it's amazing how many of these technologies we carry in our pockets daily. It'd be cool for you to make a video specifically about the evolution and utilization of engineering and sensor on mobile devices. It'd be really interesting to see how it all works from this point of view
Very good summary of a very complicated and COUNTERINTUITIVE subject. I first studied gyroscopic precession as a crew chief on helicopters in the U.S. Army. The physical design of the helicopter's control system is built with this physics property in mind. Since the rotor system of a helicopter is constantly spinning, when you input a force into that system it effectively appears at a different point in the spinning plane of the rotor from where it is input. It's hard to describe but basically the lift created by adjusting the pitch of each rotor blade actually APPEARS 90 degrees BEFORE Where you think it would! You would think that to tilt the rotor disc forward to go forward right? Nope! Because the force appears in the system 90 degrees BEFORE Where the force is applied, the position of the blades when the disc is tilting forward is as follows: the blade with MAXIMUM pitch in it is pointing straight to the left and the one with the least pitch in in is pointing straight to the right. You would think this would make the rotor disc tilt to the right... But thanks to gyroscopic precession, it makes the rotor disc tilt forward. Crazy, but true. Great video.
Helicopters' rotors are in fact so complex that only few people to this day know what technological marvels must have been applied to finally make it work after so many failures. And the gyroscopic action you describe is even more crazy.
I have to say that I began to research the subject of inertial navigation in a little project of parachute piloting three years ago, and I continued research. I have never seen such a good, concise, well explained and well illustrated video. Thanks a lot. Also, the coriolis effect based gyroscopes often works by vibrating a mass in an axis, and measuring tge vibration in the perpendicular axis (caused, from an external pov, by the rotation of the device, that ruins the alignment). It's become open knowledge that tge new breakthrough might be hemispheric resonator gyroscopes (currently in development by SAFRAN) : as in Foucault's experiment, a pendulum keeps it's oscillation plane, thus giving the impression to turn as the earth rotates. The idea is to deform a piezzoelectric dome in a direction, it will keep this direction of oscillations, given that you excite it in the correct way to compensate energy losses. It's the same physical principle behind as coriolis gyroscopes, but the coriolis ones needs a level of integration which leads to quick drift
Oneof my interests is the military use of guided parachutes. Helicopters are costly and dangerous to operate. There are many situations where guided cargo parachutes could be used instead of helicopters in dangerous combat zones. Regular transport aircraft like a C-130J could accurately drop cargo from much safer altitudes and lower costs. This would require an inertial gyroscopic navigationa system as well as GPS. This could allow helicopters to do other important tasks. Accurate delivery would make recovery of the navigational system for reuse. Large guided chutes would also allow them to be dropped far from the landing zone.
Excellent video! As a now-retired surveyor, I find the use of gyroscopes fascinating. I've never used a gyrotheodolite but sure wish that I had one (they are QUITE expensive).
Gold medal production, visual quality, timing, and narration and data content are all excellent. Would you please cover all subjects so I don't get stuck watching sub-standard productions? Thank you!
Great video as always. However, slight correction at 11:55. You mentioned that the gyroscopes can drift because they are closed loop, meaning there is no external reference/correction. This actually describes an open-loop configuration. Keep up the good work.
I agree. In this context its enticing to think of closed meaning closed off from external sources but like you pointed out thats not correct from a controls nomenclature.
👍 agree, loop refers to the control diagram having a way to measure output error after the control algorithm and feedback/loop that error back into the control algorithn so it can make use of it
For years I've pondered with respect to what does a gyroscope maintains its orientation? Can someone help me? How can something's orientation be considered stationary without respect to something else external to it?
@@tmst2199 it's stationary to the universe. If you have a gyroscope spinning (the higher the speed the better, and let's assume it's in a perfect vacuum with frictionless bearings so it will run forever without power) the gyroscope will actually be moving at 10deg/hr. This is the earth rotating (360deg/24hrs). You can put the same gyroscope in a plane and use it for the artificial horizon. However, in the real world you won't have perfect mechanics, so planes have to compensate for drift (as well as that 15deg/hr drift because that would fairly quickly become a problem for the artificial horizon).
@@seeigecannon This is my thinking as well. But it leads to the conclusion that "the universe" is an absolute frame of reference. I believe this is not supposed to exist, according to relativity. I find the concept of a universal frame of reference oddly comforting so would like to believe in it. It's almost like God Himself. The gyroscope believes in God!🔥
Flying torpedoes.....yes. I got to disassemble a gyroscopic gun sight that my dad got from a WW II destroyer that was being scrapped - it was an amazing optoelectronic device that used mirrors, lights and an air driven brass gyro that corrected for the rolling of the ship and gave anti-aircraft guns a chance to hit what they were aiming at....the gyro was about five inches in diameter and had indentations around the circumference that would catch the compressed air applied from the nozzle... pretty neat!
the quality of these videos and visualizations is really great. Hope you get more views. Btw for integrated error the best visual representation imo is an expanding probability cone based on error. Generated by moving along each point from the initial and at each next point plot the ± error points, which creates a triangle from the last point. To get the next point you apply this error to the two previous errors. If you have probability and/or magnitude based error data that can be shown through shading. Might make a good short to show integrated navigation error this way instead of the "stepping arrows". Also, a navigation system that can achieve small integrated error, called dead reckoning, is worth a lot of money!
