it's nice to see someone on youtube for once showing an "Anti-Gravity" device and explaining why it doesn't work. If more people talked about their failures, we could learn from them and one day find the answers we seek.
Yeah, I did back when I first made this gyro thing. I had both of them going while it was all sitting on a digital scale. I did all combinations, including having the gyro arms held in place horizontally while they were spinning.
The scale was capable of measuring up to 1/10th of a gram. And when I put a playing card on the unit and removed it the changes in weight showed up. But if I can pull it off, I will be doing an experiment with a much larger spinning mass. And of course I'll upload a video of it. It'll be very tricky though since a larger weighing method will be needed.
It is as redirecting the centrifuges force of the revolving disks toward an only point up. it could be defined as mass jumping? Then, if the disks are heavy the antigravity force will be extreme. In a flying plate, the ship fuselage must be light, but the disks would be weighed.
I built this device long before I filmed things. Back then I had both gyros turning and the whole thing balanced well enough so that it wouldn't vibrate wildly and so could work on a digital scale. At that time the scale stayed rock solid with no weight change. But while running I could put on a light playing card and the weight would change, so no problem with the scale. I also tried with the arms fixed so they couldn't rise. If you look at the physics, there's no reason it should lose weight.
try stopping the gyros,thats where the propulsion is. jam a scafolding pole into a motorcycle wheel at 30mph, the rider goes over the handlebars followed by the motorcycle itself, 3 perpendicular gyros = any direction, respin,redirect and keep missing the ground!
I wouldn't call it uncharted territory, the physics is quite well understood. It's just very hard to picture since it's a rotating system. I've wanted to replicate the Laithwaite demonstration, but properly, standing on a sensitive scale. My problem is figuring out how to make or get a scale that can handle a person, with the horizontal center or mass constantly changing and be sensitive down to fractions of a gram. I'd love to do it though.
The reaction is through the motor shaft, the motor, the hinge and down the center shaft to the drill. The net is zero. Certainly back when I did it the digital scale I had it one stayed at zero. Meanwhile, it I put a single, lightweight playing card gently on the thing, the scale immediately showed a weight change. Some day I'm going to take a few hours and read the physics of this and get it all straight in my head.
I had the same thought about this project but the big difference is there is a lead weight on the end of the record disks to make a fly wheel affect, the weight in the spinning disk will cause lift if both disk’s weight is 180 degrees off from each other
I can see a weight change if you manage to get it to jump, but the weight decrease during the jump up will be preceded by a weight gain just before the jump. It balances out.
I locked the hinges or the gyros in the horizontal direction back when I had both gyros spinning. The scale stayed at zero. There's no lift with these because there's an equal and opposite downward force produced at the central axis where the drill motor is. It's the same as if you lifted and object up with your arm. The object lifts up, but your shoulder feels an equal downward force. It's just not obvious with a gyro because the lifting mechanism isn't so obvious.
True enough. Conservation of angular momentum assumes no external torque acting on the object but in your car example and my stick-slip example there's external torque. So practically you can use rotation to produce linear motion. Maybe Sha Man had some specific cases in mind?
Not without modification. This was a fun and educational gyroscope experiment, but I'm not pursuing it further right now. Thanks for the suggestion anyway.
@1234ToddgMr Actually the other one isn't spinning at all; I didn't have enough power in my power supply. But you're right... spinning it such that the bottom of the disk moves opposite the direction of the rotor causes the disk to go down. I did spin them both in the right direction a long time ago when I built this and as expected, there was no weight loss. I even had it on a digital scale. I tested with the disk free to move up and with the disks held with their axises horizontal.
They'll both rotate, but in opposite directions. However, the arms with the disks will rotate around the shaft slower than if the primary motor is firm to the ground, so they won't rise as high. But I think they'll still rise. They'll still rotate and still have a net rotation with respect to the primary motor and shaft. That's my guess anyway. Interesting to think about.
What happens when you fix the gyroscopes so that they both align horizontal all the time? Would this not create an upward direction source to the whole setup?
damn...you are onto something great... All that your idea lacks is: #1 perfect counterweight from either side of your gyroscope.would eliminate gravity. #2 An additional offset wight is required to drive an upward force within the gyroscopic outer force. You cannot achieve upper force with the least amount of energy without gyroscopic force. It's a basis on which to build new revisions of your idea... I like it... well done. :)
@field16 Look for the simplest solution and you'll usually find something that works. Also, you can build pretty much anything if you design it as a bunch of pieces that work together and then patiently build them one piece at a time. That way a complex thing is simple to build since it's just a bunch of simple to build pieces. Combine those two things and your imagination's the limit. Best wishes for the holidays, Steve
Great Video. Thanks for all the effort in documenting an experiment. You demonstrate soundly that without being free to move a gyroscope will not stand. This is the reason that gyroscopic forces don't hold up the bicycle as well. When the bike falls over, the rear wheel is kept from precessing by the frame and cannot generate a torque to counter gravity. The front wheel does have a small moment though not significant.
I've done so much in the past that I only vaguely recall spinning magnets. Didn't work though. But then it's all pretty random. I don't do these types of shot-in-the-dark experiments anymore. I prefer some rigorous engineering or physics first these days.
It's just to set a starting reference. You zero the scale before you putting anything on it. So when you first turn it on it's showing some weight even though there isn't any yet. You set it to zero since that's really how much weight is on it and _then_ you start adding weight.
