Looking at a Gyroscope

[lcam88]

A gyroscope is a very interesting device. For anyone who believes in science, certainly examination of this device is often overlooked. In fact a notable scientist / engineer, Prof. Eric Laithwaite, was marginalized by scientists when he demonstrated something that appeared to defy laws of physics.

It is questionable whether his tone was really the cause of their outrage, or whether it was the subject-matter he engaged in.

But that difference it not really so distinct from church based discrimination of scientific observations that defied their idea of god in the day.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQp4grGdqY


An interesting story here, if strict adherence to the appearances of playing by the rules is not in your innate character.

On a last note, aspects of the gyroscope, the spin (winding), the introduction of a force, and the movement is quite similar to electro-magnetics.

[Dreamtimer]

Haven't watched the video yet. Gyroscopes fascinate me. I'm looking forward...

[Joanna]

lcam, you just reminded me of a NASA experiment in 2011, where they proved Einstein's theory that the Earth sits in its own 'localized' 4D spacetime vortex....using a gyroscope:

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news...11/04may_epic/

[lcam88]

Thanks for the link Joanna. This type of information is interesting. The tone of the article is very aligned with theories developed by Dr David Anderson in his time warp research; his ideas extends to spinning energy as well.

I feel the gyroscope behaviors and principles are likely very important to the issue I've brought up in your thread; that is, as long as we may continue with this idea that everything is spinning. Nobody seriously speculates about whether protons an neutrons have spin, there is some type of speculation about electron spin, perhaps being something interesting to dwell on in quantum mechanics and their examination of quantum entanglement.

The basic behaviors of spinning materials, something we can coin as gyroscopics, is probably applicable to everything. In fact, I go so far as to suppose it is a dimension in our "3D" world that is worth adding along with time. And thinking about it, time or duration has a very interesting relationship with cycles (wave-length, and even frequency of a tone).

The frequency of a spinning disk is directly related to the disks angular velocity. If you have the spinning disk connected by an axle on top of the table, spinning like a top, there are other wobbling motions associated with the effect of gravity and an opposite force (the force applied through the table supporting the spinning system) that also become part of the frequency describing the motions.

And if you consider the frequency to include the wobble effects your article mentions, suddenly a whole new reference regarding the spinning objects frequency becomes part of the system that extends to astronomical references.

If you consider the effect of spinning atom and molecules, likewise, frequency then describes a system extending into the molecular and atomic realms.

[hughe]

Books written by Eric Laithwaite

Propulsion without wheels (1965)
Induction machines for special purposes (1966)
The engineer in wonderland (1967) — The Royal Institution of Great Britain Christmas lectures, 1966/67. With illustrations, including a portrait.
The linear motor and its application to tracked hovercraft (1971)
Linear electric motors (1971)
Experiments with a linear induction motor (1971)
Exciting electrical machines (1974)
All things are possible: an engineer looks at research and development (1976)
Transport without wheels ed. (1977)
How to invent (1977) co-written by M.W. Thring
Why does a glow-worm glow? (1977) illustrated by Mike Jackson
Electric energy: its generation, transmission and use (1980) co-written by L.L. Freris
Engineer through the looking glass (1980)— a revised and expanded version of his Royal Institution of Great Britain Christmas lectures, 1974/75. With illustrations, including a portrait.
Invitation to engineering (1984)
Shape is important (1986)
Force: a basic ingredient (1986)
A history of linear electric motors (1986)
Using materials (1987)
Size is vital (1987)
An inventor in the Garden of Eden (1994)

After Royal Institution of Great Britain Christmas lectures, 1974/75, his career as a influential engineer was over because his new discoveries challenged the foundation of classical physics.


@lcam88

It has been proved that electromagnetic field affects gravity for the past one hundred years.
They would not want general public learn about it.

Strong rotating magnetic field reduces weight of an object.
Electrical neutral object, gyroscope also produces weight reduction. One of Wallace Thornill's presentation in EU conference explains it in plain words the relationship between gravity and electromagnetism. He references Eric Laithwaite's gyroscope experiment also. I'll post the link here later.