Yes! He glossed over that. Later, talking about electric motors and friction. I think it was like most things in the 19th C. Somebody had to keep cranking it? A mule??
@@Redmenace96 I ask because the act of "cranking" can disturb the gyroscope enough to shift its direction.... so there's gotta be a way to make it stable
@GeoffryGifari think of turning a gear on a watch like 1 "crank" a day and it will suddenly make sense im sure it was really percise and prone to breaking at first
I really appreciate educational/informative content like this, where an individual is able to give insights into topics in a casual way. However, and I don't say this to discourage you in any way, I didn't think this video was very good. Much of the voiceover felt like a first reading and a lot of the script was written in a way that sounded like you just rephrased some information you found online, without actually understanding it for yourself and then putting it in your own words. Many concepts were just briefly touched upon for the sake of having mentioned them, but there's no point to mentioning something just for the sake of mentioning it. There were also some technical words that were simply name dropped without giving a further elaboration or good visualization. This is pointless in my opinion, one should either explain the concept in detail or leave it out, instead of just skimming over lots of details in a short time. This way, after having watched the video, you've heard a lot of information, but nothing actually sticks. Let me be clear, I have no idea about gyroscopes or the history of gyroscopes. I am simply giving my opinion on the stylistic/script writing choices of this video. I still really appreciate the effort that went into this, but it feels more like a condensed/abbreviated series of Wikipedia entries than an educational narrative which stands on its own. Again, I really don't want to sound too negative, I intend this constructive criticism in the best way possible.
hmm, I don't agree, I wonder if it's dependent on your level of engineering education? I see the video as like a picture of the 'forest' of gyroscope technology, and your complaint amounts to "why don't you spend more time on every individual tree". The obvious answer being you will quickly lose the forest through the trees. And based on the piece of the forest I am familiar with, I think the picture he paints is actually very well researched, accurate, and well organized as an overview. I can always go on my own deep dive into any of the 'trees' that peak my interest.
I think this is way to harsh a criticism I understand much more than I did previously and your wrong this was so much more than ‘abbreviated Wikipedia entries’ … the way you phrased your harshness with a veneer of politeness… just says the issue is not the video maker.
Although I appreciate New Mind's effort, the fact that even people with 'a pretty good STEM education' struggle speaks for itself. Ask yourself: Is it really 'Really good work'?
This is a great detailed and historical explanation of the inertial system development. This has always fascinated me since I was a young boy, when I got a gyroscope for Xmas :-)
Have you noticed that the number of comments on a video will be slightly less than one thousandth of the number of views? Some examples I've seen: 9k views > 9 comments, 58k views > 54 comments, 218k views > 216 comments, 5.4M vievs > 5.4k comments. It's so interesting. At the time of this comment this video had 16K views and 60 comments but im sure it will settle out over time. It's really cool and I emplore you to look out for this on other videos you watch.
It's probably called the "ideal distraction ratio" at Google. Or it could mean that about 1 in a thousand pay attention to what others have to say after watching the video.
A fairly popular simple gyroscope with a string pull as an 'engine', was a cool toy back in day - a step above a top - actually inspired curiosity, no batteries either, haha.
Imagine it, and it becomes. It's fascinating to me that some minds create like this. I got tripped on my face in the brainiac line. 😅 I've wondered. How many more geniuses are there that never find themselves under circumstances to foster their gift. Yeah, from a spinning object to the stars. Is there nothing we can't do? Great channel. It inspires me to be optimistic about the future.
That was a gmmary. Question: Which parts did yout use ChatGPT AI to compose certain scenes? My guess is that you did not actually recover all the original clips ? This is a very cool thing you did.
Wait... so Sagnac used his effect to detect the aether? but since the aether (as an absolute frame of motion) is not a thing according to special relativity, Sagnac effect still works to detect rotation even without the aether?
My understanding is that Sagnac wanted to prove the existence in the aether, but his own experiment proved him wrong. Not only did his experiment prove that the speed of light does not depend on the speed of it's source, but when he tried to orient it in different directions to detect the speed of the earth he did not see any difference in the phase shift between the two light beams, meaning that the speed of the reference frame also played no role.
Don't mix Sagnac with Michelson - Morley. Michelson did find an ether drift, only not big enough to prove the Earth's revolution around the Sun, but in 1925 Michelson-Gale-Pearson experiment based on the same iterferometric basis actually proved the Earth rotation once a day around its axis. If Einsein was right, it would be equally impossible to detect both Michelson - Morley AND Michelson - Gale, yet the Michelson-Pearson experiment with the Sagnac one is as unknown as it can be, because they simply disprove Relativity. You should know that in the first half of the XX century there was an opposition movement among sciencists to Relativity. They were not stupid, they were conscious what Einstein did to the scence and tried to stop this derailment. Read Robert Sunegnis book "Galileo Was Rong, The Church Was Right" to get the details about where did the ether go and what has happened to the science. @@tommasomorandini1982
Our FIST-V (Fire Support vehicle) used Inertial navigation paired with GPS. we could enter our grid coordinates before leaving the COP and have accurate targeting data from our Laser Rangefinder and Designator at any time. IDK, being a FISTer was so fun.