But that's what I said... I tested with the hinges locked. The weight stayed at zero (the scale was zeroed), no change. It's the same as if you stand with a brick in each hand and arms outstretched. You then lift the weights up. That translates to an equal downward force through your arms to your body and if you're standing on a scale there'll be no change. If you lock your arms so they don't move you'll also no weight change. It's just not obvious because everything's spinning.
This is bugged, is the device stuck to the scale? then does your digital scales read a negative value when the plate is pulled against in a upward motion? The Gyros lifts with that precession. If you really want a downward force then the precession needs to the other direction. You would be better off to not set the scales to zero so that you can understand which way the force is actually going. e.g more weight or less weight.
The net will not be zero while the arms are proecssing upward. There will be a force down the shaft to the drill/ table. Nothing suprising. So im questioning your measurments if you didnt see that. btw; seems like you had a bias from the beginning which is a known type of placebo that affects ones observations.
What if you replaced the wheel with blades.? Then it would definitely create lift especially if it's held down it would create lift in an spiral motion upwards right?
I once worked on this concept. I think if you fixed the axis of the disks shaft it will work. Also I wrote my own mathemical simulator on MathCad, a plot showed this idea will work but the force generated was very small. it's a good idea for space propulsion as motion or energy is accumulative.. I would like to make contact with you
Why, he didn’t fix the axle on purpose. His disk’s were of low weight and low speed. The lift comes from forced precession which he anchored down. But you can’t avoid these videos to solidify that it doesn’t work. If you come close enough they’ll shut down your video, and get a visitor at your door. Be careful my friend.
@@chrisjenkins1989 Otis Carr spent 14 years in prison, in addition to the government taking all his inventions and apparatus, but even they weren't able to control it.
the forces you feel must be noticeable for any of this to work, thats why they say its the pilot not the plane, the plane is part of it, but the pilots wisdom and relation to the machine is also important.
hi just came across your video. fasinating that you have the setup but unfortunate that it does produce "enough" lift to produce any reading on the scale. i would have thought the fact that both rotating discs have moved upwards, means they have produced lift to lift partial of its own weight. have you tried to fix the "hinge" of the rotating vinyles spinning axis and lock to the horizontal direction? so whilst it spins... to a non-movable axis may produce some lift that can register on reading?
Oh, I see I wasn't clear. By shaft I meant the shaft that the drill is attached to. Imagine standing on the ground and lifting your arms with weights in your hands. Your weight doesn't change. It's just not obvious why the gyros lift in this case because the forces are transferred through rotation. But there's where I need to read the physics more. The expectations I had were based on the physics I've read. My experiment confirmed them. That's science: theory - hypothesis - experiment.
perhaps if you start with them lose (but only with a small free moving space), having them move freely at first and then somehow instantly freeze them in a horizontal, perhaps that instantaneous nudge will start the lifting force?
Thank you for doing this experiment! its great work and a nice build. I still see the arms doing work, theyre moving a mass upward So im confused by what you mean by "while the shaft goes down" which shaft goes down? At the very least you should see a weight reduction when you turn the main rotation off and the arms are falling. You mention in the video you had expectations, thats called bias. But im biased too given there are many gyro propulsion patents, im convinced it can work.
Maybe there is a redistribution of weight from the disk to the drill spindle, as such the scale still would remain unadjusted. This experiment seems to be a variation on Eric Laithwaite's work.
Nice! As I was watching, I was anticipating that there'd be lots of comments about how you just need to adjust "this", use a heavier "that", reverse "this" and add 2 of "these". THEN it'll work! You explained it very clearly, the lift on one side is against the downward force on the other. Like grabbing your feet to lift yourself up or putting a fan on a sailboat to blow it across the water. Damn you Isaac Newton! Great video.
This is very interesting that you have to spin the drill to achieve gyroscopic precession. So you have to get something to spin in addition to the gyroscopes. But why just one of the gyroscope gets up ?
At 2:55, I point out that the second motor isn't connected up and that the power supply I was using at the time I made the video wasn't powerful enough to power both motors. Years before that when I first made and tested it (see the photo at 1:41) I did have sufficient power.
I think you're thinking of observation. Yes, first an observation is made, often by accident. Then comes a theory to explain it, followed by a testable hypothesis (ie. if this theory is correct then if I do this then that should happen), followed by the experiment to test the hypothesis. If the experiment gives the result predicted by the hypothesis then the theory has support. If the experiment fails, then the theory needs to revised or rejected. So yes, it all starts with an observation.
I don't know doing 200 lbs but I'd like to do a heavy steel one at 30,000 rpm but I'd want to stand on a scale while I spin it. But I have no idea how to implement or get such a scale that can has an accuracy of only 1 or 2 grams.
my suggestion would be to turn the discs vertically by 90°, so when the horizontally and vertically centrifugal forces add up, the outer resulting force will be bigger than the inner. could you test that with your setup?
For every action there is a equal and opposite reaction. The center of rotating mass is near center of the machine when in operation, so when the opposing forces are applied, the opposite forces are also applied in the opposite direction. Δp1 = -Δp2
No, there was no talk in the magazine article about the magnus effect. Keep in mind, the magazine article was just a speculative article, there was no build mentioned.
