Okay everyone, take a deep breath. Eric was a brilliant man and he was seeing the effects of the gyro operating in the ether. This understanding is what eluded him. It is so intriguing to see how close he came to truly understanding the nature of existence. I really wish he would have thought to start electrifying his gyroscopes! The fact that he was an electrical engineer makes you think he would have thought of this. So obviously he did not see the connection. Stand assured that others have stood on his shoulders and are operating such devices in deep dark programs of the military defense complex. Only time will place Eric in his right full place among the greats of science and innovation. God Bless him.
Yes this is a great connection. A system that generates electricity and turns that into gyroscopic movements that would work. Navigation would be difficult but IR has infinite range in a vacuum
In the particular year in question I was actually doing electronic design for reaction wheels for earth observation satelites, a brushless motor combined with a large rotating mass. They are called reaction *_wheels_* and not gyros because they physically move the spacecraft, in conjunction with momentum wheels to create an axis to turn on.
You tube at its best unfortunately showing once again that staying in England when you have a world beating idea will end in failure. I loved seeing the maglev trains in Shanghai and my wife travelled on them. Drove past a lovely tribute to Frank Whittle the other day in Farnborough, another who almost gave up when the British pounds stopped development. We need another propulsion system for when the oil runs out. David.
I’m not an engineer or a scientist. I am merely a journeyman wireman. I do enjoy learning more and more about science and engineering. I engineer things all the time on things that I need for myself. This man has an unbelievable way to explain things so simple anyone could understand. There’s no doubt that he was definitely on to something. Imho he was stepping on toes of scientist in the black project of the us. That’s probably why he got shot down and discouraged. He had no reason to feel letdown because he shunned by the aristocracy of the science community. Look at Tesla. He invented nearly everything we have today and he was discredited. I bet Eric and Tesla are talking and laughing today in great big lab in the sky!
The Greatness of Eric is his Enthusiasm to Try practical Ideas Einstein said Failure becomes the first Step to Brilliance the Maglev Trains in his concept Japan and USA has been Proved a fantastic leap for Mankind and environment friendly in Today's Travel more than 300 MPH of Silent Hum Travel ! Hats off To Eric and English Man who Tried Hard to do Good RIP
Great. Even his failures in gyros are a great font of research for those who didn't understand very well how a gyroscope work. Think how many people will no more be fooled?!
So ironic, that Laithwaite is remembered more this way . Miles apart from gyroscopes typecasting him, he wrote some very well balanced and researched books on engineering design particularly the process of product evolution.
I too have been working all my life with gyros. and looked at his work and acidentaly made it happen and developed a realy good way to do this but using gyro's and magnets on their axis as counterweight! and the linualar moter too. also using the same technology with aluminum, and copper band. I used three gyro's off tilted and wow it worked. using linear motors to turn the rim. I have a simple one now in my shop. and people are still puzzled how it worked. but it does. I can not patten it. I get blocked at every turn.
Prof. Lathwaite admitted not long before his death in 1997 that he had been completely wrong to claim gyroscopes defied Newton's laws. Blinded perhaps by his absolute conviction/infatuation with gyro propulsion, and sadly for the great man, a man I have admired all my life, was unable to move on even after his theory of gyro propulsion had been thoroughly disproved. Today gyro propulsion remains the domain of cranks and pseudoscience, championed by the same people who claim they have invented free energy and perpetual motion. However, Professor Lathwaite was and will remain one of my all-time heroes.
gyroscopic propulsion does not break any physical laws, at most you could say that those physical laws are not easy for people to apply to the various different geometries of these complex mechanical rotating and translating systems I for one view gyroscopic propulsion as a passionate non professional chess player views his love for playing chess he might not make money with it but he sure as hell enjoys it so I will keep inventing new technologies that pay me money, while on the side, as a personal project, I will continue to pursue these so called gyroscopic propulsion systems
@@VincenzoBarbato I had the great pleasure of meeting Professor Lathwaite on two occasions while working for the BBC in the mid-1990s. Though a great Engineer he was no Scientist, of which he would proudly proclaim himself. My second meeting, though I did not know it then, was shortly before his death. I had a more lengthy conversation then in which Laithwaite spoke philosophically about the long experimental road he had trudged virtually alone. He said took it as a challenge that practically every scientist rejected gyroscopic propulsion. But did admit his assertions that gyroscopes defied Newton's laws were totally wrong, and were at least partly due to his obstinance, but they perhaps "stretched them", I took that as a joke.
You apparently 'admired (him) all my life' yet did not take the time to watch this 29 min documentary where he admitted the very thing you claim he admitted not long before his death (if you watched this why didn't you simply acknowledge he admitted this fact during this very video which was well before his death). 24:00 quote: "gyroscopes behave absolutely in accordance with Newton's laws" We can now assume you are attempting to discredit his work; thanks for the cue you are a paid shill.
I remember Professor Lathwaite being interviewed by the BBC in I believe January of 1997, the interview was broadcast posthumously. I recorded the interview on a VHS which the tape was sadly lost some time ago during a house move. As you use the exact words he used in the interview namely "I was completely wrong to claim gyroscopes defied Newton's laws" when asked by Raymond Baxter. I was wondering/hoping if you might also have a copy of the interview that you could upload to UA-cam. I would be very grateful as professor Lathwaite is a hero of mine, and it was he who inspired me to be an engineer.
In reality (which I aim to prove), he was just not that great of a gyro inventor. The real genius here was Alex Jones who had a fully functioning machine, yet somehow, was ignored by science even though there's video evidence in this literal video. The narrator conveniently makes the viewer forget about the device, and the man, because it's "about Laithwaite", but it's still there, fully functioning. I call it the 'Alex Jones device'. I've made one myself (mine was pretty terrible I'll admit), but I've also helped "Carter tech" here on youtube build a version which worked pretty well. Check it out.
Se variar o tamanho das rodas ou das extremidades de contrapesos em relção ao eixo oscilando a inclinação do eixo de forma sincronizada terá alguma propulsão, pois rodas menores se inclinam com mais facilidade que quando maiores.
He needs to be honered for his work all types even today his work teachers better than anyone else from showing how electric act same way as water so you can visualise it is amazing and then in electromagnetics many i have accidentally come across on utube and found them fascinating
Spinning a particle so that its atom has a dipole moment relative to the Earth's charge may result in a gain or reduction in mass.. Ergo., Gravity is electro-gravity and it's a weak effect like the London force and not the same as the electromagnetic force which I would imagen has a huge influence on the organisation on the cosmos>> ref **The Electric Universe Model**
working in fabrication shops most of my life I noticed that weightless effect a time or two while using a drill to polish the inside of a brass drum....we were even showing our boss.. only we thought it was cool.. I guess we were too dumb to know it was impossible..
