Thanks. Most high school textbooks doesnt provide enough explanation for that subject more than mere information meant to be memorized. It helped me very much. Thank you!
To wrap up, the top is not falling because of the force generated by the radial strut, which are generated to compensate the force of the internal strut. I think the two-top model made it easier to understand this way, but I think it won't be easy to derive this insight from a normal wheel or a top. The key to understanding this phoenomenon was to devide the force into radial strut and internal strut, but this is hard to imagine from a 2d-wheel with just one plane of spokes. In this case, the spokes would have to act as both the internal strut and the radial strut, but then it's hard to applicate the explanation of 'the radial force is generated to compesate the internal struct force'. Can you please share a thought about this?
Imagining the struts as springs also helps. When a red ball of a two-top is falling downwards, it is causing a compression in the radial strut/spring, hence a pushing force from that spring which acts outward. When a red ball is moving upwards(due to it's disk type rotational motion), it is causing the spring/strut to stretch and hence a pulling force from the spring which acts inward. I wonder what happens to Positronium rotating like a disk and then an electric field is switched on parallel to the axis of rotation.
Very interesting approach to gyroscopic motion. I'm also interested to see your technique of imagining yourself as part of the system. I use this myself when I'm teaching elementary mechanics - I find that students find it easier to understand which way forces are acting in, say, a pulley system when they think of themselves as one of the blocks, with their arms supplying the necessary forces.
Sir I was trying to prove how a fictitious vector comes out when rotation of vectors in nature occurs....I was confused....but your video was out of the box it gave me a new insight and great explanation sir....its the pure mathematical explanation I love behind every phenomena....Thank you sir.. please keep uploading more videos......❤
Gerak rotasi gasing Terhadap vertikal simestris jadi gaya gaya yg dihasilkan juga simetris,akan tetapi gravitasi hanya bernilai positif ke arah bawah sedangkan untuk ke arah atas negatif... Jadi bagaimana anda menerangkan hal ini???
So there's two centripetal forces acting, one pulling the top together so it won't separate, the other is radially pulling the top as one mass towards the sphere. And due to gravity being one-directional, these two interact differently. At half of the phase they move against gravity, and at another they move with gravity. This results in it favoring a certain direction on the sphere for the system to precess on. If this is true, then I believe dictating the direction of the top's movement around the sphere, in this case right-hand-ruling normal force of the system, is putting the cart fore of the donkey. I believe that it does favor a direction, because I tried spinning a pendulum out of a rope and duct tape with my right arm clockwise relative to my eyes, and it is easier to slowly spin my whole body on the y axis to the left than it is to the right. If I tried doing it to the right, usually the pendulum doesn't want to follow my arm, and gets close to the front of torso instead.
For me the simplest intuitive picture which is based solely on the feature of rotating bodies to maintain the plane of rotation, want to change it , apply a force and instantly receive reactive force from the rotating body. Imagine each atom in a rotating wheel as a tiny ball with a mass, that want stay in plane of rotating wheel. But gravity pull a rotating wheel/plane downwards and changes/ tilts the wheel/plane. Now the little atom still wants to run on tangent of rotating wheel in the initial vertical plane, but gravity puls the wheel down and tilts the plane of rotation. The little atom is forced to run into "an outside wall of a wheel" and exerts a force onto a body of the wheel by that causing the wheel proceed. Procession makes atoms at the top and at the bottom of the wheel to " run into a outside wall of the wheel " which creates a force moment couteracting gravity. So first gravity causes procession, then procession causes counter gravity force moment. And all that because of those stubborn atoms, that fight back when bothered in their plane of rotation.😅
Great explanation, thanks very much - I've been trying to get my head around this for a while, failed intuition I guess 😂 I am curious about what happens if multiple gyroscopes are working together in tandem - would it be possible to create slight offsets to direct angular momentum to generate lift? Would be great to see a video about why this wouldn't work? Many thanks again
I found an explanation in a more simple manner. I drew the contour path of one mass particle on the circumference of a large diameter gyro with its axis horizontal. I decided the horizontal angular displacement of the gyro axis to be smaller as compared to the full rotation 2 pi rotation of the gyro disc, say the horizontal angle was 30 degrees for a full revolution of the gyro, Then looking vertically down, I proceeded to draw the sectorial position of what becomes a thick disc and the resulting contour path, always looking vertically down there appeared to be a cycloidal with one long curved path and two shorter curved path at the ends . This cycloidal path through the " thickness" of the gyro, clearly show the horizontal complex curves projections do have their centers of rotation outside the plan view area of the gyro while the other centers are inside the plan area of the gyro and they are not acting at the centre of the gyro but at the upper half pushing in and at the lower half pushing out. This means that the upper half and the lower half are continuously being torqued against gravity, Any movement of the disc in the upper or lower direction will precess the gyro horizontally. Drawing the travelled path of one mass particle really throws all the lights necessary to understand the gyro. I drew a few contours at high or low angles of the gyro rotating axis and they all showed these two forces torquing the upper and lower half of the gyro. It is a case that when the disc of the gyro is rotating in one plane by a fixed shaft,then there is no sideways acceleration on the gyro masses, but just the centrifugal forces, but once the thin disc of the gyro is oriented a little, then it becomes a thick disc along which there are some very interesting accelerations in the top half and lower half, which act about 1/3 above and 1/3 below the gyro centre point. After finding these contours which one circumferential mass particle takes I integrated the horizontal forces intuitively by associating a higher centrifugal force with the radius of curvature of the trajectory path taken by the rotating and horizontally translating mass particle. It was crude, but I was thrilled at what I found with plotting these cycloids which come about when looking down vertically on the resulting rotating thick disc of what was a thin rotating disc!! The secret exists in the direction of the acceleration of masses in the top half and the lower half of the rotating disc.
