like to end stress and session.
Distinction
For Jelinski and his group, just this essentially differs his technics of Remote Viewing versus ´common´ clairvoyance: to separate sharp diverse kind of impressions. At a special stage of session, there is a tool for differing impressions in some columns of a table:
S - Sensoric impression, here mostly were named soft hard even hot square metallic.
D - Dimension, with most noted terms of small solid round compact aligned small thing within large chamber.
AI - Aestetic impression, i.e. which feelings has the viewer that moment: like somebody in the audience strong feelings is essential stupid uncomfortable.
EI - Emotional impressions, there on the spot: busy functional changing methodically effort work usage objectives stress relief certainty in doing.
T - Touch, what can be touched there: hammer lever-arm units doors walls.
IT - Intension, i.e. the target serves for which objectives: no pollution no risky spontaneous occurance experiment lift power-transmision survival-plan miracle.
AOL - Associations (of mind): living-being intestines landscape producer processor.
Thus, whenever mind is allowed to judge, suggestions wander into all directions. Obviously, viewers don´t have any idea they talk about. Obviously, analog statements are noted only by real emotional impressions.
Summary
Nevertheless, some viewers were able to ´incarnate´ informations thus stabel within storage of brain, they can give a summary in awake status (with much better handwriting and fluent way of expression).
A viewer still keeps on remarkable building and notes once more that nice panelled room, with elevation at the middle of the room, not to define.
An other viewer states not logically to analyse, for people with other kind of mind, for mid-range-men hard to unterstand + is not recognized, important for some very ´special ones´, which understand and know, new interpretation via feelings, they know what to do with, without questions.
A third viewer wrote clear and systematically: 1. Target: is a kind of chamber, inside there is a process physically or chemically. 2. Mode of operation: surplus of mass, pulsation, effect of trampoline, controlled reaction, starting impetus by men. 3. Chamber: sealed in connection to outside, glas-like material. There is some kind of reagens as release of reaction > not known, comes from outside, is established really within chamber, comes and goes, thus pulsating. 4. Control unit: starts the process. 5. Men: scientist, explorer, have strong feelings, calmness, relief, excitement.
This viewer (right side) now summerizes: Frist impression: natural, many elements with artificial parts, within the target there is an area concentrically arranged, there is motion controlled by high-level plan, recognizable, interesting stuff occures inside, it´s small solid and compact, parts of are flexible, there is a concentric motion of small parts, parts are square blocks of 5-6 cm length. By the movements steadily results something, environement and that behind is not known, not to touch (very complex), controlling environment looks dangerous.
So this viewer clearly did realize: one may not touch that machine, otherwise bones will be broken. If first time one sees these ´thin´ results of Remote Viewing, one will be disappointed. Obviously however, Remote Viewing is based on division of labour.
Teamwork
An organisator takes problem of a questioner, formulates this as a target, hides this notes, mentions the reference numbers to viewers and monitors. His job thus can´t be presenting answers.
A viewer must change to some kind of day-dream-status, in order to receive informations of ether knowledge base, by mental concentration. He must reduce his logical capacities to function only as neutral reporter. Medial talents not at all are necessary, e.g. Jelinski can train by some exercises every interested person. So the viewer will get only emotional impressions, which in general are not to express by numbers or words. Thus the viewer can not and may not give perfectly logical answers.
A monitor opposite will take rational functions, e.g. via instructions to the viewer. Instructions must be neutral shape, e.g.: how looks that like, how feels this when touching at, what´s inside of, what happens next, note that at the paper, make a drawing, go back once more. So the monitor must be concentrated in order to ´animate´ the viewer to most clear expression of his impressions, in order to tell and note statements. So this is a formal job, i.e. the monitor may and must not look for evaluation of informations.
So it´s the job of questioner, to bring in context these mental informations with his pre-knowledges of facts concerning that target. It´s only him, who can produce a rational resp. usable answer. Here e.g. it´s task to design a technical solution, which will fit at its best to characteristics mentioned above by Remote Viewing.