The Gyro man was affected by a life changing moment as a result of when he was an aircraft fitter, He was falling from a ladder while holding a still spinning flight gyro which prevented him injury.
This "sliding back", takes you exactly where you started. Even I understand that. If anything, gyroscopes are useful for staying at one place. Counterintuitive - yes. Complicated - no. And to go patent such thing...
What I don't get is why Laithwaite say that inertial propulsion can be an alternative for rockets in space travel. Is it me or do rockets actually work in space? I thought what made inertial propulsion so amazing was that it was a closed system that achieved propulsion whereas a rocket requires inertia outside of its operating system to achieve propulsion.
+Ben M you see a rocket really works because it is loosing mass--Action vs Reaction. Problem with Laithwaite is not that it does not move up, but that you have to rotate it to do so, hence in space must rotate against something else. In space total weightlessness causes that to run in the opposite direction. When weightless, when pushed against the other weightless, you get same action vs reaction and movement of each the same in both directions. Its like the stator with the body of the motor turning the opposite direction of the rotor, in space, because both rotor and stator with body are weightless. They push against each other to make rotation of both not just the rotor. This is why a motor not mounted down rolls when first turned on. It is gravity holding the stator and body that stops this since they weigh more than the rotor. If you notice on his chart recorder you see a downward spike then and upward. He is effectively pushing on the earth to make it process up a moment later.
@@lancewenner8467you were almost there by stating that in space, in a "weightless" environment (by which you actually mean a free fall environment) that you have no fixed reference of frame in respect to which you rotate but you're wrong in saying that you need gravity, as you still have gravity in a free fall environment, you mean you need a "non zero-g" environment right?
everything moves two ways from a point. to go forwards, something must go backwards. we see ourselves walk, see cheetahs run, see cars hurtle down dragstrips... we dont acknowledge the earth, universe, whatever, moving backwards the other way, however fractionally... but any alteration of momentum always tends to return that energy... you slam the brakes on, car hits a wall, turns a 90 degree corner... the mass has to react on something, make something go the other way... the drag car slams its breaks on. it slows down and the earth speeds up slightly... energy returned. it takes a corner at highspeed... the centripetal force is the inertia of the earth, the centrifugal the inertia of the car. as the earth tends to not move much, the car corners rather than the corner bounces away from the car... get in a bubble, free from any gravity acting in any particular direction. you have mass, inertia. rip part of the bubble off, and hurl it out the back... that bit of stuff has inertia, and by throwing it, you accelerate it. but you also accelerate yourself backwards and the resultant "backwards" force is the "thrust". any movement you make in this bubble requires that you somehow interact with the bubble and make it move in the opposite direction at a rate determined by inertia, friction, center of mass, etc... is there any way you can think of of moving that wont make the bubble also move? other than to throw part of yourself away that is not part of the bubble? but then, what happens if you grab hold of what you threw? back where you started... sigh. free from any losses, the amount of energy, acceleration, required to move away from each other is the exact same amount as taken to stop them and bring them back together... you stay still. maybe you can throw it, step to the side, and catch it off center? well, how do you "step aside" without throwing something the other way as well? sigh. use fuel, burn it, eject it... you go that way, exhaust gas go that way. the more you can throw out faster, the faster you can go, but you can never really go much faster than HALF the speed you can throw it at! at that point, you start throwing more and more out, for less and less acceleration... the limit is how fast you can eject the material out the back! it seems like a dead end, BUT! as veritasium shows with the propellor powered buggies traveling faster than the wind speed, there are ways to "bend" the rules of physics... to apply them another way. we just tend to be stupid chimps and wave our big sticks around instead... societal training? very few stop and think about what sticks are, for instance...
The energy put into the system in spinning up the gyroscope and also absorbing the energy when a spinning top is lifted is the released when left to fall sown and thus push the carriage forward. In other words energy is transfered as heat and potential gravitational potential energy when arraigned and released to show movement.
Seeing the gyro move forward reminds me of a backhoe reaching the bucket out, then using the bucket to pull you forward. I wonder if this isn't what's happening between the Earth and the flux lines...
the back hoe only pulls forward as its legs arent sunk into the ground and its mass prefers to remain "fixed" at the point of maximum friction, hopefully the bucket... whilst the rest of it trundles along. ideally, in operation, its legs are planted and the bucket moves... the thing is, the bucket moved out through the air with virtually no resistance... you dont see the air moving to fill the void, yet it does? but the earth shows a lot of resistance. you see the void it leaves behind... you gotta put it somewhere and it wants to fall back down to fill the void... it wouldnt work if it was all submerged in dirt and only dirt... theres two mediums. air, and earth. you dont see the fluid pumping in the lines, in the rams either...the hydraulic circuit...
I was thinking more or less in the terms of changing the centerpoint of its axis. If you could implant the bucket firmly into the earth with the aid of hydraulics you could pick up the tractor off the ground. So basically I was trying to give a visional concept where a nonvisional one exists...
@@steveo5295 i know. and all i am pointing out is that no matter what you do, to move one thing requires displacing another thing... no matter how seemingly inconsequential that movement is. and theres often things entirely neglected also moving... and things like to reach equilibrium. the backhoe digs dirt then the engine dies... too busy watching it dig dirt to check the fuel... and as fuel was consumed, so air moved into the tank... yet where did the fuel go? back into the air... just somewhere else. modified... energy extracted. circuit complete. sure, you can pick the backhoe up by its own hydraulics, given a good grip on the bucket... but how? the forces are transferred through linkages into the earth. to move backhoe requires it push against the earth... and the only thing preventing the earth from moving is its inertia... what happens if the backhoe is, iunno... moon sized? venus sized?
gyros do not disobey newton and do allow mass transfer. ive seen these devices , manned by 1 and they are either alien or classified, and operate on a differnt plane of existence in what you might call the astral or the ether or other dimensions etc. they certainly are one of many strnageand widely unkown things i am familiar with but do not yet fully understand. perhaps suspending the gyro by balloon would create adequate lift for the minimal forces of mass transfer (the conversion of centrifugal force to other directional forces depending on which gimbal is being manipulated)....could create motion on the forwards backwrds and sidewards planes with lift and drop being attenuated through a string or joint /s to a fixed outer gimbal or even more lijkely a pivot at one polar half of the outer gibal
I don't mind saying this man was highly motivated and intelligent! I also don't mind saying Newton "might even have shown signs of intelligence." But for Newton, that's the limits of credit I'll give him. Had you traveled back in time and told him you had traveled regularly in and airplane over 500 mph, or multiple times in a car daily over 75 mph and owned a machine that would do that, or told him people have flown to the moon and walked on the moon , Newton most likely would have laughed at you and shown you one of his scientific principles proving your error. Point being, you want to live in the past, well knock yourself out, there's a whole world paying "educators" to show them Newton's crap. Or you can be the next one to design and build the impossible machine and change the world. You can visit his grave, you can study his laws of limitations that are centuries old, you can let a dead man limit you and the world you live in, or you can choose to be that person who takes us from horse and buggie to the moon. You can be the one who defies all logic and brake every known barrier, or you can get a shovel and dig your way down to Newton and crawl in with him. Only you can make that choice. As for me, I choose the path no one wants to take because they chose the path of the least resistance.
