I am well aware after all these years that gravity is not a source of energy, but I am still convinced that the overbalancing weights, provide the drive, as Bessler said, and you may tell me that gravity cannot provide energy, but without it there is no motion.
It’s a bit like saying petroleum provides the energy for the automobile, it doesn’t until it has been ignited and forced a piston upwards. Without the petrol you would get no action.
When I first researched the science which governs this subject, I realised straight away that a closed loop could not provide the energy from one falling weight, but several working together could in theory maintain an open loop, thus cotinuous rotation.
Initially I chose to experiment with over-lapping actions, and when it became too congested, I tested arrangements on both sides of a disc. Then it became necessary to test arrangements on two and even three discs on one axle. I knew that Besser’s first wheel was very thin but it seemed a logical step forwards if it gave me a clue to how he did it.
I tried to put myself in his shoes, designing wheels which might work but which could be refined and reduced to one disc once success had been achieved. Later I returned to the single wooden disc because the other methods were too complex and tests showed that the multiple discs weren’t necessary. But since those early experiments I have gradually broken through Bessler's smoke screens of misleading and ambiguous clues and I'm convinced that I have obtained the design which I believe will work. If it does, I will explain how and why it is identical to Bessler’s design.
People have asked me many times over the years how sure am I that I finally have the right design and I have always said, oh about 90 percent sure, but my certainty has always evapourated in the cold light of reality. But this time .................................?