Someone with the expertise in phone mems/accelerometers in modern phones, if you used a modem phone in a military ballistic missile or rocket application would it be spot on? If the only info the rocket was getting was from the internal accelerometers? How good or bad would it be?
kinda creepy question to ask lol, but the answer is it is not accurate because US regulates these technologies and you are required to add certain types of noise to commercial devices. And civilian GPS signals are purposefully 'poisoned' to decrease accuracy from cm to meters. All for exactly the reason you asked 😅
@craigslist6988 Wanting to know if modern phone accelerometers are as sophisticated and accurate as military gyros and accelerometers is creepy? Super weird you would say that. It's like you didn't read my comment as well because I Said nothing about gps or the phone having any cell service or gps at all. I'm specifically asking if the mems accelerometers in modern phones are as accurate as the military ones. Has nothing to do with gps. Just the movement of the phone in space. I even literally Said "the only info the rocket was getting was from the internal accelerometers? How good or bad would it be?" I can't get more specific than that!
@@jamesrob8552 you specifically asked if a cell phone could be used for a "military ballistic missile". Try working that one out for yourself why that is a creepy way of asking how accurate they are. And to answer your question better, no. A cell phone MEMS accelerometer is no where close to accurate enough to even keep track of the orientation of your phone in real time, the error is enormous. Also as he explained like.. a hundred times in the video... they use gyroscopes in INS, accelerometers are an addon to improve the accuracy of those. Even the world's best accelerometers have too much error to do any useful position tracking. Also I don't remember if he covered this but your phone MEMS accelerometer is not those fancy vibratory interia types he talked about, they're just capacitive measurement of cantilevered beams that bend under acceleration. One for each axis.
There will be a massive leap in technology in the next couple of centuries, unfortunately I won't see it, but I'm sure it will be like magic compared to today's technology.
This is awesome but this video spent too much detail on the original gyroscope and too little on the other ones. I wanted to find out more about the other ones. I loved the ring-laser gyroscope, it looks like Iron-Man's energy source, but I saw so little of that, I'm not even sure what was shown was the entire working device.
Twin Mirrored Engine Pair[s] - Eliminate Cause Drift - Concept. I was reading about early gyroscopes, and how they are supposed to detect and eliminate drift for planes, then i immediately was like, oh no, they didn't mirror the engine designs, to eliminate the CAUSE of drift to begin with??? what our luminary aero plane engineers did, was copy over the same exact engine, from the left wing to the right wing. if they had literally mirrored the planes complete engine designs, there would actually be zero drift..... we would have two centripetal forces, working inwards. when both engines turn the exact same way, of course you get drift, a movement away from the intended center line. if both engines turned the other opposite way, no matter both inward, or outward, performing the same future, namely thrust, there would be no actual drift, at all. no simpleton aerospace engineer ever thought of mirroring the complete engine design for planes to eliminate the cause of this drift??? they then went on and invented a ring laser gyro, and auto pilot drift correcting systems, and sold the correctional method for billions. counter rotating engines, eliminate any and all drift completely, eliminating the actual need for any such auto pilot correctional systems, enabling us to fly straighter for much longer, sans corrections, saving much on fuel economy as well as enabling us with straighter landings and take offs, increasing the safety overall during take off and landings of aero planes. balance is key... 2 engines need two actually physically different yet similar [mirrored design] motors on each wing. instead of moving over the same engine, we need to mirror the entire DNA of the engine, to counter any precession to a side, creating a difference in total overall angular momentum, influencing our flight path negatively, continuously during flight. i cant believe this only took man like a 150 years to come up with? seriously? cgtrader.com/3d-models/aircraft/historic-aircraft/twin-mirrored-engine-pairs-eliminate-cause-drift-concept
@@diontranekr6567 there is none, that’s why they use this old system to hide that fact. Use these twin mirrored motors eliminating drift and you’ll find out soon enough. No need for auto pilot, no need for ring laser gyros, straight lift off and landing much safer. Flying straight is also way more fuel efficient, as you can imagine.
"I can't personally think of a good reason not to do this thing, therefore 150 years of aerospace engineers were stupid". Often in life it is the case that you have an option: Ask a good question, or call other people stupid. Choose more wisely, next time.
so, you like being financially raped, by companies that can do better, but wont, because money? or that they can land and take off much safer, fly more fuel efficient? they're selling us all this nonsense, playing with our lives. but i also see your point, somewhat.
Directional gyro and gyrocompass are fundamentally different. The first is a free gyro, the second has a gravity sensor. And you should have mentioned that the first Sperry gyro stabilized flight was 1909, or so.
A gyroscope does not depend on gravity to function so they operate just fine in deep space. The root cause of a gyroscope's stability stems from Newton's first law, namely that a particle moving in a straight line continues to do so unless acted on by an external force. However, practically nobody explains it in these basic terms but resorts to the conservation of angular momentum instead. The result is that you learn some new words to describe it but have no better understanding of it than you did before. -old physicist
@@clarencegreen3071 @clarencegreen3071 my apologies. With gyroscope action, what i meant was- Whirling Horizontal Speculum, & its successor Machine Of Bohnenberger act in deep space?