The first thing I have noticed is that the mass of vinyl records is neglectable to the mass of the system. The second thing is the force necessary to move a large rotating/spinning mass should be much smaller, which leads to the idea to spin a huge mass around a flying object before making it fly. We expect it would take just a portion of energy used to lift the flying object without any rotating mass. Well....looking forward to seeing you identify the real point rather than spinning the plastic records.
I'm not really looking for a solution. This is just a gyroscopic precession video. The flying saucer thing was just for fun. It's not something I'm going to work on further. But thanks anyway.
I added the hinges so I can see the effect of the precession. As I said at the beginning of the video, the UFO thing doesn't really work. I did that stuff just for fun. But back when I experimented, I did arrange it so they would remain horizontal anyway, and as expected, there was no change in weight.
Maybe there was a change but your scale wasn’t accurate enough, I mean it’s super heavy equipment you have there and not much mass in the records. And powered by such small motors. We need answers!! Lol
since it is using g-force it can produce well over it's weight in my theory of how it works , which I cannot explain in words , if the rpm is unlimited the pounds of force are I made something similar to this using a liquid pumped through tubing that is bent in these two directions and realized that it can be completely concealed and still produce thrust
those arent gyroscopes they are vinyl records. if you want to create antigravity the gyros must have more mass relative to the entire mass of the system
Umm if those two are spinning with the same amount of electricity in it with the horizontal movement. And a retractable hinge that will go up and down. I think this will work for me
No central shaft power is needed if the rotors are allowed to drop a small amount after spinning up. Only the rotors need power. The force of gravity will start precession, and the precession will cause an upward reaction force against gravity which can be controlled by rotor angular velocity. Of course, once the shaft reaches its upward stop the total force will equalize as you say, and create a couple against the inner walls of the craft. It is interesting to note, however, that the upward precession itself also causes a reverse direction precessional torque, slowing down the upward processional torque, but when this tries to slow and reverse the upward precession, gravity wins, and the upward precession continues. Laithwait's Law of Conservation of Momentum (he corrected Newton's Rule) states that linear and angular momentum are NOT conserved, but the SUM of the two are conserved. Thus angular momentum and linear momentum can be converted into one another. When an offset rotor is force precessed, the rotor slows down. Only part of this slowing down is due to bearing friction. Another part is loss of angular momentum due to conversion of it into linear momentum. Mass is transferred along the axis of rotation a distance according to and in direct relation to angular velocity. It is this mass transfer which begets linear force, which can be made to propell a flying saucer, but not in that manner. However, if the machine were designed so that the various gyro rotors of the craft could slide along their shafts some distance, and if this linear sliding back and forth of the rotors was timed and tuned to the overall cycle, and if the shafts were all angled downward by 10 degrees toward the perifery of the craft, it might work.
I like your idea of keeping that drill on with a tie strap. It was interesting to see how one end went up! It's amazing what you could do, as one man with limited funds. You simulated a "UFO" with gyroscopes and Blender animation on your computer. Imagine what the powerful organizations of the world could do and are doing in secret. Peace to you.
Your expirement may have worked if the mass of your spinning disks was equal to or greater than 2x the control arms holding those disks. Newtons law. Those records are probably 5 times lighter than the arms
Yup, I knew that before I built this, like I said at 1:10, "so ignoring reality..." I made this device for the fun of doing it. But you can cheat using something called stick-slip. You make something that sits on a surface and design your rotating parts such that in one direction you overcome the coefficient of friction between the device and the surface but in the other direction you don't. It even works in water. But it would never fly; it needs a medium.
There should be a force that lift the arm up. See Gryo Precession pic in wiki. (Need to jiggle with the rotation direction, plane of force and precession a bit to see. But your experience is in accordance to physics. Good work!
If you make the gyroscopes heavier than the equipment thats powering it it will cause lift because at a certain point the same exact weight from the gyro is reversed example; key:gyro= g, equipment powering gyroscope = e g weighs 100 ibs e weighs 50 ibs if g was reversed the aircraft can lift 49.9 more pounds.
In theory, it's really very simple physics, and no reason not to work, like Eric Laithwaite tried to explain, and got "burned on the stake" for. It's more easy to explain with a drawing but I'll try with words anyway. I'm not a physicist and english is not my first language so bear with me. It's easiest to understand if you start with considering the fact that gyroscopic or sentrifugal forces depend on speed. When only the gyroscope is spinning, the speed of the rim is the same all around the wheel, making the force equal in all directions, BUT when it starts moving, the speed through space ARE becoming greater either on the top or bottom, depending on the directions of the spin and movement of the rig, this SHOULD make the forces acting in one direction greater than the other. According to Newton and anyone else... IOW: The movement of the whole contraption adds speed to the side(of the wheel) already moving in the same direction, and subtracts to the side (of the same wheel) that moves in the opposite direction. The net force then is not 0, but favourable to one direction - in this case up or down. How teachers and guys like you still advocate something else, like this is not science, is pretty strange, when I looked deep into this, I found that many major airspace companies having done research on this, all had their own rigs and patents for satellite movement etc. with similar setups. If you wanna make it really powerful, you'll need very high speeds and have very good bearings. Forget about wooden rigs, the ones in the patents are really heavy duty. I believe the principle has been known for ages, but now when we have better materials to work with, it should be possible to even make a toy out of it with ordinary quadcopter parts - f.ex. electric motors that spins up to 20.000rpm's, carbon fibre, etc. Still some things nobody will believe until they see it. It's incredible how much resistance you can meet in the scientific community especially if you show them something new, or something they had completely missed. Even experimental proof will induce more theoretic resistance than you can imagine, or what in my mind at least - would be reasonable.. almost like a conspiracy - by some clever fellows, perpetuated by the stupidity and stubborness of many others. Just read the whole story about the true genius Eric Laithwaite.