I believe that Laithwaite holds Newton's laws as being correct but incomplete, in that they should include angular momentum so was seeking to modify Newton's laws but not usurp them. A ruff example would be: F = Mg -Mi A (where g= gravity, i=inertia). set 'i' to zero and you have the original formula, without the inclusion of inertia (e.g. angular momentum.)) This should account for Laithwaite being able to lift a 50 lb weight over his head. This is not anti-gravity this is gravity reduction for objects in motion and is certainly not an anti-gravity drive.
Sure wish I could have attended one of his lectures.... Love the thought processes of so-called eccentric thinkers. His detractors should hang their heads in shame. Despite their contentions, this man was obviously humble and open to being wrong. Wait until Elon Musk gets his hands on this....
THe angular momentum of a gyro only appears when its shaft is making contact with its bearing due to applied to directional force. Push a gyro one way and it precessses 90 degrees.
Galileo was opposed by the leading "intellectuals" of his time. They may have called him a moron. But really, they had not the ability to see outside of their box.
The Secret of Eric Laithwaite-Newton Misunderstanding Explained:Newton's shell theory (for a stationary sphere, say the earth) says that as we approach the center of the earth the value of g decreases to zero at the center. Now if the earth rotates around its axis, like a gyroscope, while on its way revolving around the sun, the earth experiences extra acceleration, directed at the center, due to centrifugal force of the spinning shells, exerting great pressure P=mg, that results in increase in temperature, that melts the center and press heavier elements like iron to collect at the center. Both eric and Newton are right-!!!
el min 7:55 cuales son los planos para hacer un pototipo y ver si es cierto, aunque ya fabrique uno basado solo en la idea que muestra el video y no funciono, alguien que me ayude en esto
+marioalonso0304 E-mail me at hembakat (a) hotmail.com and I can help you build one. Envíenme un mensaje al hembakat (a) hotmail.com y puedo ayudarle a construir en.
Sadly Laithwaite was mistaken about gyroscopes and admitted as such after his infamous lecture. He misunderstood that gyroscopes dont produce linear forces only torques. I made the same mistake. His other earlier ideas and inventions were brilliant.
"admitted" lol you, like most, are dense and have been heavily propagandized. This man was kept quiet because he knows too much and this knowledge must be suppressed to uphold the weight of the current narrative in the cult of science. Most of the science we have been taught is just nonsense to explain something we have no understanding of. Electricity and Electromagnetism is the perfect example of this.
@@gotchanoseLOL, he wasn't "kept quiet" they literally gave him a slot three days running on National TV and the world's oldest science program to talk about and demonstrate his ideas. Since then millions have watched extracts of these programs on the Internet. Presumably you typed that on a phone or some other sort of computer? How were the semiconductor devices in that developed without a good understanding of electricity? You might not understand electricity but many of us do - at least well enough to make a living designing products that work.
A man who can admit he doesn’t fully understand the concept that is ground breaking . Is a man I’d listen to before a cookie cutter conventional scientists 😅
Laithwaite, like many another British engineer took credit for things that he did not invent. The linear induction motor was invented by Wheatstone and a Maglev-type railway was already being demonstrated in Manchester when Laithwaite was six years old. He was taken to see it. Laithwaite pushed the UK government to back a basically unworkable Maglev system, largely because he had no mathematics other than dimensional analysis, preferred hand-waving argumentation and avoided detailed experimentation.
electrons are spinning and they keep balance with one type of attraction, proton and nutron makes them attract. but the electrons will be repeling them at a balanced point. so they will not collide. but I am working with electron spin. and proper wound coils.
@@ColinWatters Maybe they could if they use the idea presented at 23:00 if they were to send this machine into space, they could test it. We don't know for certain until we test it.
@@timspiker No need to test in space. Gyroscopes simply don't produce linear forces, only torques. If you put a gyroscope on the end of a helicopter rotor blade you can certainly get it to bend upwards but it is simply bending the blade not lifting the helicopter at all. Its pushing the helicopter down in order to bend the blade up. Its like bending a ruler in you hands and expecting it to lift you off the ground. Eric Laithwaite eventually agreed he was mistaken.
Eric was an electrical engineer with poor physics understanding. Nobody took him aside and explained the math to him. They were embarrassed for him because he didn't really understand gyroscopic precession and that to physicists is a lot like not being able to wipe yourself. He wasn't some magical hero who was persecuted, and his ignorance is not mere eccentricism. It's true that few people really grasp the math behind cross products and vector calculus, but that's a shame.. Every physicist understands why no propulsion system can be based on gyroscopes, even if few others beside mathematicians do. See at 19:50 on the video. You will find engineers and others not versed in higher math who will fall for such stuff, but actual physical scientists know better. Even after they explained it to him he still didn't get it, and persisted in ridiculous folly. And so what does the videographer do at the end but pretend he is some unsung hero toddling off on his merry way, when he has not one single thing to show for his ignorance that works. Ridiculous. THAT'S why they were embarrassed for him.
rstevewarmorycom Yeah, it's so embarrassing for him; this is basic classical mechanics for a first year physics undergraduate; yet he decided to question Newton's law of action=reaction.
To me Laithewaite is a hero and getting old is not for sissies. He developed maglev technology. A lot of people believe that everything concerning procession and gyroscopes was figured out in the 1800s. They also wanted to close down the patent office because there was no more things to invent. I guess you have to give the Jabberwock its due. The same thing happened to Tesla... Beware of the madness even on the mathematics side there is a mirage of balance and understanding in the path up ahead. Enjoy the paradoxes and try not to take it further than one's physiology can handle is my advice. It was a shame that maglev transportation was not developed more in England. Laithewaite and Tesla were beat down by the whims of the political powers and industry. Good luck with your innovations. There is another big change coming. - gravityalchemist.com
Prof Lathwaite was wrong to say that gyroscope defied newto's laws.....he himself later admitted that he was wrong nd gyroscope fully followed newtonian's mechanics.