You're right sir, and that's because science has got derailed since Einstein's theories that got rid of ther ether. Gyroscopes can only be explained on the basis of the universal reference frame, which is impossible without the mechanical ether that constitutes it. You definitely should read Robert Sunegnis book "Galileo Was Wrong, the Church Was Right". Don't be discouraged by the title if you are a non-believer, it's not about theology, it uses modern discoveries to confirm old ideas that are thought to be discredited, but in reality nobody has solidly disproved them to this day. In short, Michelson Morley + Sagnac + Michelson Gale Pearson discredit relativity theories and open the way for an alternative explanation. @@clarencegreen3071
The gyroscope maintains its orientation. But with respect to *what*, exactly? Itself? How can an orientation be considered stationary without reference to another orientation?
@@MC-bg7ro This still seems to neglect that "its initial setup" has meaning only in relation to another frame of reference. Or maybe not. I'm probably just looking at it incorrectly.
It would have been cool to have mentioned the fact that IMUs cannot detect gravity. Gravity must be subtracted from the accelerometer data and if not done precisely the drift problem becomes worse. Imagine the IMU sitting on a table. The accelerometers detect 9.8 m/s/s of acceleration and yet the IMU is not accelerating. It detects the table pushing up but it doesn't detect the gravity pushing down.
Couple thoughts on autonomous vehicles. As the technology gets better over time vehicles, cars, trucks, even ships and large planes, will be better at navigating busy streets, etc. than people. The computers on the vehicles will be dedicated to doing one job, driving the vehicles, where humans are continually distracted by their thoughts. Could be anything from a quarrel with someone to your kids birthday party and a host of other thoughts. Of course there's another task the vehicle's computers will do. Send information to some cloud or government agency about where you go, when you go, how long you stayed, etc. A lot of vehicles already do that with GPS systems. You can get a discount on insurance if you connect you vehicle to monitor your driving habits. Your cell phone and computers do the same thing. You can turn the tracking system off...but how do you know for sure it's off? Those things a lot of people have in their homes like Alexa? Same thing. This new high tech world we live in seems convenient and cool. Is it really a good thing? Good or bad, it's here to stay. There will be those who don't wish to be tracked and monitored will finds ways around the system.
▶ Visit brilliant.org/NewMind to get a 30-day free trial + the first 200 people will get 20% off their annual subscription
Why are you using AI images?
I am curious how the gyroscope kept rotating in the navigational gyro-compass.
@@user-221iI can hear the computer generated voices. However, how can you tell that a photo is computer generated?
This thumbs down sponsored by brilliant.
@@user-221i why not?
it's amazing how many of these technologies we carry in our pockets daily. It'd be cool for you to make a video specifically about the evolution and utilization of engineering and sensor on mobile devices. It'd be really interesting to see how it all works from this point of view
Very good summary of a very complicated and COUNTERINTUITIVE subject.
I first studied gyroscopic precession as a crew chief on helicopters in the U.S. Army. The physical design of the helicopter's control system is built with this physics property in mind. Since the rotor system of a helicopter is constantly spinning, when you input a force into that system it effectively appears at a different point in the spinning plane of the rotor from where it is input. It's hard to describe but basically the lift created by adjusting the pitch of each rotor blade actually APPEARS 90 degrees BEFORE Where you think it would!
You would think that to tilt the rotor disc forward to go forward right? Nope! Because the force appears in the system 90 degrees BEFORE Where the force is applied, the position of the blades when the disc is tilting forward is as follows: the blade with MAXIMUM pitch in it is pointing straight to the left and the one with the least pitch in in is pointing straight to the right.
You would think this would make the rotor disc tilt to the right... But thanks to gyroscopic precession, it makes the rotor disc tilt forward. Crazy, but true.
Great video.
Helicopters' rotors are in fact so complex that only few people to this day know what technological marvels must have been applied to finally make it work after so many failures. And the gyroscopic action you describe is even more crazy.
It's 90° after the point force is applied or 90° in the direction of rotation.
I have to say that I began to research the subject of inertial navigation in a little project of parachute piloting three years ago, and I continued research. I have never seen such a good, concise, well explained and well illustrated video. Thanks a lot.
Also, the coriolis effect based gyroscopes often works by vibrating a mass in an axis, and measuring tge vibration in the perpendicular axis (caused, from an external pov, by the rotation of the device, that ruins the alignment).
It's become open knowledge that tge new breakthrough might be hemispheric resonator gyroscopes (currently in development by SAFRAN) : as in Foucault's experiment, a pendulum keeps it's oscillation plane, thus giving the impression to turn as the earth rotates. The idea is to deform a piezzoelectric dome in a direction, it will keep this direction of oscillations, given that you excite it in the correct way to compensate energy losses. It's the same physical principle behind as coriolis gyroscopes, but the coriolis ones needs a level of integration which leads to quick drift
Oneof my interests is the military use of guided parachutes. Helicopters are costly and dangerous to operate. There are many situations where guided cargo parachutes could be used instead of helicopters in dangerous combat zones. Regular transport aircraft like a C-130J could accurately drop cargo from much safer altitudes and lower costs. This would require an inertial gyroscopic navigationa system as well as GPS. This could allow helicopters to do other important tasks. Accurate delivery would make recovery of the navigational system for reuse. Large guided chutes would also allow them to be dropped far from the landing zone.