Use 3 wheels give stability and more power,increase RPM exactly for lift mas.Add floating mass on the wheels, inertia and centrifugal force would be helpful .(),mass must be in center when it move down,uP perform better control. That make first electrically powered motor inertia.
No, it didn't. Before turning it on, I put it on the scale and it showed the weight of the whole thing. Then I zeroed the scale (I say this at 1:46). That means that it subtracts the actual weight. When I ran it, the scale stayed at zero, meaning there was no change in weight.
I did lock the hinges a few years ago when I did the original tests. The result was a very steady zero on the scale the whole time. And yet sitting a single playing card on the wooden base of the device would cause a weight change during the test. There should be no weight change anyway since the upward force of the disks is produced by an equal downward force on the center shaft.
There would have been precession on the spinning gyro if you had the gyro fixed on an extension arm with the other end of the extension arm fixed on the free center of the " vertical shaft" without the drill being used of course.
IMPORTANT: This prototype works if the primary motor (the one that turns the two arms) is firm to the ground, if the lower part of the engine instead of resting on the ground was suspended it would turn on itself, and the two arms remain stationary, so I do not think will work
Weird to explain but for some reason I think everyone has been spinning these things the wrong way for it to lift. I got the theory from watching this video years ago now hear me out. If you spin the gyro up and precess it in the way it wants to go the gyro wants to go up but whatever it's attached to get a downward pressure. But if you spin it against the way it wants to precess the downward force would be on the gyro and the upward force on whatever it's attached to.
You have one gyro (record) spinning the wrong direction that is why it goes down not up like the other one. Try reversing the direction of this on and check for weight loss.
Would be amazing you doing some research on the Allais effect on pendulums during eclipses... There's still a lot to know about gravity. And for most eather scholars there's even a cover up of the real phenomena.
Rafael Crespo There's no need to repeat it with any modifications. As you see in the video at 0:35, one end goes up while the other goes down. There are equal and opposite upward and downward forces. Though as I mention in the video at 1:49, I did do the test with the arms blocked laterally just for fun and got 0 weight change on the scale.
If the rpm is unlimited the amount of force coming from the thrust is.my point, can you imagine how efficient of a flying vehicle this would be and how strong it would be.if you had the idea's that pop into my head you'd probably be weirded out I'm just not because I'm used to it.
This was the starting place that I used to ultimately design and build a device that does exhibit significant lift. I simply had to discover the mechanism by which the gyroscopic effect is generated, and voila, several G's of lift produced... @InertialDrive
3 dimmer switches for all 3 motors now that would be a bit interesting, especially if you had the center adjustable to lift up instead of holding it down.
need 3 gyros,xyz control. the propulsion is when the gyros are stopping, respin and redirect,just keep missing the ground.meet u at the sea of tranquility, bring a picnic.john sear did one,2000mph! 2 seater?
That could very well have been what the magazine article was about back when I read it in the 1970s or early 80s. I recall hearing about the Betty and Barney story back then.
Now do this with super conducting ceramics super cold and maybe it would work it would be a really expensive experiment but supposedly a scientist spun a ceramic disc super cooled and lost weight!
great video,I guess you know by now,it has nothing to do with anti gravity,if only it was that easy.Thanks for posting.PS Someday we may be able to bend space time,my guess,10,000 years from now,that is if we survive as a species.
it's nice to see someone on youtube for once showing an "Anti-Gravity" device and explaining why it doesn't work. If more people talked about their failures, we could learn from them and one day find the answers we seek.
Yeah, I did back when I first made this gyro thing. I had both of them going while it was all sitting on a digital scale. I did all combinations, including having the gyro arms held in place horizontally while they were spinning.
Pretty cool.
The scale was capable of measuring up to 1/10th of a gram. And when I put a playing card on the unit and removed it the changes in weight showed up.
But if I can pull it off, I will be doing an experiment with a much larger spinning mass. And of course I'll upload a video of it. It'll be very tricky though since a larger weighing method will be needed.
It is as redirecting the centrifuges force of the revolving disks toward an only point up. it could be defined as mass jumping? Then, if the disks are heavy the antigravity force will be extreme. In a flying plate, the ship fuselage must be light, but the disks would be weighed.
I built this device long before I filmed things. Back then I had both gyros turning and the whole thing balanced well enough so that it wouldn't vibrate wildly and so could work on a digital scale. At that time the scale stayed rock solid with no weight change. But while running I could put on a light playing card and the weight would change, so no problem with the scale. I also tried with the arms fixed so they couldn't rise. If you look at the physics, there's no reason it should lose weight.
try stopping the gyros,thats where the propulsion is. jam a scafolding pole into a motorcycle wheel at 30mph, the rider goes over the handlebars followed by the motorcycle itself, 3 perpendicular gyros = any direction, respin,redirect and keep missing the ground!
I wouldn't call it uncharted territory, the physics is quite well understood. It's just very hard to picture since it's a rotating system. I've wanted to replicate the Laithwaite demonstration, but properly, standing on a sensitive scale. My problem is figuring out how to make or get a scale that can handle a person, with the horizontal center or mass constantly changing and be sensitive down to fractions of a gram. I'd love to do it though.