Results
These results of Remote Viewing sessions may look ´rather thin and disappointing´, however one may concider these points of view. At first, look at any simple animation here at this website, afterward try to explain to an other person what there did move why for which purpose. So it was not to expect, viewers could describe exactly that target in steady motion. Opposite, it´s absolutely astonishing how precisely they did mention details of these movements extremely complex.
Second, these first sessions to a target can only serve for ´exploration´. These first results are usefull for following sessions. All interpretations which are not totally clear, thus should be checked once more, here e.g. whether there was a second machine or spare-parts at that wall, whether these ´points´ indeed will mark members of that commission, what kind these soft-hard parts will be, which parts are really effective masses, what´s about these spokes, how can wheels be included one within the other, and some more detailed questions. Jelinksi would never present such interpretations without a checkup by following sessions. So it´s absolutely my risk as a questioner to publish my impressions and my interpretations already now - and probably make a fool of myself.
Third, Jelinski´s experiences are, viewers can and do tell everything correct - they are asked for. So the monitor has essential function, cause he must ask (right) questions to the viewer. That´s no simple job, cause by questions the answer may not be pre-dicted. On the other hand, also the monitor has no (or never complete) knowledges about the target. Also for him, every answer of the viewer can bring quite new and surprising facts. So the monitor must ask for most different aspects, must be curious to each step of progress within that ´inter-view´ and must react immediately.
Consequences
My impressions are, these technics of Remote Viewing are well usable to achieve answers for technical problems. It won´t make sense to look into far future. This would be pure voyeurism, cause we neither could understand nore realize results. Improvements necessary however could be accelerated, e.g. by questions about production process without toxins, at near future.
Above this, naturally Remote Viewing was used for non-technical targets and most remarkable results were achieved. Again however it would be rather naiv to ask for predictions about numbers of lotto or share stock indices. The ´other side´ knows neither words nore numbers, but only emotional pictures and their essential meanings. Without sensefull answer will also be questions about well-ness and lucky-ness of anybody in future. Soulmates will not allow answers, which everyone has to find by himself.
If however successfull sessions of Remote Viewing could help for better understanding of its basic mechanism - the ether as medium of all occurances - that kind of viewing could become common usage: as everyone would be his own monitor, asking himself right questions, as his own viewer will find spontaneous and correct answers, relaying at his own ´inner voice´.
Besides direct successes, Remote Viewing could contribute to understand, not only ideas borne by mind are real, but knowledges by feelings are true as well. Above this, that ´new kind of viewing´ could change living-together in general.
Principles and construction
It wouldn´t be surprising, if just at middle of 2001 anywhere at this globe a Perpetuum Mobile would be build exactely by these principles shown here. Knowledges of Johann Bessler never got lost within ether, even hundreds of years ago - as results above at least do show. By the work of viewers and ideas and conciderations of all related persons, these knowledges within morphogenetic fields are intensified again, so free available for everyone by corresponding focus. It´s evident experience e.g., viewers at following sessions do find much easier to a target and are able to see more details (thus could easily clear up remaining questions above).
What I could recognize concerning effective principle by now, I will present here within some weeks, inclusive basic design of that machine. I am confident, not only these technical conciderations will really be approved, but same time spiritual aspects behind.
As mentioned, I do publish these conciderations ´rash´ at the web, thus take risk of disgrace. It´s not my job to work silently within my chamber in order to produce perfect results. I can´t do this, cause practically to none of these subjects I have well founded knowledges. By my conciderations, I just can give impacts for those who can take and improve these ideas. Every reader now e.g. by his co-operative thinking and his feelings did contribute to strengthen this subject at morphogentic field. Above this however, I would appreciate some ´soft-hard´ (email-) criticism and hints for subjects discussed here.
Evert / 08.07.2001
| Perpetuum mobile | Index / Sitemap | Menu |