inertial propulsion with gyroscope

[Hanelore]

Hi Laurent,

my crafting skills are rather poor, so I do
not feel able to build experiments like you.

I would like to emphasize again that one has to
do the Nasa pendulum test very carefully in
order to be taken seriously by physicists.

All other tests on earth, which are not suspended similarly to Nasa,
will be assigned to well-known "stick-slip phenomenon" immediately!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/stick-slip_phenomenon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VW1y6isl18

All claimed unidirectional motivators working on wheels I know so far
failed as they were suspended similarly to Nasa pendulum test...

By the way:

I payed the construction of a Laithwaite-machine
in 2010, and it worked very good on flat surface.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nstIIZZadAM

Nasa pendulum test it failed clearly, but this
video was never published by the constructor.

Best, Hanelore

[shadowbones]

Dear Woopy,

There is an important difference between moving the center of mass of a device, and achieving thrust. Thrust means a force, which means an acceleration. But the devices you have made so far do not give a sustained acceleration, they simply transfer the center of mass along a line. In order to oppose gravity, as with a pendulum, a sustained acceleration must be created. There may be a way to do that with the principle of "mass transfer" but the engineering is not obvious.

It is incredible that you have achieved propulsion horizontally. It must mean, as Laithwaite said, that the inertia is reduced when the gyro is spinning and precessing. How is it possible that physicists have not noticed your experiment 16? Their blindness boggles my mind.

We should assume that Newton's laws are not violated. Thus momentum is conserved at all times. Let's take that as granted, and reason from there. In experiment 16 for example, conservation of momentum can happen only if the inertial mass is zero (or much less than gravitational mass)!  At rest inertial mass precisely equals gravitational mass though scientists cannot agree on why. When the gyro is spinning and precessing, somehow inertial mass gets much reduced. Since scientists don't have a good explanation for inertia in the first place (Mach's principle?), it is going to be tricky for them to explain how inertia is reduced by a spinning mass. But this phenomenon seems like a very big clue.

Here is an experiment I would very much like to see you do: Our hypothesis is that the inertial mass is reduced during precession. Therefore the kinetic energy must also be reduced because k=1/2 mv². if you place a pressure transducer in the path of precession and let the gyro collide with it, the force you measure should be much lower than that calculated for a non-spinning gyro moving at the same speed. We can do those calculations based on a few measurements you can easily make.

Laithwaite actually commented on this very point several times. Stopping precession took very little force even for his large gyros.

Incidentally, I think this idea of the inertial mass becoming reduced explains that famous "big gyro lifting over head" phenomenon. Once your arm is opposing gravity and holding the gyro at some level, raising it higher involves accelerating only inertial mass, not more gravitational mass.
But inertial mass is reduced, so the thing is easy to lift higher.

Note that gravitational mass doesn't change at all, so everything weighs the same regardless of spinning/no spinning when it is on a scale.

Kevin

[woopy]

Hi Halenore

yep dommage that you can not build a contraption. But it is up to you.

In the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VW1y6isl18 at 0.30 you see clearly the truck toy pushing backwards the substrate on the air table, due to friction of the motorised wheel on the substrate and action and reaction. In my part eight video, it is exactly the same config but my Fiala's device does not push the substrate (which is on steel marbles probabbly better than an air table because no angulation of the surface ) backwards, which clearly mean that the wheels are not motorising , even by the smallest STICK SLIP. My device goes happily forwards in the reference frame, and the substrate stays almost at the same place or eventually it goes slightly FORWARDS.
It is why i think that this test is the best because the Fiala's device needs a flat and smooth surface to exhibit it's capacity in full. On a suspended pendulum of any kind it will not be able to be at it's max capacity. It is as if you decide to test the acceleration rate of a car on ice, it works but the result is not very convincing for sure.
And if you observe attentively, on my test 17, at the end, when the system is stabilised , it seems that the average movement of the pointer is about the outer 12 mm width rim of the reference wheel.At full stop, the pointer is right in the middle, which seems to demonstrate a poor but not null result to me (6 mm offset on 2 meters length suspension line.

Now on the test you payed for. my comments.

1- so far i can see, this system is not in precession at all. It rotate then stops than exhibit a linear translation then stop and  back to beginning. For precessing it must be both together. So i am sorry to think that you are replicating any of Laithwaite's or Fiala's test with this contraption.
2- you test the device on a "billard" table, this is not smooth at all. Than if you should have mounted the device on wheels then placed it on a substrate, and the substrate on steel marbles (not too much touching together ) and all this on a plate of glass perfectly levelled , i bet that you would have got no translation at all. And the Nasa's pendulum test you made after is a normal result.

Finally in the Nasa's report it is written in plain letters that those Gyro propulsion constitute a non viable system. Bu to stay "open".... they  could ...perhaps...be ready... to  change their opinion ... if and only if a Nasa's pendulum test would be positiv and after super solid checking. Other said they will ask always more test and retest, because.......if it would eventually works, the actual physics should need a lifting.

Incredible, they simply don't want to see any thing that could perhaps modernised some portion of their physics. So no chance to convince them. Dommage butso it is. Sorry i have no more time for convincing anybody. I go my way and if i am wrong it will be my fault. Basta !

I have done new test with my latest contraption to check the apparent lack of inertia when a gyro is SPINNING and PRECESSING. Really interesting. And i insist i find each day new stuff , because i have the machine in my hands. And almost at each test my mind is twisted , because i was so sure that the result would be different....facinating and what a fun.

Hope this helps

Laurent

[woopy]

Hi shadow

Nice that you can post now.

Yes  i will try to stick on the fact that Newton is there, i should better say SOMEWHERE in the device.

I have made new test with my little contraption of part 17. Trying to imagine how i could install a system to stop the precession and measure the forces, as you proposed.

I got a big surprise as usual with this gyros,

first i tried to stop the rotation (while the gyro is spinning and precessing) by putting my finger against the rear vertical hinge. And it does not stop the rotation instantly and it was quite a bit of powerfull chock against my finger. Then i do the same directly on the gyro spinning shaft, same result, a strong and long force. Is Laithwaite wrong, did he trick something when he stopped effortless the big orange wheel on the tripod ?
Then i made some reflections and i remembered when Laithwaite put and remove a weight on one of his gyro during the lecture. When he remove the weight, the precession stops instantly.
So i redo my test ad guess what, when i slightly lift the gyro (while of course spinning and precessing, ) it stops instantly and exhibit no inertia.
So if you try to stop the precession by stopping the rotation, you don't stop the precession and you will be propelled away by the really impressivr force.

But if you slightly lift the gyro it stop to precess and to rotate immediately without inertia. And the same when you release the gyro it goes immediately in precession, i am not sure that it fall at all (to be checked) I would say that if there was no friction, perfect bearing and no dead mass, the gyro goes instantly into precession.

Incredible and once more Prof Eric Laithwaite was right. But Newton is also there, but where and how his he acting?

Speed up your replication you will feel all this in your hands, and remember you will not twist the gyro, the gyro will twist your mind, but for the better.

Laurent

[telecom]

Dear Woopy,

There is an important difference between moving the center of mass of a device, and achieving thrust. Thrust means a force,


Kevin

I think the device is producing trust and force, it is clear from the video.
Also, I don't see  any difference between the gravitational and inertial masses of the gyro,
since it immediately becomes unbalanced.