The reaction is through the motor shaft, the motor, the hinge and down the center shaft to the drill. The net is zero. Certainly back when I did it the digital scale I had it one stayed at zero. Meanwhile, it I put a single, lightweight playing card gently on the thing, the scale immediately showed a weight change. Some day I'm going to take a few hours and read the physics of this and get it all straight in my head.
I love how we can just respond directly to something you did 9 years ago. Should do a 2022 version
I had the same thought about this project but the big difference is there is a lead weight on the end of the record disks to make a fly wheel affect, the weight in the spinning disk will cause lift if both disk’s weight is 180 degrees off from each other
I can see a weight change if you manage to get it to jump, but the weight decrease during the jump up will be preceded by a weight gain just before the jump. It balances out.
I locked the hinges or the gyros in the horizontal direction back when I had both gyros spinning. The scale stayed at zero. There's no lift with these because there's an equal and opposite downward force produced at the central axis where the drill motor is. It's the same as if you lifted and object up with your arm. The object lifts up, but your shoulder feels an equal downward force. It's just not obvious with a gyro because the lifting mechanism isn't so obvious.
True enough. Conservation of angular momentum assumes no external torque acting on the object but in your car example and my stick-slip example there's external torque. So practically you can use rotation to produce linear motion. Maybe Sha Man had some specific cases in mind?
Not without modification. This was a fun and educational gyroscope experiment, but I'm not pursuing it further right now. Thanks for the suggestion anyway.
@1234ToddgMr Actually the other one isn't spinning at all; I didn't have enough power in my power supply. But you're right... spinning it such that the bottom of the disk moves opposite the direction of the rotor causes the disk to go down. I did spin them both in the right direction a long time ago when I built this and as expected, there was no weight loss. I even had it on a digital scale. I tested with the disk free to move up and with the disks held with their axises horizontal.
WOW ! impressive, the time, effort and work you put into that idea is commendable !! Keep at it, you just might build that flying saucer !!
They'll both rotate, but in opposite directions. However, the arms with the disks will rotate around the shaft slower than if the primary motor is firm to the ground, so they won't rise as high. But I think they'll still rise. They'll still rotate and still have a net rotation with respect to the primary motor and shaft. That's my guess anyway. Interesting to think about.
What happens when you fix the gyroscopes so that they both align horizontal all the time? Would this not create an upward direction source to the whole setup?
damn...you are onto something great... All that your idea lacks is: #1 perfect counterweight from either side of your gyroscope.would eliminate gravity. #2 An additional offset wight is required to drive an upward force within the gyroscopic outer force. You cannot achieve upper force with the least amount of energy without gyroscopic force. It's a basis on which to build new revisions of your idea... I like it... well done. :)
@field16 Look for the simplest solution and you'll usually find something that works. Also, you can build pretty much anything if you design it as a bunch of pieces that work together and then patiently build them one piece at a time. That way a complex thing is simple to build since it's just a bunch of simple to build pieces. Combine those two things and your imagination's the limit.
Best wishes for the holidays, Steve
Great Video. Thanks for all the effort in documenting an experiment. You demonstrate soundly that without being free to move a gyroscope will not stand. This is the reason that gyroscopic forces don't hold up the bicycle as well. When the bike falls over, the rear wheel is kept from precessing by the frame and cannot generate a torque to counter gravity. The front wheel does have a small moment though not significant.
I've done so much in the past that I only vaguely recall spinning magnets. Didn't work though. But then it's all pretty random. I don't do these types of shot-in-the-dark experiments anymore. I prefer some rigorous engineering or physics first these days.
It's just to set a starting reference. You zero the scale before you putting anything on it. So when you first turn it on it's showing some weight even though there isn't any yet. You set it to zero since that's really how much weight is on it and _then_ you start adding weight.
But that's what I said... I tested with the hinges locked. The weight stayed at zero (the scale was zeroed), no change. It's the same as if you stand with a brick in each hand and arms outstretched. You then lift the weights up. That translates to an equal downward force through your arms to your body and if you're standing on a scale there'll be no change. If you lock your arms so they don't move you'll also no weight change. It's just not obvious because everything's spinning.
This is bugged, is the device stuck to the scale? then does your digital scales read a negative value when the plate is pulled against in a upward motion? The Gyros lifts with that precession. If you really want a downward force then the precession needs to the other direction. You would be better off to not set the scales to zero so that you can understand which way the force is actually going. e.g more weight or less weight.
Yes, the scale shows negative values if you have it zeroed and then remove some mass or pull it upward.
The net will not be zero while the arms are proecssing upward. There will be a force down the shaft to the drill/ table. Nothing suprising.
So im questioning your measurments if you didnt see that.
btw; seems like you had a bias from the beginning which is a known type of placebo that affects ones observations.
What you need to try is the reproduction of what the article said. you need a plataform and more than 2 weels.
What if you replaced the wheel with blades.? Then it would definitely create lift especially if it's held down it would create lift in an spiral motion upwards right?
Thanks! Yeah, I want to spend some time with that wiki, maybe even make a video once I've wrapped my head around it.