So where does "Rigidity in Space" come from? I have not found any explanation for why it exists in a gyroscope. I have only seen videos or read descriptions of the results of it, but never any explanation as to why it exists in the first place. It would be a first to see a video or read an explanation on why "Rigidity in Space" occurs. Regards
I believe that mass is not a fundamental characteristic of spacetime. It is possible that the connection between gravity and inertia could be elucidated by the behavior of a gyroscope, since all objects with mass consist of particles in motion. Although the particles move randomly, they possess momentum, which could result in increased inertia as an object moves through space in a particular direction. This may explain why the bending of spacetime increases with mass, providing an explanation for the equal interplay between gravity and inertia.
It's too hard for me but intuitively I would think that it's a matter of checking all the vectors, adding them up and it seems that gravity is here not the dominating force obviously as long as the speed is still high enough.(??) Perhaps this shows us too the weakness of gravity which we as laypeople, too often see it as a rather strong force??
Interesting, yt prevents me from using the subscribe button on the video pages, yet it works on the channel page. It changes "subscribe" to "subscribed" but it doesn't actually go through with the action, which is revealed after refresh.
that sounds wrong... the angular momentum vector doesn't signify a force in the same direction if I remember my physics course right. might be wrong tho 🤷♂️
I have a newer gyro video with new math that describes the causal ACCELERATIONS. The spinning and tilting mass in a disk follows a rose pattern path in space as it spins AND tilts. Second derivative gets you the acceleration. There is literally a force field of acceleration vectors that is shaped like a cylindrical hoof shape extending perpendicular from each half of the disk. THIS FORCE FIELD HAS A CENTROID THAT WILL NOT CHANGE AS THE FIELD CHANGES SIZE. No one has done this, and EVERYONE ignores it! Can you tell me why?
Would you be able to point me in the direction of that video if it's available on the internet? I would love to see it. I'm trying to understand this fully but it seems to elude my grasp. The standard explanation is not enough for me.
@@dariosarti2791 th-cam.com/video/Sip_9ew2RjA/w-d-xo.html Few people seem to be able to see this, so I'm a quack until it's popular. How goofy is that?
Newton proposed a rule that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Einstein proposed a rule (E=MC²) that matter can be changed into its basic constituent of energy. Matter is simply energy given angular momentum in 3 separate dimensions. Gravity is simply the pulling "force" that is the consequence of that construct. Yes Einstein, gravity is a force, it's just not a "push" force, it's a pulling (negative) force!
th-cam.com/video/D-3aLd28pjE/w-d-xo.html Is my explanation correct? It seems simpler to explain the behavior of gyroscopes using the curve I call the A-curve.
Laws are mnemonic devices not causes. Angular vectors are pretend, not real. Seesaw tilting end velocities must TOTALLY reverse in HALF of a rotation of the spinning mass. The tilting fulcrum axis running through the diameter of the spinning mass is the focus of all of that SEESAWING tilt velocity change ACCELERATION. One side points up while the other down, NORMAL TO THE SPIN PLANE. The tilt fulcrum axis follows tilting DIRECTION like an axle producing acceleration perpendicular to the tilting direction. Initially, falling starts down, but the acceleration production steers it into precession. This is why precession ends up perpendicular to gravity. I really hope this ruins math for you. Angular momentum is a pretend analogous vector that only works AFTER the right-hand rule, which is just another mnemonic device NOT A CAUSE.
