|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
25 April 2024 14:26
|
|
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: |
Inertial propulsion is not possable |
| Question: |
Good Evening All,
I have recently finished a search for inertial propulsion that lasted about nine months. I regret telling you the conclusion of tests and theory prove it is not possible.
Before this search began, I had already concluded propulsion was not possible. This conclusion followed dozens of years of off and on reasoning from time to time and a lot of ineffective testing. All results proved negative.
Then last year I saw a youtube video of the Supper Precision gyroscope. The flywheel mounted to about a 150 mm shaft and processed around a stationary pivot. From this action, supposing it was true, I knew that propulsion was achievable and so I began this nine-month search. I develop the first ever complete theory and applied it to everything shown on the internet, also much of the patents and everything this community has written about. Then I developed two designs for applying this assumed trust.
The first design was based on these ideas. If one-half of a plate was precession and the other half was rotation, then centrifuge in rotation would only occur in one-half rotation sphere. Centrifuge/angler momentum would pull the plate. Remember that we believed centrifuge and angler momentum did not occur during precession at the other half of the plate. Further that if three plates were stacked on top of one another and the outer two rotated the same direction and speed, while the center rotated in an opposite direction at twice the speed, or with twice the mass, all things are balanced. You would have study acceleration.
The function of this design although possible provided the pivot did in fact remain in place, proved too compounded because of many mechanical difficulties. A latter design, again using centrifuge/angler momentum as a force was far more successful in the ease of building and in the mechanical working sense. I have large models made up of each design with the second and better one being complete and setting in my bedroom. You see I lived and dreamed through all this morning until night.
The theory and solutions to explain all that we have written about and have viewed is a fascinating theory never before known, but it is lengthy and difficult to present. I hope to publish all for you some day.
Now, to the bitter part that set me off on this latest research. On youtube I saw the Supper Precision gyroscope flywheel mounted to a 150 mm extended shaft processed around a stationary pivot. The surface on which it pivoted looked for all the world like a perfectly smooth surface, but I now know it could not have been. The surface could not have been glass like smooth. It was ruff and most likely, velvet felt with the pile height holding the pivot in place. All the torqued force from gravity upon the gyro mass forces down on the pivot and it then crushed the felt to create concaved indentation the pivot rides in. The pivot cannot move as it otherwise would. It would otherwise always move.
It was such a surprise in learning that all pivots react equally and oppositely to precession though they do not appear to. Slow precession and a shorter shaft produce such a small amount of inertia that even the slightest amount of friction at the pivot over glass can hold it in place. (what a neat way I have proved this beyond the visuals.) We have been wrong about the pivot. Knowing that the pivot precess equally and oppositely as I do now, is also knowing that inertial propulsion is impossible.
What a jip to me, and an intense waste of one year of failure in life. I failed to remember this maxim: “Don’t believe all you hear and only half of what you see.”
Everything a gyroscope does or tries to do, is an endless series of reactions all of which obey the laws of motion exactly without exception. If you believe me now, or will one day believe me after I have provided proof, then I know you are hurt or will be hurt as I was. I am sorry.
For you who will not accept the impossibly of inertial propulsion; and will remain misled with our confusing and ineffective tests. . . . I wish you happiness, enjoyment, wellness and in all other things success.
Glenn,
|
| Date: |
15 March 2016
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Fermer05 - 20/01/2017 10:39:54
| | | lnertial propuision https://youtu.be/GnG7G56f4dg
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
kristijan - 15/11/2017 13:22:48
| | | That topic is not dead. Here is my effort on that topic. Gyroscopic precession has no moment of inertia and this cna be used for more thing than talking. Here is a device that was made by me that uses gyroscopic precession for propulsion. This propulsion theoretically can be used in space...What do you think about it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZP_ZbnGA9I&t=443s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo-qR0lx_io
Please comment.
thnank you
dr. kristijan
dr.todoroski@gmail.com
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