Those that opposed him are an absolute disgrace to inventors. What makes this so bad is that since the launch of james webb so much of what "the establishment" state what the universe is has now been put in doubt. Shame on you for what you did to such a brilliant man.
the british only abandoned this man because they already knew everything about gravity from alien craft they recovered from the italian dictator Mussolini in 1933
The problem is every scientist, regardless of era, always thinks they're ahead of the curve, and that everyone who's not a scientist is a 'crank', as the program put it (a nutjob who doesn't know anything).
So, he still has yet to demonstrate anything that produces useful motion? The one demo of that other guy's invention seems to depend rather heavily on the guy stopping it before it tries to roll back the other way. Just demonstrate something that works with no fiddly funny business and people will be a lot more likely to believe it.
I looked in vain for a definite demonstration of anything that was as the professor represented it. You can of course make something weightless, according to a scale, for a period of time, by tossing it up. Here the issue gets confused by using the precession of gyroscopes to accomplish the same thing. Maybe there is something more useful in doing it this roundabout way, and if the professor finds it, good.
an old "Biker" ( motorcycle gang) friend of mine said that is why you don't ever see any BMW motorcycle choppers... he said once he did see a BMW chopper take to the air at a small bump in the road, the BMW was going fast , when it launch off the pavement...it began to twist roll on axes , like , over to the right side ... when it came back to the ground (at about 55 mph) it was on a 45° angle tilt to the side & crashed - because the BMW motor is a flat horizontal opposing twin "GYRO" ! That it what he told me !
Makes you think, doesn't it, after seeing a lot of gyro weirdness, whether you could accidentally induce craziness like that. Thinking in the other direction, I have heard of experimental gyro-stabilized race cars, ages ago, that were supposed to take curves faster. I never heard the explanation, and I don't know if they ever materialized, because I don't follow racing. Ford Motor Company had a "car of the future" on display, called the Gyron, which I saw in person at the Ford Rotunda (maybe 1962), that predicted cars with two wheels, like a motorcycle, that were held up by gyros. It was just what one would look like, it didn't actually function. I thought it was the coolest looking car I had ever seen, strictly from the rear. It looked like a delta wing jet from the back. I used to love spacey and futuristic looking automobiles, the stranger the better.
Kenneth Florek They used to have Buses in Sweden (or Switzerland..) that had instead of a gas or electric motor, a huge flywheel that was spun up at the start of the day (and spun up a bit whenever the bus goes down hill) and would drive the bus forward and up hills all day There are many ways of using stored energy. A tank of water on a hill is stored energy and there are a million things one could do with it! We are at the end of 200 year cycle of a 'dumbing down' of our educational system, we ironically know Far Less about Far More than ever before in history. Read the book: 'The Dumbest Generation' - A new Dark Age of Ignorance on the way (or is already here...)
Robert England A lot of interesting and provocative stuff in one short message. I recall that there was a major push (probably in the '70's) to revolutionize the flywheel, which would be light, instead of heavy, and be spun up tremendously fast, so it would store as much energy as a tank of gas. Theory and calculation predicted that a flywheel strong enough to survive, spun so fast, was not much beyond the predicted strength of the then new experimental ultra-strong fiber composites. Flywheels with anything like the speed required were never achieved , but very light flywheels capable of storing a lot more energy than flywheels ever could before were. If the education system may be dumbing down, there are still a hellava lot of ingenious people working around it, and probably a lot more ingenious people than ever before. 200 years of dumbing seems to be stretching a point, so I have to check what that book is about. Plus, I don't altogether agree that there was a Dark Age, or progress gap, in Europe between Rome and the Renaissance.
***** Since this is on my comment, I will comment. There is nothing in that article that sounds like it would work. Although a person, Otis Carr, built some kind of device, it never functioned, and that is empirical evidence, not just theory, that the obscure principle, whatever it was, was wrong. www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/02files/Otis_Carr.html The basic reason inventive and scientifically interested people go wrong in their thinking, when devising a radical energy source which uses magnetism or electric charge, is the mistaken impression that energy is being drawn from these in mechanisms like an electrical generator. The energy actually comes in by moving the armature. The energy source is in the movement of the armature, not the magnetic field. The energy that goes out as electricity, initially came from motion, not magnetism. A generator is a conversion mechanism, not an energy source. Energy is not drawn from magnetism in a generator.
Interesting professor Eric used the principal of the solenoid in different way ... naw... to trying to make energy in are planet by the opposite force is complicated and possible impossible because the formulas of newton and Albert Einstein... together...F=ma and ..E=mc2....l love the job of Eric, but... the only gyroscope and antigravity and whatever else in the universe is are planet, another words antigravity not need external force and energy
The pattern of ridicule, ignorance, and then eventual acceptance by the ''scientific'' establishment has been repeated over and over. It must have set science backwards by a hundred years or more. The most obvious example, is Plate Tectonics, which is now taught as standard, but the inventor was ridiculed, and ostracised, and regrettably never saw his discovery accepted in his lifetime. This behaviour is not confined to physics and mechanics, but is reciprocated in the medical field as well. For 150 years or more, all doctors were taught, ''Nothing can live in the stomach, because its too acid''! What is remarkable, is that all doctors actually believed it! Common sense should have told them that the stomach is a living organism, and that seems to get along quite happily with the acidity. Therefore, as human stomach cells are unlikely to be unique in the universe, there are probably other organisms that can tolerate the acidity. In fact there was. It was a nasty bacteria, that gave people stomach ulcers. It took one doctor, with a functioning brain, TEN YEARS to convince the ''medical profession'' of that fact. Meanwhile thousands, even millions of people were suffering and dying from it! At least Eric Laithwaite was able to prove his point, with Gyros, even if only to himself, before he died. .
The train idea at 5:30 definitely does work and since our governments rejected it, China has now got their hands on it and implemented it and has one of the most advanced trains in the world. The problem isn't that it doesn't work. It's that it's being rejected as this research eventually leads to zero point energy. Something the electrical industry and oil industry is heavily against as it would bankrupt them nearly overnight.
Faraday Edison et al we're not "ostracized you pompous_ The British are has-been narcissists. Gyro is Greek and pronounced "hero" as correctly applied in sub-sandwich shops. Thus Gyro, spelled 'Hero' in phony 'british history' invented a steam turbine that spun rapidly -the Gyro-scope. And E-gypt was known to the Greeks as the land that kicked-out ('e') the Hipsies ('Hibaru') aka 'Gypsies'
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #30 ДВА В ОДНОМ [Один человек]• Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nrXy15orKhY/mqdefault.jpg)
Okay everyone, take a deep breath. Eric was a brilliant man and he was seeing the effects of the gyro operating in the ether. This understanding is what eluded him. It is so intriguing to see how close he came to truly understanding the nature of existence. I really wish he would have thought to start electrifying his gyroscopes! The fact that he was an electrical engineer makes you think he would have thought of this. So obviously he did not see the connection. Stand assured that others have stood on his shoulders and are operating such devices in deep dark programs of the military defense complex. Only time will place Eric in his right full place among the greats of science and innovation. God Bless him.