It needs to create buoyancy and the driver must be able to steer. The driver sits in what is called the hero seat. Use multiple wings magnetically symmetric axis, the crossing over under at the star of David's hexagonal corner it's not flat but based on a cube, so that like you said nicely the sigma or center of rise or drop, gravitational interaction according to surroundings. Launch from a ferris wheel like support. Isaac basic the force to move an object must be greater than the matter intended to move, for instance the proton in order to create a electron must have force or rotational angular velocity greater than or equal to the matter * delta, mass by delta intent. Good job simplifying motion.protons.
@@PhysicsUnsimplified Yes, but you assumed it is. So what is your point? That is, I am sorry to say, literally the least intelligent evasion I have ever come across.
@@TheAnimammal Sigh. No evasion. I did not say that angular momentum is conserved and I did not assume that angular momentum is conserved, because angular momentum is not conserved. The gyroscope is subject to an external torque.
Please explain why you think this is fake. Note that I derived the equations of motion in detail in the follow-up video "Gyroscopic Motion: Equations of Motion for the Two-Top". And the code I used for the visualizations is freely available at the link given in the description.
Thanks. Most high school textbooks doesnt provide enough explanation for that subject more than mere information meant to be memorized. It helped me very much. Thank you!
Very simple and creative approach! Thx, it helped a lot
Best unsimplified explanation ever
wonderful work and simulation too good
I am so impressed wit your work, thank you so much
To wrap up, the top is not falling because of the force generated by the radial strut, which are generated to compensate the force of the internal strut. I think the two-top model made it easier to understand this way, but I think it won't be easy to derive this insight from a normal wheel or a top. The key to understanding this phoenomenon was to devide the force into radial strut and internal strut, but this is hard to imagine from a 2d-wheel with just one plane of spokes. In this case, the spokes would have to act as both the internal strut and the radial strut, but then it's hard to applicate the explanation of 'the radial force is generated to compesate the internal struct force'. Can you please share a thought about this?
Imagining the struts as springs also helps. When a red ball of a two-top is falling downwards, it is causing a compression in the radial strut/spring, hence a pushing force from that spring which acts outward. When a red ball is moving upwards(due to it's disk type rotational motion), it is causing the spring/strut to stretch and hence a pulling force from the spring which acts inward. I wonder what happens to Positronium rotating like a disk and then an electric field is switched on parallel to the axis of rotation.
Very interesting approach to gyroscopic motion. I'm also interested to see your technique of imagining yourself as part of the system. I use this myself when I'm teaching elementary mechanics - I find that students find it easier to understand which way forces are acting in, say, a pulley system when they think of themselves as one of the blocks, with their arms supplying the necessary forces.
Sir I was trying to prove how a fictitious vector comes out when rotation of vectors in nature occurs....I was confused....but your video was out of the box it gave me a new insight and great explanation sir....its the pure mathematical explanation I love behind every phenomena....Thank you sir.. please keep uploading more videos......❤
Can the flywheel be abstracted to be a point mass with moment of inertia for calculation?
Beautiful animation and clear explanation. I liked this video. You should definitely make more such videos.. #Respect
Gerak rotasi gasing Terhadap vertikal simestris jadi gaya gaya yg dihasilkan juga simetris,akan tetapi gravitasi hanya bernilai positif ke arah bawah sedangkan untuk ke arah atas negatif...
Jadi bagaimana anda menerangkan hal ini???
Thank you. Very helpful video.
Wonderful explanation!
Thank you professor!
So there's two centripetal forces acting, one pulling the top together so it won't separate, the other is radially pulling the top as one mass towards the sphere. And due to gravity being one-directional, these two interact differently. At half of the phase they move against gravity, and at another they move with gravity. This results in it favoring a certain direction on the sphere for the system to precess on.
If this is true, then I believe dictating the direction of the top's movement around the sphere, in this case right-hand-ruling normal force of the system, is putting the cart fore of the donkey.
I believe that it does favor a direction, because I tried spinning a pendulum out of a rope and duct tape with my right arm clockwise relative to my eyes, and it is easier to slowly spin my whole body on the y axis to the left than it is to the right. If I tried doing it to the right, usually the pendulum doesn't want to follow my arm, and gets close to the front of torso instead.
