|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
23 November 2024 18:05
|
|
Welcome to the gyroscope forum. If you have a question about gyroscopes in general,
want to know how they work, or what they can be used for then you can leave your question here for others to answer.
You may also be able to help others by answering some of the questions on the site.
|
Question |
| Asked by: |
Robert Stuch |
| Subject: |
The 'free lunch' |
| Question: |
Hello all. I've been through the whole forum, and more. Fortunately, I haven't felt your pain explicitly, though implicitly, I have. What I have read herein has been a lot of language barrier/trying to visualize what has been said and lots of failures in doing so. I have also found some pure basics not being covered, or not covered appropriately.
So, in beginning, I'd like to define the terms I'll be using:
1) "Spin" is the gyro rotating about its own axis.
2) "Rotation" is the act of the gyro and arm revolving about the axial center of the total circulating mass.
I have read here that precession 'possesses' no force as it is not 'accelerating'. I'm not 'accelerating' towards the center of the earth either, yet, because of gravity, it's said that my mass x the 32 ft/sec^2 is 'force'. I can certainly feel the effects of it by the pressure exerted on the soles of my feet.
Let's review the case of the typical spinning gyro, but instead of letting it freely precess, we start it up at a stop peg so it cannot precess. There is also no momentum and subsequent 'bounce' as there is zero velocity at the stop peg. Is there a pressure exerted upon the stop peg, as there is a pressure exerted on the soles of my feet? I grant that there would have to be because the gyro certainly does 'need' to precess, as that end of its axle is not supported, and is 'free' to fall under the duress of gravity. If not, then it never would have precessed to begin with, without a stop peg. I HOPE to get comments on this as they have been sorely lacking within all these pages. This is not saying that there won't then be an action 'trying' to happen at the support end. That would be another question: as to which way/direction it might become 'apparent'.
Let us then discuss momentum MV on the stop peg. If one were to vibrate/oscillate the stop peg end of the gyros axle against the stop peg many times per second, two things happen: 1) precession puts it back on or towards the peg. 2) the oscillation causes quick momentum upon the peg causing an acceleration. To me, that's one form of a 'free lunch'.
Another form of 'free lunch' is in quickly DRIVING a high angle precessed gyro back towards either a zero angle, or even a negative (below pivot) thus causing force to be applied axially to the revolving assemblage. That should take a 'few' pounds off of the 'scale'. The free lunch part is that precession will quickly and freely put it back at high angle where the operation can be applied again. Yes, this is 'pulse' but with multiple pairs in like operation, it would become smoother.
Well, that's enough for the moment. I hope to acquire some responses.
|
| Date: |
7 December 2010
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Sandy Kidd - 01/01/2011 15:03:18
| | | Robert Stuch for information
The origins of the “FREE LUNCH SCENARIO”
Once upon a time, many years ago, a far seeing experimenter, predicted that certain advantageous physical movements, changes if you like, could be made to a gyroscopic system in precession, ultimately allowing positive inertial pulses to be generated.
His name was Professor Eric Laithwaite and he called this his Free Lunch Scenario.
He predicted that as there is no angular momentum or centrifugal force present in a passive gyroscopic (gravitationally accelerated system) in precession physical changes could be made without the requirement for any extra energy.
This being the case the gyroscope could be moved from a lower elevation to a higher one with no requirement for any energy input.
He thought that if the gyroscope could be raised from a low point, say 10 degrees above the gyroscope’s lowest safe level of precession to a much higher point say for example 60 degrees higher and then made to gain some angular momentum at that point, a pulse of inertial thrust would be developed as it descended.
The angular momentum gain could be attained by slowing the system rotation speed and/or gyroscope rotation speed.
My own thinking on this point is that only changes to the gyroscope rotation speed would be required to effect this requirement.
“Up like a gyroscope and down like a brick” the now old adage for this kind of action, springs to mind.
I am not sure if the good professor ever developed a device to demonstrate his ideas, but he was certainly very keen to test his ideas when I talked gyroscopes with him in the Imperial College in 1985 or thereabouts.
I personally think something like this could be done successfully if suitably designed and built.
Anyway that was the Free Lunch as I know it.
Sandy Kidd
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