I once worked on this concept. I think if you fixed the axis of the disks shaft it will work. Also I wrote my own mathemical simulator on MathCad, a plot showed this idea will work but the force generated was very small.
it's a good idea for space propulsion as motion or energy is accumulative.. I would like to make contact with you
Why, he didn’t fix the axle on purpose. His disk’s were of low weight and low speed. The lift comes from forced precession which he anchored down.
But you can’t avoid these videos to solidify that it doesn’t work.
If you come close enough they’ll shut down your video, and get a visitor at your door.
Be careful my friend.
@@chrisjenkins1989 Otis Carr spent 14 years in prison, in addition to the government taking all his inventions and apparatus, but even they weren't able to control it.
the forces you feel must be noticeable for any of this to work, thats why they say its the pilot not the plane, the plane is part of it, but the pilots wisdom and relation to the machine is also important.
My measurements saw zero weight change. That's to be expected if the arms go up while the shaft goes down. Experiment is king. No bias there.
With the brush less motor technology we have now, and if you make the structure out of something like dollar tree foam, I think this would work.
hi just came across your video. fasinating that you have the setup but unfortunate that it does produce "enough" lift to produce any reading on the scale. i would have thought the fact that both rotating discs have moved upwards, means they have produced lift to lift partial of its own weight. have you tried to fix the "hinge" of the rotating vinyles spinning axis and lock to the horizontal direction? so whilst it spins... to a non-movable axis may produce some lift that can register on reading?
Oh, I see I wasn't clear. By shaft I meant the shaft that the drill is attached to. Imagine standing on the ground and lifting your arms with weights in your hands. Your weight doesn't change. It's just not obvious why the gyros lift in this case because the forces are transferred through rotation. But there's where I need to read the physics more. The expectations I had were based on the physics I've read. My experiment confirmed them. That's science: theory - hypothesis - experiment.
But building it is half the fun! :) Seriously, glad you like it.
perhaps if you start with them lose (but only with a small free moving space), having them move freely at first and then somehow instantly freeze them in a horizontal, perhaps that instantaneous nudge will start the lifting force?
Thank you for doing this experiment! its great work and a nice build.
I still see the arms doing work, theyre moving a mass upward So im confused by what you mean by "while the shaft goes down" which shaft goes down?
At the very least you should see a weight reduction when you turn the main rotation off and the arms are falling.
You mention in the video you had expectations, thats called bias. But im biased too given there are many gyro propulsion patents, im convinced it can work.
Maybe there is a redistribution of weight from the disk to the drill spindle, as such the scale still would remain unadjusted. This experiment seems to be a variation on Eric Laithwaite's work.
Nice! As I was watching, I was anticipating that there'd be lots of comments about how you just need to adjust "this", use a heavier "that", reverse "this" and add 2 of "these". THEN it'll work! You explained it very clearly, the lift on one side is against the downward force on the other. Like grabbing your feet to lift yourself up or putting a fan on a sailboat to blow it across the water. Damn you Isaac Newton! Great video.
Andy Jones Thanks! If only Isaac Newton had never existed! :)
This is very interesting that you have to spin the drill to achieve gyroscopic precession. So you have to get something to spin in addition to the gyroscopes. But why just one of the gyroscope gets up ?
At 2:55, I point out that the second motor isn't connected up and that the power supply I was using at the time I made the video wasn't powerful enough to power both motors. Years before that when I first made and tested it (see the photo at 1:41) I did have sufficient power.
@@RimstarOrg ok. the two gyros would get up if both motors supply enough power?
Yes, like in the photo I show at 1:41 which was taken when I did have enough power.
I guess it would depend on what you're trying to do. Interesting in what way?
I think you're thinking of observation. Yes, first an observation is made, often by accident. Then comes a theory to explain it, followed by a testable hypothesis (ie. if this theory is correct then if I do this then that should happen), followed by the experiment to test the hypothesis. If the experiment gives the result predicted by the hypothesis then the theory has support. If the experiment fails, then the theory needs to revised or rejected. So yes, it all starts with an observation.
I don't know doing 200 lbs but I'd like to do a heavy steel one at 30,000 rpm but I'd want to stand on a scale while I spin it. But I have no idea how to implement or get such a scale that can has an accuracy of only 1 or 2 grams.
my suggestion would be to turn the discs vertically by 90°, so when the horizontally and vertically centrifugal forces add up, the outer resulting force will be bigger than the inner. could you test that with your setup?
For every action there is a equal and opposite reaction. The center of rotating mass is near center of the machine when in operation, so when the opposing forces are applied, the opposite forces are also applied in the opposite direction. Δp1 = -Δp2
Does the magazine build also partially rely on the magnus effect?
No, there was no talk in the magazine article about the magnus effect. Keep in mind, the magazine article was just a speculative article, there was no build mentioned.
@@RimstarOrg Ah copy that. Thanks for the info and all the great content. Timeless gold my man.
The first thing I have noticed is that the mass of vinyl records is neglectable to the mass of the system. The second thing is the force necessary to move a large rotating/spinning mass should be much smaller, which leads to the idea to spin a huge mass around a flying object before making it fly. We expect it would take just a portion of energy used to lift the flying object without any rotating mass.
Well....looking forward to seeing you identify the real point rather than spinning the plastic records.
would using a system of specifically positioned gyrostats and dense fluids work to a more interesting extent?
I'm not really looking for a solution. This is just a gyroscopic precession video. The flying saucer thing was just for fun. It's not something I'm going to work on further. But thanks anyway.
