Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of this Forum, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above
Thanks to ALL for your help!!


inertial propulsion with gyroscope

Started by woopy, January 16, 2018, 04:39:01 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

TinselKoala

Woopy, think about action/reaction. If your aluminum plate is much heavier than the device you are testing, it is possible for the device to "push" against the plate and move across it without seeing much opposite movement reaction of the plate.  For these experiments I have always used a precisely leveled machinist's granite "surface plate" for the base, and a sheet of plate glass for the substrate surface upon which the device under test (DUT) is placed. I generally try to ballast the plate glass with adjustable weights (like modelling clay) so that its mass is equal to the mass of the DUT. In this way I expect the glass+ballast to move in the equal amount and opposite direction as the DUT moves, if it is indeed pushing against the substrate.

Your latest test is intriguing because your device does seem to cause movement of the substrate aluminum plate and the DUT together in the _same_ direction. Is this because the aluminum plate is much heavier than the DUT? Is it because the bearing wheels of the DUT aren't exactly aligned with the preferred direction of motion? Or some other reason? I don't know. The fact that the whole setup _does_ move, rather than just the DUT moving across the substrate, indicates that the system is not totally reactionless. Otherwise the DUT would simply move across the aluminum plate without moving the plate.

For such a system to be useful as a space drive, or as a true weight-loss system, it must be able to move when it is not in contact with anything material it can "push against" to create an equal and opposite reaction. In testing, it should be able to move without moving the surface it is sitting on, if that surface is also free to move.

Anyhow, I admire your dedication to experimentation and I encourage you to keep going, with several more experiments you can try.  For example, does the device still cause movement when the gyro rotor is not spinning, and just the circular drive motor is used, hence eliminating any effects caused by precession alone?


(Some names: Tolchin, Shipov, Poponin, Kidd, Firmage. You may be interested in reading about Chris Duffield's experiments with the Tolchin device. It's not a gyro precession device, rather it is a weight shifter with centrifugal force. But many of the same testing principles apply.  Note especially what he says about air tables and linear air tracks. I myself also tested the same Tolchin device provided by Gennady Shipov at the ISSO laboratory in San Franciso in 1999. )
http://www.iptq.com/cd/progress_1.htm

sm0ky2

This simple experiment here is fairly similar to the gyroboat of the 90's


Here a motor spins the gyro,
And a imbalance on the shaft pushes the motor in one direction
once per rotation, in exactly the same place.
this oscillating precessional force translates to directional linear forces.
In this example the forces are in two dimensions.
One is parallel to the plane of rotation (tangential or radial depending on perspective)
the other dimensional force is not clearly shown in this video, but some effects are present here.
It is a vectored angle, slightly off-axis from the vertical.
This causes a 'lifting' effect on the side of the frame where the motor is mounted.
The force is not really "up", but on the axis which is tied to the frame (tape roll).


If you were to place a scale under one side of the tape roll, opposite the motor
Your scale would show increased weight, because the distribution has changed momentarily
the side under the motor would show decreased weight for the same reason.
This motion is restricted by the mounts and by gravity
But if you can imagine the machine flipped sideways, you can picture the normally demonstrated
precession force causing this action.


Watch the video closely, you can see that the forces are truly in 3-dimensions.


https://youtu.be/Cj_3DaFA_ns
I was fixing a shower-rod, slipped and hit my head on the sink. When i came to, that's when i had the idea for the "Flux Capacitor", Which makes Perpetual Motion possible.

sm0ky2

Here is a nice demo from an ex NASA physicist
NASA began investigating this some time in the late 80's
(at least that was publicly released)
Inspired (allegedly) by the work of Sandy Kidd


The real experiments done by NASA involved large massive gyros
Some estimates place these wheels at 100-ft diameter weighing several tons.


This is a tiny version of an experiment, with many less degrees of freedom.
https://youtu.be/R9L8fmE0RlI
I was fixing a shower-rod, slipped and hit my head on the sink. When i came to, that's when i had the idea for the "Flux Capacitor", Which makes Perpetual Motion possible.

woopy

Hi TK

thank's very much for input and compliment.
I have done a last video, where i have replaced the steel balls by roller.
I have also balanced the weight of the substrate (the black alu plate which is originally almost 2 times lighter than the machine)
I don't know if the fact to use roller instead of balls interfer badly on the results ??
By doing this i can redo the test on my leveled and smooth cooking vitroceramique , i know that there is nothing to compare with a perfect machiniste plate, but it is better than my wooden table.
So it seems that, this time , the machine go forward and the substrate move almost not.

https://youtu.be/GSi1JzGogdM

I have looked some of your links and i don't know if the moving pendulums can exhibit some gyroscopic effect, but i have learned a lot on test on air tables or tracks and errors they can produce. And how easy it is to be fooled by those inertial systems.

So as usual i have to be very careful with the results, and i hope some others will come in the game so we can compare the results


Hi Smoky2

Yes M. Mccabe as made a lot of very impressive experiment with gyro and there is a lot of video on youtube. I have heard that he passed away (not sure) very sad. The one you have linked is probabbly something i will replicate to try to understand with my fingers what is going on.

Laurent

telecom

You can probably increase the effect by applying an extra weight on a gyro end.
It should precess more (just guessing)
Can you measure the force by stopping the movement with a fish scale?