Yes this is a great connection. A system that generates electricity and turns that into gyroscopic movements that would work. Navigation would be difficult but IR has infinite range in a vacuum
My thoughts exactly! Salvatore Piez.
In the particular year in question I was actually doing electronic design for reaction wheels for earth observation satelites, a brushless motor combined with a large rotating mass. They are called reaction *_wheels_* and not gyros because they physically move the spacecraft, in conjunction with momentum wheels to create an axis to turn on.
And (apart from the gyro years) Laithwaite had wrote some pretty decent books on engineering design and comparing the process with mother nature.
You tube at its best unfortunately showing once again that staying in England when you have a world beating idea will end in failure.
I loved seeing the maglev trains in Shanghai and my wife travelled on them.
Drove past a lovely tribute to Frank Whittle the other day in Farnborough, another who almost gave up when the British pounds stopped development.
We need another propulsion system for when the oil runs out.
David.
V ,,i 1:05 o z 1:09 ij😅i😅NVzz
Eric is a true hero
I’m not an engineer or a scientist. I am merely a journeyman wireman. I do enjoy learning more and more about science and engineering. I engineer things all the time on things that I need for myself. This man has an unbelievable way to explain things so simple anyone could understand. There’s no doubt that he was definitely on to something. Imho he was stepping on toes of scientist in the black project of the us. That’s probably why he got shot down and discouraged. He had no reason to feel letdown because he shunned by the aristocracy of the science community. Look at Tesla. He invented nearly everything we have today and he was discredited. I bet Eric and Tesla are talking and laughing today in great big lab in the sky!
A brilliant man, inventor and scientific engineer!!!!!!!
Another Nikola Tesla no doubt !
The Greatness of Eric is his Enthusiasm to Try practical Ideas Einstein said Failure becomes the first Step to Brilliance the Maglev Trains in his concept Japan and USA has been Proved a fantastic leap for Mankind and environment friendly in Today's Travel more than 300 MPH of Silent Hum Travel ! Hats off To Eric and English Man who Tried Hard to do Good RIP
Great. Even his failures in gyros are a great font of research for those who didn't understand very well how a gyroscope work. Think how many people will no more be fooled?!
@Noname Noname you don't know what you're talking about.
So ironic, that Laithwaite is remembered more this way . Miles apart from gyroscopes typecasting him, he wrote some very well balanced and researched books on engineering design particularly the process of product evolution.
I too have been working all my life with gyros. and looked at his work and acidentaly made it happen and developed a realy good way to do this but using gyro's and magnets on their axis as counterweight! and the linualar moter too. also using the same technology with aluminum, and copper band. I used three gyro's off tilted and wow it worked. using linear motors to turn the rim. I have a simple one now in my shop. and people are still puzzled how it worked. but it does. I can not patten it. I get blocked at every turn.
excellent stuff, I love Gyroscope's.
what a great man....
It's easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.
Nothing wrong with following something- you might go the wrong way but you learn. Without making mistakes we would never learn
I know exactly how and why all of this works. It's simple to understand once you realize the spin is the starting [oint for all the effects.
very nice example that everything is made of waves. Gyroscope properties tap into the fact that matter is made up of standing waves.
this sure is most certainly wrong
Funny how earlier in his career he said to beware of the Jabberwocky.
Lol
Prof. Lathwaite admitted not long before his death in 1997 that he had been completely wrong to claim gyroscopes defied Newton's laws. Blinded perhaps by his absolute conviction/infatuation with gyro propulsion, and sadly for the great man, a man I have admired all my life, was unable to move on even after his theory of gyro propulsion had been thoroughly disproved.
Today gyro propulsion remains the domain of cranks and pseudoscience, championed by the same people who claim they have invented free energy and perpetual motion. However, Professor Lathwaite was and will remain one of my all-time heroes.
gyroscopic propulsion does not break any physical laws, at most you could say that those physical laws are not easy for people to apply to the various different geometries of these complex mechanical rotating and translating systems
I for one view gyroscopic propulsion as a passionate non professional chess player views his love for playing chess
he might not make money with it but he sure as hell enjoys it
so I will keep inventing new technologies that pay me money, while on the side, as a personal project, I will continue to pursue these so called gyroscopic propulsion systems
@@VincenzoBarbato I had the great pleasure of meeting Professor Lathwaite on two occasions while working for the BBC in the mid-1990s. Though a great Engineer he was no Scientist, of which he would proudly proclaim himself.
My second meeting, though I did not know it then, was shortly before his death. I had a more lengthy conversation then in which Laithwaite spoke philosophically about the long experimental road he had trudged virtually alone.
He said took it as a challenge that practically every scientist rejected gyroscopic propulsion. But did admit his assertions that gyroscopes defied Newton's laws were totally wrong, and were at least partly due to his obstinance, but they perhaps "stretched them", I took that as a joke.
You apparently 'admired (him) all my life' yet did not take the time to watch this 29 min documentary where he admitted the very thing you claim he admitted not long before his death (if you watched this why didn't you simply acknowledge he admitted this fact during this very video which was well before his death).
24:00 quote: "gyroscopes behave absolutely in accordance with Newton's laws"
We can now assume you are attempting to discredit his work; thanks for the cue you are a paid shill.
I remember Professor Lathwaite being interviewed by the BBC in I believe January of 1997, the interview was broadcast posthumously. I recorded the interview on a VHS which the tape was sadly lost some time ago during a house move. As you use the exact words he used in the interview namely "I was completely wrong to claim gyroscopes defied Newton's laws" when asked by Raymond Baxter. I was wondering/hoping if you might also have a copy of the interview that you could upload to UA-cam. I would be very grateful as professor Lathwaite is a hero of mine, and it was he who inspired me to be an engineer.
In reality (which I aim to prove), he was just not that great of a gyro inventor. The real genius here was Alex Jones who had a fully functioning machine, yet somehow, was ignored by science even though there's video evidence in this literal video.
The narrator conveniently makes the viewer forget about the device, and the man, because it's "about Laithwaite", but it's still there, fully functioning. I call it the 'Alex Jones device'.
I've made one myself (mine was pretty terrible I'll admit), but I've also helped "Carter tech" here on youtube build a version which worked pretty well. Check it out.
Se variar o tamanho das rodas ou das extremidades de contrapesos em relção ao eixo oscilando a inclinação do eixo de forma sincronizada terá alguma propulsão, pois rodas menores se inclinam com mais facilidade que quando maiores.
