Question |
| Asked by: |
Ted Pittman |
| Subject: |
Proof |
| Question: |
Has anyone out there (other than Sandy Kidd) done a sucessful counter-weight test or pendulum test? |
| Date: |
13 June 2013
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Ted Pittman - 09/05/2014 17:07:59
|
| | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuUSetOaiT0
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Momentus - 12/05/2014 11:11:00
|
| | Hi Ted
The only video that is still available is the "Gamma", where the guy has a great deal of kit yet the demo does nothing for me.
There is/was a German video of a Laithwaite device moving on a snooker table covered with ping pong balls. I have lost my link to that one, have you seen it? Anyone else who has this link, please post it.
Momentus
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Harry K. - 12/05/2014 15:28:48
|
| | Hi Momentus,
Here is the link:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nstIIZZadAM
Regards,
Harald
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 13/05/2014 20:13:56
|
| | Hi Harry,
Re:-
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nstIIZZadAM
Thank you for putting up that link. I had lost my link to this you tube video after my computer recently got destroyed by a lightning strike on a neighbouring property. I should be glad as I only lost a computer, some cordless phones and my TV. My neighbour lost a large chunk of roof and had most of his cables and sockets blown out of the walls. Some say that God (or Newton or whoever is in charge these days) was heard to mutter – “Dam! Missed Nick again”!
It would be good to know who put the above video up to be able to ask them a few questions but they seem secretive – one of them even has his face blurred out. However, it seems that the link you put up shows a genuine answer – what do you think?
It is similar to a version of the machine the poor Eric Laithwaite made after his career had been destroyed by his pears and he was driven to make test models from Meccano. While it is different to my work which can work faster because it doesn’t have to wait on gravity for its precesion (mine’s force precessed) they both have restricted usefulness as they suffer from producing their reactionless thrust in “impulses”. So no dreamt of steady one G acceleration to the stars, then.
I am not sure, but I think this will prove to be the way with any gyro impulse device. Its usefulness will thus be restricted (though, who can tell the future?) and, instead of being used for thrust, it may end up being more useful for opening up peoples minds to the possibility that even the great God Newton can be superseded and that the Royal Society needs to learn how to observe outside its hermetically sealed box. Then this just may lead on to yet more remarkable invention.
Kind regards
Nitro
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 13/05/2014 23:46:33
|
| | It is not reaction-less thrust. I get tired of explaining why not.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Blaze - 14/05/2014 01:55:28
|
| | Glenn said
It is not reaction-less thrust.
I agree Glenn. All the movement that is apparent on the video is a direct result of action-reaction.
regards,
Blaze
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 14/05/2014 05:22:22
|
| | Yes, right again, Blaze.
The cylinder thrust last .5 seconds (1/2 sec.) and creates a new center of gravity.
The cylinder rotates for 3 seconds into realignment.
The velvet table top depresses under the ping pong balls and produces a backdrop for resistance.
Cylinder thrust is a stronger action, as it's power is delivered quicker against the velvet resistance.
The rotation of the cylinder into re-positioning is six times weaker in force against the crushed velvet,because the force is absorbed six times more slowly.
It is very much a slip and stick action.
Regards,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Nitro - 14/05/2014 12:28:02
|
| | Hi Harry and Blaze and others,
Further to your post on my post regarding this machine:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nstIIZZadAM&app=desktop
You pedantic lot!
I said “ – they (the above machine and mine) suffer from producing their reactionless thrust in “impulses”.” I said “reactionless”. What a heinous crime! What I perhaps should have said to keep you happy was that their “overall thrust” is produced reactionlessly (Is that a word? Well, it is now!). In other words; if you shoved a car along in neutral with a large version of this in the boot (sorry US – trunk) the car would not produce any reaction outside it. It would shake your teeth out but then you are bound to have some teething (ouch) problems when breaking a fundamental of physics.
Now sit up straight and pay attention!
In the above machine the thrust producing stroke shoves the machine in one direction while the heavy gyro is shoved in the other – all very Newtonian so far. The cleaver bit is the repositioning of the gyro, after each stroke. This is done by the reactionless (note that word!) precession of the machine round 180 degrees readying the movable mass (my machine also uses this, but very differently) which is the gyro, for the next shove of the next “stroke”. Each “stroke” causes linier reaction on the frame producing the linier motion of the rest of the machine. Therefore, while shoving the heavy gyro certainly has reaction – which is what causes the machine’s motion – cleverly getting the gyro to revolve the machine through 180 degrees to reset for the next “stroke” has no measurable opposing revolving (torsional) or linear reaction (see link below). This leaves just the reaction to shoving the gyro which is what moves the machine.
And Glen, although we old hands habitually look for stick slip, this machine displays none in important or significant amounts. If the machine were to be placed on an air table it would produce the same results. The machine does not require gravity to work either, as gravity could be simply replaced with a spring, or magnate or even, my old favourite, an elastic band. To work well in space it would benefit from a twinning arrangement. The only problem remaining is that the thrust (reactionless) is produced in discreet packages and not the lovely smooth thrust of science fiction. Shame that. Still it’s a start.
To see that there is no opposite rotating reaction to the BASE of a precessing gyro watch this video:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwSCM-Ipy2Y
Although the machine shown in the top video does what we are looking for I shall still continue with my machine as it has the potential for much faster resetting between strokes and thus might be more useful. Knowing what my device does, as far as I am concerned this thing does what it says on the tin. It screws Newton. It also screws the Royal Society and the established scientific community – though it will probably take them forever to notice before they finally find the courage to climb on the shoulders of the new giants.
Kind regards and laughter
Nitro
PS I've also posted this as a new question for other's opinions.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 15/05/2014 12:16:29
|
| | Have a beautiful day, Nitro my friend. I am off to see the wizard. It is rumored he is handing out new brains and that I am a needy candidate. You might like to tag along. Take care buddy. In the end we are all much the same.
My good regards,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Ted Pittman - 10/06/2014 19:11:35
|
| | Search YouTube for "Gamma Drive" to see a successful counter-weight test.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
