my favorite quackeries place :)
Quick reminder on y device :)
Just wondering if Sandy Kidd made anything new?
Does anyone agrees that precession has no inertia?
Did anyone did specific experiment to proof this?
This guy did a inefficient device
Look at this device:
1. The arm is leveled before the gyro is on.
2. The arm is up when the gyro is off
3. This means the balance is off for some reason...
4. Here is an idea for anew device --- engage the gyro, precession moves the arm up (less mass apparently), Stop the gyro the mass appears suddenly....Repeat that all the time and you get one way force....right?
Love you all guys. Don't give up.
||7 February 2021
Answers (Ordered by Date)
||dave brown - 08/02/2021 01:56:29
| ||you didn't read mine did you.|
||Sandy - 08/02/2021 11:42:36
| ||Good morning Kristijan|
If you feel the need to prove that there is no inertia during precession here is a simple method of checking the truth of this fact
This is much easier proved in a mechanically accelerated system where centrifugal force can easily be calculated if so required.
Rotate a gyro of known weight on an arm of fixed length at a fixed hub rotation speed .
The resultant centrifugal force can be easily calculated ,delivering the generally accepted value according to accepted principles.
Continue to rotate aforementioned device at the fixed rotation speed.
Now rotate the known weight (gyroscope) at a speed sufficient to raise itself above the horizontal plane of rotation, to about an angle of 45 degrees.
According to accepted principles the centrifugal force at this 45 degrees of elevation should be equal to the vertical component lifting the device upwards which would be very smartly, probably several Gs in fact.
However this does not happen because physics is not quite correct.
In fact the angular momentum which is supposed to be conserved is lost in total.
There is no mass left to accelerate?
If such a resource is available try the experiment on a set of scales or on a pulley counterweight system like I produced 40 plus years ago.
(See “Antigravity Machine Part One” on YouTube
There will be no lift in any normal similar experiment which means there is no centrifugal force generated at this angle.
If left to its own devices the gyroscope will raise itself from the horizontal and will continue to elevate itself until it reaches the highest point it can, if unobstructed it will align its axis of rotation with the axis of hub rotation becoming one and the same.
It will be noticed that there is no change in the weight of the system during the extent of this motion.
You really do not need to do any calculations as my claims are so obvious
Hope this helps
There was a little centrifugal force left during runs of “Antigravity Machine Part One” which allowed that device to work as demonstrated
That machine never went into precession.
||dave brown - 08/02/2021 13:48:45
| ||wow. I have to be rude to get a reply to mine? i thought i was, unintentionally, but there is no editing here.|
||kristijan - 08/02/2021 21:17:53
| ||Good day Sandy,|
So if it is so simple why these smart guys are gaping at this gyro as sheep:
Someone needs to demonstrate that in a study and publish it. Not a propulsion device, but just as a science fact.
I don't think that it is a science fact....is it? Can't find any "official" physics describing it as "inertia-less" movement.
||dave brown - 08/02/2021 21:32:22
||Sandy - 09/02/2021 13:09:55
| ||Hello again Kristijan,|
I demonstrated the loss of centrifugal force in my first machine “Antigravity Machine Part One”” in the University of Dundee during its in-house analysis in that establishment. 35 years ago
Not a word was ever spoken about that demonstration.
How close do the clever people have to be?
However a bit farther down the line I built a device especially for the purpose of demonstrating visually and by means of instrumentation (including telemetry) what a gyroscope will do on a system of fixed rotation speed and the gyroscopes accelerated from rest up until they go into what is commonly called precession,.and farther until they rotate around the hub or as far as they can mechanically climb.
That is where the strain gauges prove my point.
That machine has been sitting idle for a couple of years or so because that is the point I realised I was just wasting my time.
After 40 years of this arrogant and ignorant abuse I decided that they were not worth it anyway and I decided to shut my mouth regarding discoveries or breakthrough
At 83 any aspirations I had, have gone and so has anyone who ever had anything to do with my stuff.
I do have patent drawings and a nearly completed application for an advanced device but until the establishment accept our findings it is not going anywhere.
I returned to my beloved radio controlled model aircraft and have been building a pair of 3 axis gimbals for my quadcopter’s cameras.
I am also still trying to get access to my local friendly tool-room in an effort to modify a pair of spherical gyroscopes for a test device for Brian (Momentus)
I promised to do this before this Covid19 thing shut everything down.
If you want to see photographs of the gyroscope device contact me at email@example.com
||kristijan - 09/02/2021 14:51:46
| ||Thank you Sandy, sent you an email.|
I will say here what I say in the mail. You and prof. Laithvaite started all this you can finish it. You must join with some physician, mathematician and make a scientific paper.
I can find some physicist in my country if you want....or in UK. I can find some friends there from Oxford.
||Brian Morris - 29/03/2021 11:54:44
| ||Hi Kristian|
Some time since I last looked in, here are some answers to your queries
(Does anyone agrees that precession has no inertia? ) The gyroscope generates forces internally which overcome the inertia of the mass. Where mass is present there is inertia. So that is a qualified yes to your query. It behaves as if precession has no inertia.
Regarding the lifting gyroscope. If you were to replace the gyroscope with an equivalent mass you would have a balance beam. It only takes a very small force to move a really good balance beam. There is just such a small force present, enough to upset the balance, not enough to show on the scales.
Prof Laithwaite had an excellent demonstration of “absent centrifugal force” He showed it to me back in the 1980’s in his lab at Imperial College. There is a video, but I can't lay my hand on it. I will keep looking. It was an upside-down top, a flywheel about 100 mm on the end of a 200mm shaft.
The spinning top was released at an angle of 45 degrees and the heavy top precessed in a circle whilst the point stayed in the same place on a small glass mirror.
I describe my own experiment in String theory” post id
Twin rotors Id is also an example of “inertia free” precession.
(You must join with some physician, mathematician and make a scientific paper.
I can find some physicist in my country if you want....or in UK. I can find some friends there from Oxford.)
All my experience tells me that this will not happen. I live not far from Oxford and would welcome the opportunity to discuss my experimental results with an informed Professional!!
||Brian Morris - 29/03/2021 13:15:22
| ||Hi all |
Missing references from the previous post
I describe my own experiment in String theory” post id=1464
Twin rotors Id=3028 is also an example of “inertia free” precession
||Gardner Martin - 27/04/2021 14:40:34
| ||Mr Morris, I have been taking a close look at Laithwaite as part of my projected history of the antigravity (reactionless propulsion) delusion. Every physicist that I have contacted says that he was an idiot who should never been made a professor and who has done untold harm to the teaching of physics. As you seem to be one of his 'victims' I am curious to know why you believed his fantasies: was it his qualifications, his affiliation or something else?|
|Add an Answer >>|