He needs to be honered for his work all types even today his work teachers better than anyone else from showing how electric act same way as water so you can visualise it is amazing and then in electromagnetics many i have accidentally come across on utube and found them fascinating
Spinning a particle so that its atom has a dipole moment relative to the Earth's charge may result in a gain or reduction in mass.. Ergo., Gravity is electro-gravity and it's a weak effect like the London force and not the same as the electromagnetic force which I would imagen has a huge influence on the organisation on the cosmos>> ref **The Electric Universe Model**
working in fabrication shops most of my life I noticed that weightless effect a time or two while using a drill to polish the inside of a brass drum....we were even showing our boss.. only we thought it was cool.. I guess we were too dumb to know it was impossible..
The Gyro man was affected by a life changing moment as a result of when he was an aircraft fitter, He was falling from a ladder while holding a still spinning flight gyro which prevented him injury.
This "sliding back", takes you exactly where you started. Even I understand that. If anything, gyroscopes are useful for staying at one place. Counterintuitive - yes. Complicated - no. And to go patent such thing...
What I don't get is why Laithwaite say that inertial propulsion can be an alternative for rockets in space travel.
Is it me or do rockets actually work in space? I thought what made inertial propulsion so amazing was that it was a closed system that achieved propulsion whereas a rocket requires inertia outside of its operating system to achieve propulsion.
+Ben M yes this sort of propulsion could be used in an enclosed system , the same works for gyros in a box, they still exhibit their effects.
+Ben M you see a rocket really works because it is loosing mass--Action vs Reaction. Problem with Laithwaite is not that it does not move up, but that you have to rotate it to do so, hence in space must rotate against something else. In space total weightlessness causes that to run in the opposite direction. When weightless, when pushed against the other weightless, you get same action vs reaction and movement of each the same in both directions. Its like the stator with the body of the motor turning the opposite direction of the rotor, in space, because both rotor and stator with body are weightless. They push against each other to make rotation of both not just the rotor. This is why a motor not mounted down rolls when first turned on. It is gravity holding the stator and body that stops this since they weigh more than the rotor. If you notice on his chart recorder you see a downward spike then and upward. He is effectively pushing on the earth to make it process up a moment later.
+Lance Wenner Excellent point
@@lancewenner8467you were almost there by stating that in space, in a "weightless" environment (by which you actually mean a free fall environment) that you have no fixed reference of frame in respect to which you rotate
but you're wrong in saying that you need gravity, as you still have gravity in a free fall environment, you mean you need a "non zero-g" environment right?
everything moves two ways from a point.
to go forwards, something must go backwards.
we see ourselves walk, see cheetahs run, see cars hurtle down dragstrips... we dont acknowledge the earth, universe, whatever, moving backwards the other way, however fractionally...
but any alteration of momentum always tends to return that energy...
you slam the brakes on, car hits a wall, turns a 90 degree corner... the mass has to react on something, make something go the other way...
the drag car slams its breaks on. it slows down and the earth speeds up slightly... energy returned.
it takes a corner at highspeed... the centripetal force is the inertia of the earth, the centrifugal the inertia of the car. as the earth tends to not move much, the car corners rather than the corner bounces away from the car...
get in a bubble, free from any gravity acting in any particular direction. you have mass, inertia.
rip part of the bubble off, and hurl it out the back... that bit of stuff has inertia, and by throwing it, you accelerate it. but you also accelerate yourself backwards and the resultant "backwards" force is the "thrust".
any movement you make in this bubble requires that you somehow interact with the bubble and make it move in the opposite direction at a rate determined by inertia, friction, center of mass, etc... is there any way you can think of of moving that wont make the bubble also move?
other than to throw part of yourself away that is not part of the bubble?
but then, what happens if you grab hold of what you threw?
back where you started... sigh. free from any losses, the amount of energy, acceleration, required to move away from each other is the exact same amount as taken to stop them and bring them back together... you stay still.
maybe you can throw it, step to the side, and catch it off center?
well, how do you "step aside" without throwing something the other way as well?
sigh.
use fuel, burn it, eject it... you go that way, exhaust gas go that way. the more you can throw out faster, the faster you can go, but you can never really go much faster than HALF the speed you can throw it at! at that point, you start throwing more and more out, for less and less acceleration... the limit is how fast you can eject the material out the back!
it seems like a dead end, BUT!
as veritasium shows with the propellor powered buggies traveling faster than the wind speed, there are ways to "bend" the rules of physics... to apply them another way.
we just tend to be stupid chimps and wave our big sticks around instead... societal training? very few stop and think about what sticks are, for instance...
The energy put into the system in spinning up the gyroscope and also absorbing the energy when a spinning top is lifted is the released when left to fall sown and thus push the carriage forward. In other words energy is transfered as heat and potential gravitational potential energy when arraigned and released to show movement.
Rod Young i think its the tranducer on malucer that will cause the reducer and cause lift
Videos that mix real stuff with fiction or impossible things so to "demostrate" it is also real.
Seeing the gyro move forward reminds me of a backhoe reaching the bucket out, then using the bucket to pull you forward. I wonder if this isn't what's happening between the Earth and the flux lines...
the back hoe only pulls forward as its legs arent sunk into the ground and its mass prefers to remain "fixed" at the point of maximum friction, hopefully the bucket... whilst the rest of it trundles along. ideally, in operation, its legs are planted and the bucket moves...
the thing is, the bucket moved out through the air with virtually no resistance... you dont see the air moving to fill the void, yet it does?
but the earth shows a lot of resistance. you see the void it leaves behind...
you gotta put it somewhere and it wants to fall back down to fill the void...
it wouldnt work if it was all submerged in dirt and only dirt... theres two mediums. air, and earth.
you dont see the fluid pumping in the lines, in the rams either...the hydraulic circuit...
I was thinking more or less in the terms of changing the centerpoint of its axis. If you could implant the bucket firmly into the earth with the aid of hydraulics you could pick up the tractor off the ground.
So basically I was trying to give a visional concept where a nonvisional one exists...
@@steveo5295 i know. and all i am pointing out is that no matter what you do, to move one thing requires displacing another thing... no matter how seemingly inconsequential that movement is. and theres often things entirely neglected also moving... and things like to reach equilibrium.
the backhoe digs dirt then the engine dies... too busy watching it dig dirt to check the fuel... and as fuel was consumed, so air moved into the tank... yet where did the fuel go?
back into the air... just somewhere else. modified... energy extracted. circuit complete.
sure, you can pick the backhoe up by its own hydraulics, given a good grip on the bucket... but how? the forces are transferred through linkages into the earth. to move backhoe requires it push against the earth... and the only thing preventing the earth from moving is its inertia...
what happens if the backhoe is, iunno... moon sized? venus sized?
