|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
29 November 2024 00:39
|
|
Welcome to the gyroscope forum. If you have a question about gyroscopes in general,
want to know how they work, or what they can be used for then you can leave your question here for others to answer.
You may also be able to help others by answering some of the questions on the site.
|
Question |
| Asked by: |
Glenn Hawkins |
| Subject: |
The Walrus said to the carpenter, |
| Question: |
"To talk of many things: Of shoes and ships and sealing wax. Of cabbages and kings.”
I replied to the Walrus; Allow me to belabor an argument that will not go away.
In order to proceed in the hope and work of inertial propulsion, it is necessary to understand that there is no opposite reaction from the orbit of the flywheel. The pedestal does not circle in the opposite direction. Equally necessary to realize, is that the gyroscope dose not seek to revolve around it's center of gravity.
Centrifuge seeks to pull the gyro outward in a straight line, but straight line travel is not allowed in the system of these sequences, wherein torque produces only torque. The direction of centrifuge is maintained in a state of curving, because it must follow the circling flywheel which creates it.
The pedestal circles in the same direction as the flywheel. Incredibly, they are somehow governed to maintain at all times an exact and constant alinement toward a stationary center point in empty space, wherein they revolve in perfect synchronization to one another, pivot and wheel. This must certainly be because centrifuge and precession maintain each other in a constant ratio of countering cause and effect. I do not know how it works, only that it must.
The effects can trick the mind's eye into seeing what is not there. The mind may see the circling movement of the pivot not as it is, but rather based on a lifetime of recorded logic, inspection and assumption of what it thinks it should see. The mind may trick itself into seeing opposite reaction, because it expects it.
I am saying of course. That the pivot and string do not curve in opposite direction the flywheel curves, but in the same direction. There is no opposite reaction at the pivot.
Another contention is whether a precessing gyro system, including all it's connected parts, attempts to revolve around its center of mass. It does not. The argument for, involves an air table on which to set the pedestal for testing, but there are problems with such a test. These problems for instance would not allow for a proof and a conclusion. Perhaps we can see the problems with that test, by looking at a different test:
Use two pedestals.
Put crushed ice in the cavities of each, weighing and adjusting each until they are the same.
Tie a short string from one pedestal, to the outside cage of the gyroscope so that it will be dragged by the flywheel.
Add weight on top of this dragged pedestal to equal the total weight of the gyroscope with axle.
(Thanks Luis & Blaze for the work on weight verses friction)
Start the precession. Both mass and the friction coefficient for each pedestal would be the same. Would the system then revolve around it's center of mass? Perfect test? No and no. Whenever the progress of a precessing gyro is stopped, it falls spiraling in chaos to its end. When it is impeded, but without enough resistance to stop it, it dose not fall and will torque that amount of resistance equally and oppositely against the pedestal. You have created a condition that did not exist before. So you get no peanut. A normal gyroscope precessing freely and unimpeded does not put equal and opposite directional force against the pivot. This condition we have called forced-coasting, which is an ignominious creation against good sense and meaning, double negative term and idea. (It was supposed to mean 'that precise amount' of action that is unimpeded) Forced coasting? We use it well and will keep it, but I wonder what dinwitt ever coined such a word.
Ah. . . ah. . . it was I. Don't shoot!
These conditions would exist using a platform on an air table, plus other problems from adding more mass at the wrong place. (in the platform to support the pedestal)
The reason precession does not revolve around its center of mass is because of another condition, also poorly named and called 'deflections'. How these deflections work and cause all the seemingly unnatural mayhem, which is precession, involves a lengthy explanation. Such a thing as deflections and how they work can only be seen in the mind by by way of logic and reason.
It is easy to argue what you cannot see, but already community agreement here, is impossible even for things we can see. So. . . Thank your for allow me to belabor an argument that will not go away. Bless all our little pointed heads.
Happy trail from Roy, Dale, Trigger and Buttermilk.
Regards, Glenn
|
| Date: |
4 February 2013
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| |
No answers yet |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