Wallace Thornhill: The Long Path to Understanding Gravity | EU2015
https://youtu.be/YkWiBxWieQU

[lcam88]

Very interesting video to anyone who likes the idea of pure physics! Brilliant! It puts so much into meaningful perspective, to me anyway.

Strong rotating magnetic field reduces weight of an object.

Being a stickler for distinctions... the difference between mass and weight begins by how it is measured. Mass is measured on a balance where the object being measured is contraposed by another object of a known or established mass, 1 kg for example. Weight is determined by measuring a mass in the force of gravity against a spring that has characteristic that are known or established, a pound for example. The result is that 1 kg on earth is 1kg on the moon, whereas 1 lbs is 1/6 lbs on the moon (presuming 1/6th the gravitational force of earth).

Weight is therefore a measure of the mass or inertia of an object as it is affected by a force or by acceleration.

It can indeed be said that the weight of an object can change, even though its mass does not. That distinction gives a lot more meaning to the statement I quote above.

ADDENDUM

In reply to your video and in order to continue rational you present while on the topic of a relationship between the electric force and gravity, David LaPoint who is behind the ideas in the following three videos, believes that the entire universe is based on electric and magnetic forces. The videos elaborate his reasoning in a compelling way.

Him being a specialist in plasma utilizes a vacuum chamber and plasmas as in the presence of specially formed magnetic fields...

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EPlyiW-xGI

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NogyJ0k8Kw

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpI6ikj1G-s


FYI David LaPoint was convinced to discontinue publishing further ideas but these three videos are quite revealing. IMO

[hughe]

Excerpt from presentation of Walter Bosley - Origins - The Emergence of the Breakaway Civilization, Secret Space Program Conference 2015

GravitoElectroMagnetism

Theory published in 1893 by Oliver Heaviside

Counter-Rotating Wheels produce greater magnetic attraction than when rotating
in same direction

The Toroidal Mass Rotational aspects may be used to accelerate objects without
experiencing G-Forces

[lcam88]

Electrical neutral object, gyroscope also produces weight reduction...

It would seem, hughe, that what we consider "electrically neutral" is only neutral when compared to our own electrical state. In fact, relativity to origin is essential to how Wallice Thornhill defines energy (and consequently mass). We may consider, for the sake of simplicity, that our origin is always neutral, but necessarily it should be defined, rather than presumed, especially as we seek to introduce an instability into a system.

Gyroscopes...

... do not require to be balanced as our modern engineered devices tend to be. There is no rule in physics that declares a normal distribution of energy in the system; vibration would obviously be innate to unbalanced spinning systems, where the vibration would be in in phase with angular velocity from an outside neutral reference point.

Man-made devices tend to be more useful when they define neutral points that can also serve as reference outside of the specific spinning system and so, we tend to design our gyroscopes to be as well balanced as possible.

Perhaps a noble gas (Ne) can be considered balanced in a similar way?

If you consider the earths revolutions about the sun to be motion of a gyroscopic nature, its movement is obviously in reference to a neutral that would be the the sun. And you could describe a portion of the frequency of our suns solar system to have a 365.25 Earth Day oscillation.

Perhaps there are at least three interesting observations to make at this point:

1) as our reference point from where we observe our 356.25 day energy oscillation is of a stellar origin. (Context electrically neutral above) It may be increasingly clear that the all gyroscopic systems have a distinct neutral point where all energies within the system is relatively balanced or zero'ed. Relatively since introductions of energy into the system may cause changes; dynamic response.

2) as we may focus on different systems the result of energetic influence on those system may have a variety of manifested "dimensions" or aspects: weight, electrical polarity, temperature etc etc, harmonic interference, color, sound etc.

3) Is there any real reason we cannot define a neutral point within the nucleus of an atom, even as we examine a molecule of which that atom is a part of?

ADDENDUM

hughe, can you elaborate a bit on "Toroidal Mass Rotational"?

PS. I'm really enjoying the electrical universe model that Wallace Thornhill presents. Especially his Proto-Saturn Star ideas.