He moves the gyroscope in the opposite direction its wheel spins. If the wheel spins clockwise, apply a counter-clockwise motion to the frame. tadahh!
gyros do not disobey newton and do allow mass transfer. ive seen these devices , manned by 1 and they are either alien or classified, and operate on a differnt plane of existence in what you might call the astral or the ether or other dimensions etc. they certainly are one of many strnageand widely unkown things i am familiar with but do not yet fully understand. perhaps suspending the gyro by balloon would create adequate lift for the minimal forces of mass transfer (the conversion of centrifugal force to other directional forces depending on which gimbal is being manipulated)....could create motion on the forwards backwrds and sidewards planes with lift and drop being attenuated through a string or joint /s to a fixed outer gimbal or even more lijkely a pivot at one polar half of the outer gibal
Why not apply same principle to lightening?
I don't mind saying this man was highly motivated and intelligent!
I also don't mind saying Newton "might even have shown signs of intelligence."
But for Newton, that's the limits of credit I'll give him. Had you traveled back in time and told him you had traveled regularly in and airplane over 500 mph, or multiple times in a car daily over 75 mph and owned a machine that would do that, or told him people have flown to the moon and walked on the moon , Newton most likely would have laughed at you and shown you one of his scientific principles proving your error.
Point being, you want to live in the past, well knock yourself out, there's a whole world paying "educators" to show them Newton's crap. Or you can be the next one to design and build the impossible machine and change the world. You can visit his grave, you can study his laws of limitations that are centuries old, you can let a dead man limit you and the world you live in, or you can choose to be that person who takes us from horse and buggie to the moon. You can be the one who defies all logic and brake every known barrier, or you can get a shovel and dig your way down to Newton and crawl in with him.
Only you can make that choice.
As for me, I choose the path no one wants to take because they chose the path of the least resistance.
Can it be built out of Lego?
No you will be ostracised
The Way to Understand the Wheel is to Dissect it. Cut it into Spokes and watch one Spoke move.
I believe that Laithwaite holds Newton's laws as being correct but incomplete, in that they should include angular momentum so was seeking to modify Newton's laws but not usurp them. A ruff example would be: F = Mg -Mi A (where g= gravity, i=inertia). set 'i' to zero and you have the original formula, without the inclusion of inertia (e.g. angular momentum.)) This should account for Laithwaite being able to lift a 50 lb weight over his head. This is not anti-gravity this is gravity reduction for objects in motion and is certainly not an anti-gravity drive.
Sure wish I could have attended one of his lectures.... Love the thought processes of so-called eccentric thinkers. His detractors should hang their heads in shame. Despite their contentions, this man was obviously humble and open to being wrong. Wait until Elon Musk gets his hands on this....
THe angular momentum of a gyro only appears when its shaft is making contact with its bearing due to applied to directional force.
Push a gyro one way and it precessses 90 degrees.
The elephant in the room is that nothing worked or was explained .
Galileo was opposed by the leading "intellectuals" of his time. They may have called him a moron. But really, they had not the ability to see outside of their box.
Need video of gyroscooe on the ISS
The Secret of Eric Laithwaite-Newton Misunderstanding Explained:Newton's shell theory (for a stationary sphere, say the earth) says that as we approach the center of the earth the value of g decreases to zero at the center.
Now if the earth rotates around its axis, like a gyroscope, while on its way revolving around the sun, the earth experiences extra acceleration, directed at the center, due to centrifugal force of the spinning shells, exerting great pressure P=mg, that results in increase in temperature, that melts the center and press heavier elements like iron to collect at the center.
Both eric and Newton are right-!!!
el min 7:55 cuales son los planos para hacer un pototipo y ver si es cierto, aunque ya fabrique uno basado solo en la idea que muestra el video y no funciono, alguien que me ayude en esto
+marioalonso0304 E-mail me at hembakat (a) hotmail.com and I can help you build one. Envíenme un mensaje al hembakat (a) hotmail.com y puedo ayudarle a construir en.
ANOTHER GREAT BRITISH INVENTOR. THANKS BBC.
Like today's doctors!
Sadly Laithwaite was mistaken about gyroscopes and admitted as such after his infamous lecture. He misunderstood that gyroscopes dont produce linear forces only torques. I made the same mistake. His other earlier ideas and inventions were brilliant.
You are who miss understand him. Simply as that..
@@tamastokai1477 ua-cam.com/video/tLMpdBjA2SU/v-deo.htmlsi=IukoluS1lM_5SND3
"admitted" lol you, like most, are dense and have been heavily propagandized. This man was kept quiet because he knows too much and this knowledge must be suppressed to uphold the weight of the current narrative in the cult of science. Most of the science we have been taught is just nonsense to explain something we have no understanding of. Electricity and Electromagnetism is the perfect example of this.
@@gotchanoseLOL, he wasn't "kept quiet" they literally gave him a slot three days running on National TV and the world's oldest science program to talk about and demonstrate his ideas. Since then millions have watched extracts of these programs on the Internet.
Presumably you typed that on a phone or some other sort of computer? How were the semiconductor devices in that developed without a good understanding of electricity? You might not understand electricity but many of us do - at least well enough to make a living designing products that work.
@9:00 why has none checked his invention yet ? Also, he's named Alex Jones... you can't make that up.
A man who can admit he doesn’t fully understand the concept that is ground breaking . Is a man I’d listen to before a cookie cutter conventional scientists 😅
Instead of glorifying professor Eric Lathwaite, please show what his invention is.
Gyroscopic Dynamics, Gyro-Propeller
Laithwaite, like many another British engineer took credit for things that he did not invent. The linear induction motor was invented by Wheatstone and a Maglev-type railway was already being demonstrated in Manchester when Laithwaite was six years old. He was taken to see it. Laithwaite pushed the UK government to back a basically unworkable Maglev system, largely because he had no mathematics other than dimensional analysis, preferred hand-waving argumentation and avoided detailed experimentation.
Deipatrous really? I think his skill was getting media attention
I mean, the inventor worth mentioning here was Alex Jones, lol.
mass can be transferred . like electricity
Big Bear sent me
Why does it take 20 years to make a meccano model?
Well for one both Eric and Alex Jones are both dead now. The ones that need to do the experiments is us.
Ree1981
Alex Jones is dead?
Lol not that Alex Jones, the inventor who inspired Laithewaite back in the 90's. He's just a normal person.
electrons are spinning and they keep balance with one type of attraction, proton and nutron makes them attract. but the electrons will be repeling them at a balanced point. so they will not collide. but I am working with electron spin. and proper wound coils.