I added the hinges so I can see the effect of the precession. As I said at the beginning of the video, the UFO thing doesn't really work. I did that stuff just for fun. But back when I experimented, I did arrange it so they would remain horizontal anyway, and as expected, there was no change in weight.
Maybe there was a change but your scale wasn’t accurate enough, I mean it’s super heavy equipment you have there and not much mass in the records. And powered by such small motors. We need answers!! Lol
The hinge is one of the contribution to losing its upward thrust, it should be placed vertical and spinning and I am not saying it will lift up
since it is using g-force it can produce well over it's weight in my theory of how it works , which I cannot explain in words , if the rpm is unlimited the pounds of force are I made something similar to this using a liquid pumped through tubing that is bent in these two directions and realized that it can be completely concealed and still produce thrust
Very nice design.
Good logic. @1:30, creating lift is possible in space.
Now I'm curious. Whatyousay?
I think with the right the materials and higher RPM, you can make a version of this that works to some extent.
What about the weight as the spinning disc precesses up? It raises up, so does the weight increases during that time?
This is some of that old school TH-cam good shit
those arent gyroscopes they are vinyl records. if you want to create antigravity the gyros must have more mass relative to the entire mass of the system
Umm if those two are spinning with the same amount of electricity in it with the horizontal movement. And a retractable hinge that will go up and down. I think this will work for me
No central shaft power is needed if the rotors are allowed to drop a small amount after spinning up. Only the rotors need power. The force of gravity will start precession, and the precession will cause an upward reaction force against gravity which can be controlled by rotor angular velocity. Of course, once the shaft reaches its upward stop the total force will equalize as you say, and create a couple against the inner walls of the craft. It is interesting to note, however, that the upward precession itself also causes a reverse direction precessional torque, slowing down the upward processional torque, but when this tries to slow and reverse the upward precession, gravity wins, and the upward precession continues. Laithwait's Law of Conservation of Momentum (he corrected Newton's Rule) states that linear and angular momentum are NOT conserved, but the SUM of the two are conserved. Thus angular momentum and linear momentum can be converted into one another. When an offset rotor is force precessed, the rotor slows down. Only part of this slowing down is due to bearing friction. Another part is loss of angular momentum due to conversion of it into linear momentum. Mass is transferred along the axis of rotation a distance according to and in direct relation to angular velocity. It is this mass transfer which begets linear force, which can be made to propell a flying saucer, but not in that manner. However, if the machine were designed so that the various gyro rotors of the craft could slide along their shafts some distance, and if this linear sliding back and forth of the rotors was timed and tuned to the overall cycle, and if the shafts were all angled downward by 10 degrees toward the perifery of the craft, it might work.
I like your idea of keeping that drill on with a tie strap.
It was interesting to see how one end went up!
It's amazing what you could do, as one man with limited funds. You simulated a "UFO" with gyroscopes and Blender animation on your computer. Imagine what the powerful organizations of the world could do and are doing in secret.
Peace to you.
It's a nice demo, even without the anti-gravity. :)
try putting together the flying saucer thing and build and ion lifter around it maybe it can fly
Your expirement may have worked if the mass of your spinning disks was equal to or greater than 2x the control arms holding those disks. Newtons law. Those records are probably 5 times lighter than the arms
Yup, I knew that before I built this, like I said at 1:10, "so ignoring reality..." I made this device for the fun of doing it. But you can cheat using something called stick-slip. You make something that sits on a surface and design your rotating parts such that in one direction you overcome the coefficient of friction between the device and the surface but in the other direction you don't. It even works in water. But it would never fly; it needs a medium.
Or in the beginning in the video would you be able to put two main layers then one would go one way and the bottom would go the other
have you ever tried to make a gyroscope that would show the rotation of the earth over the course of an hour or so?
Why did you add the hinges? As I understand it, you're suppose to keep the axis straight.
There should be a force that lift the arm up. See Gryo Precession pic in wiki. (Need to jiggle with the rotation direction, plane of force and precession a bit to see. But your experience is in accordance to physics. Good work!
If you make the gyroscopes heavier than the equipment thats powering it it will cause lift because at a certain point the same exact weight from the gyro is reversed example; key:gyro= g, equipment powering gyroscope = e g weighs 100 ibs e weighs 50 ibs if g was reversed the aircraft can lift 49.9 more pounds.
In theory, it's really very simple physics, and no reason not to work, like Eric Laithwaite tried to explain, and got "burned on the stake" for. It's more easy to explain with a drawing but I'll try with words anyway. I'm not a physicist and english is not my first language so bear with me.
It's easiest to understand if you start with considering the fact that gyroscopic or sentrifugal forces depend on speed. When only the gyroscope is spinning, the speed of the rim is the same all around the wheel, making the force equal in all directions, BUT when it starts moving, the speed through space ARE becoming greater either on the top or bottom, depending on the directions of the spin and movement of the rig, this SHOULD make the forces acting in one direction greater than the other. According to Newton and anyone else...