For me the simplest intuitive picture which is based solely on the feature of rotating bodies to maintain the plane of rotation, want to change it , apply a force and instantly receive reactive force from the rotating body.
Imagine each atom in a rotating wheel as a tiny ball with a mass, that want stay in plane of rotating wheel. But gravity pull a rotating wheel/plane downwards and changes/ tilts the wheel/plane. Now the little atom still wants to run on tangent of rotating wheel in the initial vertical plane, but gravity puls the wheel down and tilts the plane of rotation. The little atom is forced to run into "an outside wall of a wheel" and exerts a force onto a body of the wheel by that causing the wheel proceed. Procession makes atoms at the top and at the bottom of the wheel to " run into a outside wall of the wheel " which creates a force moment couteracting gravity. So first gravity causes procession, then procession causes counter gravity force moment. And all that because of those stubborn atoms, that fight back when bothered in their plane of rotation.😅
Very useful, thanks!
outstanding video
Great explanation, thanks very much - I've been trying to get my head around this for a while, failed intuition I guess 😂 I am curious about what happens if multiple gyroscopes are working together in tandem - would it be possible to create slight offsets to direct angular momentum to generate lift? Would be great to see a video about why this wouldn't work? Many thanks again
I found an explanation in a more simple manner. I drew the contour path of one mass particle on the circumference of a large diameter gyro with its axis horizontal. I decided the horizontal angular displacement of the gyro axis to be smaller as compared to the full rotation 2 pi rotation of the gyro disc, say the horizontal angle was 30 degrees for a full revolution of the gyro, Then looking vertically down, I proceeded to draw the sectorial position of what becomes a thick disc and the resulting contour path, always looking vertically down there appeared to be a cycloidal with one long curved path and two shorter curved path at the ends . This cycloidal path through the " thickness" of the gyro, clearly show the horizontal complex curves projections do have their centers of rotation outside the plan view area of the gyro while the other centers are inside the plan area of the gyro and they are not acting at the centre of the gyro but at the upper half pushing in and at the lower half pushing out. This means that the upper half and the lower half are continuously being torqued against gravity, Any movement of the disc in the upper or lower direction will precess the gyro horizontally. Drawing the travelled path of one mass particle really throws all the lights necessary to understand the gyro. I drew a few contours at high or low angles of the gyro rotating axis and they all showed these two forces torquing the upper and lower half of the gyro. It is a case that when the disc of the gyro is rotating in one plane by a fixed shaft,then there is no sideways acceleration on the gyro masses, but just the centrifugal forces, but once the thin disc of the gyro is oriented a little, then it becomes a thick disc along which there are some very interesting accelerations in the top half and lower half, which act about 1/3 above and 1/3 below the gyro centre point. After finding these contours which one circumferential mass particle takes I integrated the horizontal forces intuitively by associating a higher centrifugal force with the radius of curvature of the trajectory path taken by the rotating and horizontally translating mass particle. It was crude, but I was thrilled at what I found with plotting these cycloids which come about when looking down vertically on the resulting rotating thick disc of what was a thin rotating disc!! The secret exists in the direction of the acceleration of masses in the top half and the lower half of the rotating disc.
So where does "Rigidity in Space" come from? I have not found any explanation for why it exists in a gyroscope. I have only seen videos or read descriptions of the results of it, but never any explanation as to why it exists in the first place. It would be a first to see a video or read an explanation on why "Rigidity in Space" occurs. Regards
I believe that mass is not a fundamental characteristic of spacetime. It is possible that the connection between gravity and inertia could be elucidated by the behavior of a gyroscope, since all objects with mass consist of particles in motion. Although the particles move randomly, they possess momentum, which could result in increased inertia as an object moves through space in a particular direction. This may explain why the bending of spacetime increases with mass, providing an explanation for the equal interplay between gravity and inertia.
thanks!!
It's too hard for me but intuitively I would think that it's a matter of checking all the vectors, adding them up and it seems that gravity is here not the dominating force obviously as long as the speed is still high enough.(??)
Perhaps this shows us too the weakness of gravity which we as laypeople, too often see it as a rather strong force??
❤ Very good 👍🏼
Interesting, yt prevents me from using the subscribe button on the video pages, yet it works on the channel page. It changes "subscribe" to "subscribed" but it doesn't actually go through with the action, which is revealed after refresh.