Excellent video! As a now-retired surveyor, I find the use of gyroscopes fascinating. I've never used a gyrotheodolite but sure wish that I had one (they are QUITE expensive).
So this is how the missle knows where it is from where it was, or where it should be from where it wasn't..
Gold medal production, visual quality, timing, and narration and data content are all excellent. Would you please cover all subjects so I don't get stuck watching sub-standard productions? Thank you!
That Inertial Measurement Unit spinning around is so satisfying
Spinning tops are basically gyros..
Great video as always. However, slight correction at 11:55. You mentioned that the gyroscopes can drift because they are closed loop, meaning there is no external reference/correction. This actually describes an open-loop configuration.
Keep up the good work.
I agree. In this context its enticing to think of closed meaning closed off from external sources but like you pointed out thats not correct from a controls nomenclature.
👍 agree, loop refers to the control diagram having a way to measure output error after the control algorithm and feedback/loop that error back into the control algorithn so it can make use of it
For years I've pondered with respect to what does a gyroscope maintains its orientation? Can someone help me? How can something's orientation be considered stationary without respect to something else external to it?
@@tmst2199 it's stationary to the universe. If you have a gyroscope spinning (the higher the speed the better, and let's assume it's in a perfect vacuum with frictionless bearings so it will run forever without power) the gyroscope will actually be moving at 10deg/hr. This is the earth rotating (360deg/24hrs). You can put the same gyroscope in a plane and use it for the artificial horizon. However, in the real world you won't have perfect mechanics, so planes have to compensate for drift (as well as that 15deg/hr drift because that would fairly quickly become a problem for the artificial horizon).
@@seeigecannon This is my thinking as well. But it leads to the conclusion that "the universe" is an absolute frame of reference. I believe this is not supposed to exist, according to relativity.
I find the concept of a universal frame of reference oddly comforting so would like to believe in it. It's almost like God Himself. The gyroscope believes in God!🔥
Thank you, I was wanting to learn about this history,. Well done. I will promote your video.
Great video! Very informative, educational and entertaining, keep up the good work ❤
I regulary service the STD-22 Anschutz gyros on ships. Really reliable.
I hear those STDs spread through naval fleets pretty quickly.
I learn so much in your videos ty ty ty! I like how our interests in ee and defense industry overlap more and more on this channel
The Obry torpedo used gyroscopic guidance from 1895 on. The V1 rockets were basically guided torpedos that flew.
Flying torpedoes.....yes.
I got to disassemble a gyroscopic gun sight that my dad got from a WW II destroyer that was being scrapped - it was an amazing optoelectronic device that used mirrors, lights and an air driven brass gyro that corrected for the rolling of the ship and gave anti-aircraft guns a chance to hit what they were aiming at....the gyro was about five inches in diameter and had indentations around the circumference that would catch the compressed air applied from the nozzle... pretty neat!
This video had my head in a spin
You need a gyroscope
@@gamechip06gyroscopy
@@gamechip06 comedy king
The little air driven flywheels on the fins of the missile really blew my mind. What eloquent design that is!!
I didn't know laser gyroscopes existed, really cool almost completely solid state solution.
same
Even more mind blowing that Sagnac experimented with the thing in 1913. How cool is that.
And still ever more mind blowing is that Sagnac without the ether is unimaginable. Read Robert Sungenis to get details.@@remek_ember
the quality of these videos and visualizations is really great. Hope you get more views.
Btw for integrated error the best visual representation imo is an expanding probability cone based on error. Generated by moving along each point from the initial and at each next point plot the ± error points, which creates a triangle from the last point. To get the next point you apply this error to the two previous errors. If you have probability and/or magnitude based error data that can be shown through shading.
Might make a good short to show integrated navigation error this way instead of the "stepping arrows".
Also, a navigation system that can achieve small integrated error, called dead reckoning, is worth a lot of money!
Great Video! Keep up the good work! More Tech deep dives please!
In its early uses as a navigation tool, how can the gyroscope be kept spinning?
Yeah that’s what I was to know
Yes! He glossed over that. Later, talking about electric motors and friction. I think it was like most things in the 19th C. Somebody had to keep cranking it? A mule??
@@Redmenace96 I ask because the act of "cranking" can disturb the gyroscope enough to shift its direction.... so there's gotta be a way to make it stable
@GeoffryGifari think of turning a gear on a watch like 1 "crank" a day and it will suddenly make sense im sure it was really percise and prone to breaking at first
Incredibly well researched and informative video!
I really appreciate educational/informative content like this, where an individual is able to give insights into topics in a casual way. However, and I don't say this to discourage you in any way, I didn't think this video was very good.
Much of the voiceover felt like a first reading and a lot of the script was written in a way that sounded like you just rephrased some information you found online, without actually understanding it for yourself and then putting it in your own words. Many concepts were just briefly touched upon for the sake of having mentioned them, but there's no point to mentioning something just for the sake of mentioning it. There were also some technical words that were simply name dropped without giving a further elaboration or good visualization. This is pointless in my opinion, one should either explain the concept in detail or leave it out, instead of just skimming over lots of details in a short time.
This way, after having watched the video, you've heard a lot of information, but nothing actually sticks.