IOW: The movement of the whole contraption adds speed to the side(of the wheel) already moving in the same direction, and subtracts to the side (of the same wheel) that moves in the opposite direction. The net force then is not 0, but favourable to one direction - in this case up or down. How teachers and guys like you still advocate something else, like this is not science, is pretty strange, when I looked deep into this, I found that many major airspace companies having done research on this, all had their own rigs and patents for satellite movement etc. with similar setups. If you wanna make it really powerful, you'll need very high speeds and have very good bearings. Forget about wooden rigs, the ones in the patents are really heavy duty. I believe the principle has been known for ages, but now when we have better materials to work with, it should be possible to even make a toy out of it with ordinary quadcopter parts - f.ex. electric motors that spins up to 20.000rpm's, carbon fibre, etc. Still some things nobody will believe until they see it. It's incredible how much resistance you can meet in the scientific community especially if you show them something new, or something they had completely missed. Even experimental proof will induce more theoretic resistance than you can imagine, or what in my mind at least - would be reasonable.. almost like a conspiracy - by some clever fellows, perpetuated by the stupidity and stubborness of many others. Just read the whole story about the true genius Eric Laithwaite.
why would you zero your scales before testing? wouldn't that disable them unless your scales have a minus scale? (if you get mt drift)
Use 3 wheels give stability and more power,increase RPM exactly for lift mas.Add floating mass on the wheels, inertia and centrifugal force would be helpful .(),mass must be in center when it move down,uP perform better control. That make first electrically powered motor inertia.
Well, it certainly lifted the weight of the the record and the motor.
No, it didn't. Before turning it on, I put it on the scale and it showed the weight of the whole thing. Then I zeroed the scale (I say this at 1:46). That means that it subtracts the actual weight. When I ran it, the scale stayed at zero, meaning there was no change in weight.
I did lock the hinges a few years ago when I did the original tests. The result was a very steady zero on the scale the whole time. And yet sitting a single playing card on the wooden base of the device would cause a weight change during the test. There should be no weight change anyway since the upward force of the disks is produced by an equal downward force on the center shaft.
There would have been precession on the spinning gyro if you had the gyro fixed on an extension arm with the other end of the extension arm fixed on the free center of the " vertical shaft" without the drill being used of course.
IMPORTANT: This prototype works if the primary motor (the one that turns the two arms) is firm to the ground, if the lower part of the engine instead of resting on the ground was suspended it would turn on itself, and the two arms remain stationary, so I do not think will work
Weird to explain but for some reason I think everyone has been spinning these things the wrong way for it to lift. I got the theory from watching this video years ago now hear me out. If you spin the gyro up and precess it in the way it wants to go the gyro wants to go up but whatever it's attached to get a downward pressure. But if you spin it against the way it wants to precess the downward force would be on the gyro and the upward force on whatever it's attached to.
You have one gyro (record) spinning the wrong direction that is why it goes down not up like the other one. Try reversing the direction of this on and check for weight loss.
Very nice.. i wanted to make something like this. thanks for sharing. :)
But if it's unnoticeable then how do you know you're right?
Would be amazing you doing some research on the Allais effect on pendulums during eclipses...
There's still a lot to know about gravity. And for most eather scholars there's even a cover up of the real phenomena.
please, repeat the experiment blocking the lateral arms and using some disks a little but heavy. with a mobile base vertically. the machine could rise
Rafael Crespo There's no need to repeat it with any modifications. As you see in the video at 0:35, one end goes up while the other goes down. There are equal and opposite upward and downward forces. Though as I mention in the video at 1:49, I did do the test with the arms blocked laterally just for fun and got 0 weight change on the scale.
If the rpm is unlimited the amount of force coming from the thrust is.my point, can you imagine how efficient of a flying vehicle this would be and how strong it would be.if you had the idea's that pop into my head you'd probably be weirded out I'm just not because I'm used to it.
Meu país não está preparado para experimentar coisas grandes.
This was the starting place that I used to ultimately design and build a device that does exhibit significant lift. I simply had to discover the mechanism by which the gyroscopic effect is generated, and voila, several G's of lift produced... @InertialDrive
Dude, it works. Just spin one of the wheels, the one not going up, in the other direction. You're welcome.
3 dimmer switches for all 3 motors now that would be a bit interesting, especially if you had the center adjustable to lift up instead of holding it down.
I mean how did you think you were gonna get lift with no rpm?? the laws of lift still apply with gyros
Awesome!
I don't know how you had it built, but you might have ignored the counter momentum of the electric screwdriver.
:) There's a glass... the big plexiglass sheet I'm standing behind. That's gotta be nerdsign. :)
need 3 gyros,xyz control. the propulsion is when the gyros are stopping, respin and redirect,just keep missing the ground.meet u at the sea of tranquility, bring a picnic.john sear did one,2000mph! 2 seater?
I have idea also to make the anti gravity. But I need money to create it. I will have the additional on your works
Interesting, but precession reversal would prevent the device from generating lift.
This was supposedly a principle explained to Betty and Barney when they were taken aboard a craft in the 60's ....
That could very well have been what the magazine article was about back when I read it in the 1970s or early 80s. I recall hearing about the Betty and Barney story back then.
Now do this with super conducting ceramics super cold and maybe it would work it would be a really expensive experiment but supposedly a scientist spun a ceramic disc super cooled and lost weight!
Quality fun here. Plenty of room for scientific method.
And if it doesn't, it sure would look cool. :)
Great job. I can understand why you wanted to build and prove it ...now youve saved me 3 months :-)
great video,I guess you know by now,it has nothing to do with anti gravity,if only it was that easy.Thanks for posting.PS Someday we may be able to bend space time,my guess,10,000 years from now,that is if we survive as a species.
Look into levitation by sub zero superconductors.
It won't take 10,000 years.