You can feel the right hand rule in cars if you spin out on snow or ice. The car always pulls a bit to the left.
that sounds wrong... the angular momentum vector doesn't signify a force in the same direction if I remember my physics course right.
might be wrong tho 🤷♂️
I have a newer gyro video with new math that describes the causal ACCELERATIONS. The spinning and tilting mass in a disk follows a rose pattern path in space as it spins AND tilts. Second derivative gets you the acceleration. There is literally a force field of acceleration vectors that is shaped like a cylindrical hoof shape extending perpendicular from each half of the disk. THIS FORCE FIELD HAS A CENTROID THAT WILL NOT CHANGE AS THE FIELD CHANGES SIZE. No one has done this, and EVERYONE ignores it! Can you tell me why?
Would you be able to point me in the direction of that video if it's available on the internet? I would love to see it. I'm trying to understand this fully but it seems to elude my grasp. The standard explanation is not enough for me.
@@dariosarti2791 th-cam.com/video/Sip_9ew2RjA/w-d-xo.html Few people seem to be able to see this, so I'm a quack until it's popular. How goofy is that?
thanks!
Awesome video! You have way too few follower.
Newton proposed a rule that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Einstein proposed a rule (E=MC²) that matter can be changed into its basic constituent of energy. Matter is simply energy given angular momentum in 3 separate dimensions. Gravity is simply the pulling "force" that is the consequence of that construct. Yes Einstein, gravity is a force, it's just not a "push" force, it's a pulling (negative) force!
Very creative visualization. Manim, no?
Nice explanation, but the missing frames in the animations made my brain twitch! - LOL
how many liberty grades does it have?
私の実験では、表向き裏向きの遠心力で説明できるようです。
th-cam.com/video/D-3aLd28pjE/w-d-xo.html
Is my explanation correct? It seems simpler to explain the behavior of gyroscopes using the curve I call the A-curve.
Counter rotating conductors have lift!!!!!!!
Laws are mnemonic devices not causes. Angular vectors are pretend, not real. Seesaw tilting end velocities must TOTALLY reverse in HALF of a rotation of the spinning mass. The tilting fulcrum axis running through the diameter of the spinning mass is the focus of all of that SEESAWING tilt velocity change ACCELERATION. One side points up while the other down, NORMAL TO THE SPIN PLANE. The tilt fulcrum axis follows tilting DIRECTION like an axle producing acceleration perpendicular to the tilting direction. Initially, falling starts down, but the acceleration production steers it into precession. This is why precession ends up perpendicular to gravity. I really hope this ruins math for you. Angular momentum is a pretend analogous vector that only works AFTER the right-hand rule, which is just another mnemonic device NOT A CAUSE.
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
How do you explain that if you spin the wheel in a reverse direction precession also reverses? My "theory" easily explains this fact.
It needs to create buoyancy and the driver must be able to steer. The driver sits in what is called the hero seat. Use multiple wings magnetically symmetric axis, the crossing over under at the star of David's hexagonal corner it's not flat but based on a cube, so that like you said nicely the sigma or center of rise or drop, gravitational interaction according to surroundings. Launch from a ferris wheel like support. Isaac basic the force to move an object must be greater than the matter intended to move, for instance the proton in order to create a electron must have force or rotational angular velocity greater than or equal to the matter * delta, mass by delta intent. Good job simplifying motion.protons.
I'm not quite following why we wouldn't include space time in the equation, given that everything appears to be symmetric.
Comments 14
How does it do that?
It does it by doing it!!! That is it ! The end and good bye !
Angular momentum is not conserved and the explanation of the gyroscope being a result of conservation of angular momentum is a joke.
I did not say "angular momentum is conserved" in this video.
@@PhysicsUnsimplified Yes, but you assumed it is. So what is your point?
That is, I am sorry to say, literally the least intelligent evasion I have ever come across.
@@TheAnimammal Sigh. No evasion. I did not say that angular momentum is conserved and I did not assume that angular momentum is conserved, because angular momentum is not conserved. The gyroscope is subject to an external torque.
@@PhysicsUnsimplified bullshit is not science. If you are too afraid to face facts then you are no scientist
fake
Please explain why you think this is fake. Note that I derived the equations of motion in detail in the follow-up video "Gyroscopic Motion: Equations of Motion for the Two-Top". And the code I used for the visualizations is freely available at the link given in the description.
Clarify, please.
Fake what?
@@ifrazali3052 the explanation is fake, he pretends to explain but it's all non-sense. Look into Eric Laithwaite's gyroscope explanation
have you ever thought about getting a microphone that is freestanding with a buffer?
why do none of these videos explain what the fuck a gyroscope is