Let me be clear, I have no idea about gyroscopes or the history of gyroscopes. I am simply giving my opinion on the stylistic/script writing choices of this video. I still really appreciate the effort that went into this, but it feels more like a condensed/abbreviated series of Wikipedia entries than an educational narrative which stands on its own. Again, I really don't want to sound too negative, I intend this constructive criticism in the best way possible.
Yes. The mentioning things without explaining anything bothers me.
hmm, I don't agree, I wonder if it's dependent on your level of engineering education?
I see the video as like a picture of the 'forest' of gyroscope technology, and your complaint amounts to "why don't you spend more time on every individual tree". The obvious answer being you will quickly lose the forest through the trees.
And based on the piece of the forest I am familiar with, I think the picture he paints is actually very well researched, accurate, and well organized as an overview. I can always go on my own deep dive into any of the 'trees' that peak my interest.
I think this is way to harsh a criticism I understand much more than I did previously and your wrong this was so much more than ‘abbreviated Wikipedia entries’ … the way you phrased your harshness with a veneer of politeness… just says the issue is not the video maker.
Your deep dive videos are always fascinating
Really good work. I can't quite follow all of it, even though I have a pretty good STEM education
Although I appreciate New Mind's effort, the fact that even people with 'a pretty good STEM education' struggle speaks for itself. Ask yourself: Is it really 'Really good work'?
This is a great detailed and historical explanation of the inertial system development. This has always fascinated me since I was a young boy, when I got a gyroscope for Xmas :-)
Have you noticed that the number of comments on a video will be slightly less than one thousandth of the number of views? Some examples I've seen:
9k views > 9 comments,
58k views > 54 comments,
218k views > 216 comments,
5.4M vievs > 5.4k comments.
It's so interesting.
At the time of this comment this video had 16K views and 60 comments but im sure it will settle out over time.
It's really cool and I emplore you to look out for this on other videos you watch.
It's probably called the "ideal distraction ratio" at Google. Or it could mean that about 1 in a thousand pay attention to what others have to say after watching the video.
The B52 once had unique an method to sync the INS platform through star sightings. Wonder if some form of that is still in use.
Iirc that was used in the SR71 as well
I am overwhelmed with amazedness, thank you.
Thank you for posting and sharing!
At 5:20 there is a turbulent flow off the ships rear stack that resembles a spinning gyroscope.
😀 That's because New Mind himself made it to look that way - probably with something like Adobe After Effects...
Wow. Very educational!
Really REALLY GOOD Stuff🤙
When you are content to be simply yourself and don't compare or compete, everybody will respect you.
As an avionics tech, I am very familiar with gyroscopes. There are two types: Earth based and space based..
If ever is going to be a part 2, the focus must be on bipedalism in humanoid robots.
They were a popular toy in the early 1960s. You pulled a string to get it spinning. They were fascinating.
I think it would be good, to add information if what is show is true, or CGI/AI generated.
A fairly popular simple gyroscope with a string pull as an 'engine', was a cool toy back in day - a step above a top - actually inspired curiosity, no batteries either, haha.
Right on. Thanks for sharing.
Imagine it, and it becomes.
It's fascinating to me that some minds create like this.
I got tripped on my face in the brainiac line. 😅
I've wondered. How many more geniuses are there that never find themselves under circumstances to foster their gift.
Yeah, from a spinning object to the stars. Is there nothing we can't do?
Great channel. It inspires me to be optimistic about the future.
Outstanding video
Great video, thank you.
Great video!
This just made my day!
How does the position part of an ins cope with wind?
That was a gmmary. Question: Which parts did yout use ChatGPT AI to compose certain scenes? My guess is that you did not actually recover all the original clips ? This is a very cool thing you did.
Wait... so Sagnac used his effect to detect the aether? but since the aether (as an absolute frame of motion) is not a thing according to special relativity, Sagnac effect still works to detect rotation even without the aether?
My understanding is that Sagnac wanted to prove the existence in the aether, but his own experiment proved him wrong. Not only did his experiment prove that the speed of light does not depend on the speed of it's source, but when he tried to orient it in different directions to detect the speed of the earth he did not see any difference in the phase shift between the two light beams, meaning that the speed of the reference frame also played no role.
Don't mix Sagnac with Michelson - Morley. Michelson did find an ether drift, only not big enough to prove the Earth's revolution around the Sun, but in 1925 Michelson-Gale-Pearson experiment based on the same iterferometric basis actually proved the Earth rotation once a day around its axis. If Einsein was right, it would be equally impossible to detect both Michelson - Morley AND Michelson - Gale, yet the Michelson-Pearson experiment with the Sagnac one is as unknown as it can be, because they simply disprove Relativity. You should know that in the first half of the XX century there was an opposition movement among sciencists to Relativity. They were not stupid, they were conscious what Einstein did to the scence and tried to stop this derailment. Read Robert Sunegnis book "Galileo Was Rong, The Church Was Right" to get the details about where did the ether go and what has happened to the science. @@tommasomorandini1982
When are you releasing quantum programming part 2? Thanks!
missed a golden opportunity to explain how they got the earliest gyros spinning, without electricity.
That’s what I want to know
I suspect a string like on a top,but that’s a guess
that would make sense, but I dont imagine that iit would run for the days or months required for long term navigation with one pull of a string?
You spin me right round baby right round like a record baby!😂
AahHahHhAAA😅
Was there really a strip of birch as a seal for the protective hood of that V2 rocket's inertial system?
Awesome quality stuff
Electronic celestial navigation systems and techniques suggestion for video.
Why no views of this outstanding video?
viewing now!
Was not public before
Only showing as uploaded 8 minutes ago for me, so I'm assuming most people are still watching.
Because they use AI images.
@TheUSAxeManwhat in Gods name are you banging on about?
Our FIST-V (Fire Support vehicle) used Inertial navigation paired with GPS. we could enter our grid coordinates before leaving the COP and have accurate targeting data from our Laser Rangefinder and Designator at any time. IDK, being a FISTer was so fun.
Malysia memang mantap cara pembuatan nya
12:16 Actually 1 nm/hr drift is pretty good performance.
Love it.... The most part... The rest... Learning. Thanks for the video. Nice. Great narration
Something something An INS knows where it is by knowing where it isn’t
Amazing video btw
Someone with the expertise in phone mems/accelerometers in modern phones, if you used a modem phone in a military ballistic missile or rocket application would it be spot on? If the only info the rocket was getting was from the internal accelerometers? How good or bad would it be?
kinda creepy question to ask lol, but the answer is it is not accurate because US regulates these technologies and you are required to add certain types of noise to commercial devices. And civilian GPS signals are purposefully 'poisoned' to decrease accuracy from cm to meters. All for exactly the reason you asked 😅
@craigslist6988
Wanting to know if modern phone accelerometers are as sophisticated and accurate as military gyros and accelerometers is creepy? Super weird you would say that. It's like you didn't read my comment as well because I Said nothing about gps or the phone having any cell service or gps at all. I'm specifically asking if the mems accelerometers in modern phones are as accurate as the military ones. Has nothing to do with gps. Just the movement of the phone in space. I even literally Said "the only info the rocket was getting was from the internal accelerometers? How good or bad would it be?"
I can't get more specific than that!
@@jamesrob8552 you specifically asked if a cell phone could be used for a "military ballistic missile". Try working that one out for yourself why that is a creepy way of asking how accurate they are.
And to answer your question better, no. A cell phone MEMS accelerometer is no where close to accurate enough to even keep track of the orientation of your phone in real time, the error is enormous.
Also as he explained like.. a hundred times in the video... they use gyroscopes in INS, accelerometers are an addon to improve the accuracy of those. Even the world's best accelerometers have too much error to do any useful position tracking. Also I don't remember if he covered this but your phone MEMS accelerometer is not those fancy vibratory interia types he talked about, they're just capacitive measurement of cantilevered beams that bend under acceleration. One for each axis.
great video
There will be a massive leap in technology in the next couple of centuries, unfortunately I won't see it, but I'm sure it will be like magic compared to today's technology.
Sensacional!
Little did I know, gyros were everywhere!
Why angular momentum everywhere. Will superposition can be more superposition at center or edge.
This is awesome but this video spent too much detail on the original gyroscope and too little on the other ones. I wanted to find out more about the other ones.
I loved the ring-laser gyroscope, it looks like Iron-Man's energy source, but I saw so little of that, I'm not even sure what was shown was the entire working device.
Twin Mirrored Engine Pair[s] - Eliminate Cause Drift - Concept.
I was reading about early gyroscopes, and how they are supposed to detect and eliminate drift for planes, then i immediately was like, oh no, they didn't mirror the engine designs, to eliminate the CAUSE of drift to begin with??? what our luminary aero plane engineers did, was copy over the same exact engine, from the left wing to the right wing. if they had literally mirrored the planes complete engine designs, there would actually be zero drift..... we would have two centripetal forces, working inwards.
when both engines turn the exact same way, of course you get drift, a movement away from the intended center line. if both engines turned the other opposite way, no matter both inward, or outward, performing the same future, namely thrust, there would be no actual drift, at all. no simpleton aerospace engineer ever thought of mirroring the complete engine design for planes to eliminate the cause of this drift??? they then went on and invented a ring laser gyro, and auto pilot drift correcting systems, and sold the correctional method for billions.
counter rotating engines, eliminate any and all drift completely, eliminating the actual need for any such auto pilot correctional systems, enabling us to fly straighter for much longer, sans corrections, saving much on fuel economy as well as enabling us with straighter landings and take offs, increasing the safety overall during take off and landings of aero planes. balance is key... 2 engines need two actually physically different yet similar [mirrored design] motors on each wing. instead of moving over the same engine, we need to mirror the entire DNA of the engine, to counter any precession to a side, creating a difference in total overall angular momentum, influencing our flight path negatively, continuously during flight.
i cant believe this only took man like a 150 years to come up with? seriously?
cgtrader.com/3d-models/aircraft/historic-aircraft/twin-mirrored-engine-pairs-eliminate-cause-drift-concept
But it does not limit the rotation of the earth.
@@diontranekr6567 there is none, that’s why they use this old system to hide that fact. Use these twin mirrored motors eliminating drift and you’ll find out soon enough. No need for auto pilot, no need for ring laser gyros, straight lift off and landing much safer. Flying straight is also way more fuel efficient, as you can imagine.
"I can't personally think of a good reason not to do this thing, therefore 150 years of aerospace engineers were stupid".
Often in life it is the case that you have an option: Ask a good question, or call other people stupid. Choose more wisely, next time.
so, you like being financially raped, by companies that can do better, but wont, because money? or that they can land and take off much safer, fly more fuel efficient? they're selling us all this nonsense, playing with our lives. but i also see your point, somewhat.
good one
Keep up the good work🤍
15:52 - That's the British physicist Henry Moseley.
Good video don't worry it will be picked up by algorithm later ,
Directional gyro and gyrocompass are fundamentally different. The first is a free gyro, the second has a gravity sensor. And you should have mentioned that the first Sperry gyro stabilized flight was 1909, or so.
pro tip : set on 0.75/1 allows slow-pokes to grasp it all without hitting left arrow 100 times
9:50 Gryroscope typo
How would simple (physical) gyroscope or gimbal act in deep space, with no gravity?
And how will it behave in accelerating rocket? (In deep space)
A gyroscope does not depend on gravity to function so they operate just fine in deep space. The root cause of a gyroscope's stability stems from Newton's first law, namely that a particle moving in a straight line continues to do so unless acted on by an external force. However, practically nobody explains it in these basic terms but resorts to the conservation of angular momentum instead. The result is that you learn some new words to describe it but have no better understanding of it than you did before. -old physicist
@@clarencegreen3071 @clarencegreen3071 my apologies. With gyroscope action, what i meant was- Whirling Horizontal Speculum, & its successor Machine Of Bohnenberger act in deep space?
You're right sir, and that's because science has got derailed since Einstein's theories that got rid of ther ether. Gyroscopes can only be explained on the basis of the universal reference frame, which is impossible without the mechanical ether that constitutes it. You definitely should read Robert Sunegnis book "Galileo Was Wrong, the Church Was Right". Don't be discouraged by the title if you are a non-believer, it's not about theology, it uses modern discoveries to confirm old ideas that are thought to be discredited, but in reality nobody has solidly disproved them to this day. In short, Michelson Morley + Sagnac + Michelson Gale Pearson discredit relativity theories and open the way for an alternative explanation. @@clarencegreen3071
Going in circles can indeed make you arrive where you want to go.
The gyroscope maintains its orientation. But with respect to *what*, exactly? Itself? How can an orientation be considered stationary without reference to another orientation?
@@MC-bg7ro This still seems to neglect that "its initial setup" has meaning only in relation to another frame of reference. Or maybe not. I'm probably just looking at it incorrectly.
Cool...😎😎😎
Please make quantum computers part 2!
Btw, Foucault is pronounced foo-KOH 😘
While this video was excellent, those AI generated segments were nightmare fuel uncanny valley stuff. Please reconsider using them in future videos!
Crazy to think that there’s gyroscopes in the devices most of us are watching this video on
My brother in Christ:
- a phenomenON
- several phenomenA
Thank you. Great video.
03:07 "... gyroscopic procession is a phenomena ..." It's a phenomenon.
🤓
It would have been cool to have mentioned the fact that IMUs cannot detect gravity. Gravity must be subtracted from the accelerometer data and if not done precisely the drift problem becomes worse. Imagine the IMU sitting on a table. The accelerometers detect 9.8 m/s/s of acceleration and yet the IMU is not accelerating. It detects the table pushing up but it doesn't detect the gravity pushing down.
Why is this hidden!?!? Im subscribed and all!!
One amazing invention was a train running on a single track ballance by large gyroscopes.
And profesor Eric Laithwaite's discoveries.
Cool.
I just joined this channel. What are the odds?
I keep on searching for a gyro stabilizer for a 4-12kg mass. Yet every time I find either get a gyroscopic sensor or a boating one.
Gyroscope usually used in space station for change the direction
Bohnenberger 😂 my man 😎 thank you for guiding our seamen 🤣
Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned.
Couple thoughts on autonomous vehicles. As the technology gets better over time vehicles, cars, trucks, even ships and large planes, will be better at navigating busy streets, etc. than people. The computers on the vehicles will be dedicated to doing one job, driving the vehicles, where humans are continually distracted by their thoughts. Could be anything from a quarrel with someone to your kids birthday party and a host of other thoughts. Of course there's another task the vehicle's computers will do. Send information to some cloud or government agency about where you go, when you go, how long you stayed, etc. A lot of vehicles already do that with GPS systems. You can get a discount on insurance if you connect you vehicle to monitor your driving habits. Your cell phone and computers do the same thing. You can turn the tracking system off...but how do you know for sure it's off? Those things a lot of people have in their homes like Alexa? Same thing. This new high tech world we live in seems convenient and cool. Is it really a good thing? Good or bad, it's here to stay. There will be those who don't wish to be tracked and monitored will finds ways around the system.
I wonder if the early inventors had an idea of what the technology would evolve into
mans really did 3 takes so we wouldnt hear the smile in his voice when he said 'Bohnenberger' lmao nooo duuuude that name lmao
One problem that has not been solved is the stability of bicycles when moving. It has not been proven to be a gyroscopic effect.
What kind of gyroscopic effect would a spinning black hole have?
The missile knows where it is, because it knows where it is not.
15° per hour gyroscope drift is pretty darn good evidence the earth is round.