We have the maglev train prototype in Peterborough
I mean, he was on to something.. They infact use gyroscopes today in satellites to remotely maneuver them without the need for chemical rockets.
They only use gyroscopes to rotate the satellite, they don't (can't) use gyroscopes to provide linear motion.
@@ColinWatters Maybe they could if they use the idea presented at 23:00 if they were to send this machine into space, they could test it. We don't know for certain until we test it.
@@timspiker No need to test in space. Gyroscopes simply don't produce linear forces, only torques. If you put a gyroscope on the end of a helicopter rotor blade you can certainly get it to bend upwards but it is simply bending the blade not lifting the helicopter at all. Its pushing the helicopter down in order to bend the blade up. Its like bending a ruler in you hands and expecting it to lift you off the ground. Eric Laithwaite eventually agreed he was mistaken.
Eric was an electrical engineer with poor physics understanding. Nobody took him aside and explained the math to him. They were embarrassed for him because he didn't really understand gyroscopic precession and that to physicists is a lot like not being able to wipe yourself. He wasn't some magical hero who was persecuted, and his ignorance is not mere eccentricism. It's true that few people really grasp the math behind cross products and vector calculus, but that's a shame.. Every physicist understands why no propulsion system can be based on gyroscopes, even if few others beside mathematicians do. See at 19:50 on the video. You will find engineers and others not versed in higher math who will fall for such stuff, but actual physical scientists know better. Even after they explained it to him he still didn't get it, and persisted in ridiculous folly. And so what does the videographer do at the end but pretend he is some unsung hero toddling off on his merry way, when he has not one single thing to show for his ignorance that works. Ridiculous. THAT'S why they were embarrassed for him.
rstevewarmorycom Yeah, it's so embarrassing for him; this is basic classical mechanics for a first year physics undergraduate; yet he decided to question Newton's law of action=reaction.
***** How do you mean?
To me Laithewaite is a hero and getting old is not for sissies. He developed maglev technology. A lot of people believe that everything concerning procession and gyroscopes was figured out in the 1800s. They also wanted to close down the patent office because there was no more things to invent. I guess you have to give the Jabberwock its due. The same thing happened to Tesla... Beware of the madness even on the mathematics side there is a mirage of balance and understanding in the path up ahead. Enjoy the paradoxes and try not to take it further than one's physiology can handle is my advice. It was a shame that maglev transportation was not developed more in England. Laithewaite and Tesla were beat down by the whims of the political powers and industry. Good luck with your innovations. There is another big change coming. - gravityalchemist.com
Purest nonsense.
So how did he lift a spinning 50lb weight?
Prof Lathwaite was wrong to say that gyroscope defied newto's laws.....he himself later admitted that he was wrong nd gyroscope fully followed newtonian's mechanics.
Agree. But it even in that way, he invented the maglev.
Those that opposed him are an absolute disgrace to inventors. What makes this so bad is that since the launch of james webb so much of what "the establishment" state what the universe is has now been put in doubt. Shame on you for what you did to such a brilliant man.
the british only abandoned this man because they already knew everything about gravity from alien craft they recovered from the italian dictator Mussolini in 1933
The problem is every scientist, regardless of era, always thinks they're ahead of the curve, and that everyone who's not a scientist is a 'crank', as the program put it (a nutjob who doesn't know anything).
‘Gyro propulsion’
So no misconception there.
Dead on paper.
Yet UFOs were seen spinning from witnesses, and this was his downfall, he was getting too close to showing how to make UFOs real
So, he still has yet to demonstrate anything that produces useful motion? The one demo of that other guy's invention seems to depend rather heavily on the guy stopping it before it tries to roll back the other way. Just demonstrate something that works with no fiddly funny business and people will be a lot more likely to believe it.
I looked in vain for a definite demonstration of anything that was as the professor represented it. You can of course make something weightless, according to a scale, for a period of time, by tossing it up. Here the issue gets confused by using the precession of gyroscopes to accomplish the same thing. Maybe there is something more useful in doing it this roundabout way, and if the professor finds it, good.
an old "Biker" ( motorcycle gang) friend of mine said that is why you don't ever see any BMW motorcycle choppers... he said once he did see a BMW chopper take to the air at a small bump in the road, the BMW was going fast , when it launch off the pavement...it began to twist roll on axes , like , over to the right side ... when it came back to the ground (at about 55 mph) it was on a 45° angle tilt to the side & crashed - because the BMW motor is a flat horizontal opposing twin "GYRO" ! That it what he told me !
Makes you think, doesn't it, after seeing a lot of gyro weirdness, whether you could accidentally induce craziness like that. Thinking in the other direction, I have heard of experimental gyro-stabilized race cars, ages ago, that were supposed to take curves faster. I never heard the explanation, and I don't know if they ever materialized, because I don't follow racing.
Ford Motor Company had a "car of the future" on display, called the Gyron, which I saw in person at the Ford Rotunda (maybe 1962), that predicted cars with two wheels, like a motorcycle, that were held up by gyros. It was just what one would look like, it didn't actually function. I thought it was the coolest looking car I had ever seen, strictly from the rear. It looked like a delta wing jet from the back. I used to love spacey and futuristic looking automobiles, the stranger the better.
Kenneth Florek They used to have Buses in Sweden (or Switzerland..) that had instead of a gas or electric motor, a huge flywheel that was spun up at the start of the day (and spun up a bit whenever the bus goes down hill) and would drive the bus forward and up hills all day There are many ways of using stored energy. A tank of water on a hill is stored energy and there are a million things one could do with it! We are at the end of 200 year cycle of a 'dumbing down' of our educational system, we ironically know Far Less about Far More than ever before in history. Read the book:
'The Dumbest Generation' - A new Dark Age of Ignorance on the way (or is already here...)
Robert England A lot of interesting and provocative stuff in one short message.
I recall that there was a major push (probably in the '70's) to revolutionize the flywheel, which would be light, instead of heavy, and be spun up tremendously fast, so it would store as much energy as a tank of gas. Theory and calculation predicted that a flywheel strong enough to survive, spun so fast, was not much beyond the predicted strength of the then new experimental ultra-strong fiber composites. Flywheels with anything like the speed required were never achieved , but very light flywheels capable of storing a lot more energy than flywheels ever could before were.
If the education system may be dumbing down, there are still a hellava lot of ingenious people working around it, and probably a lot more ingenious people than ever before. 200 years of dumbing seems to be stretching a point, so I have to check what that book is about. Plus, I don't altogether agree that there was a Dark Age, or progress gap, in Europe between Rome and the Renaissance.
*****
Since this is on my comment, I will comment. There is nothing in that article that sounds like it would work. Although a person, Otis Carr, built some kind of device, it never functioned, and that is empirical evidence, not just theory, that the obscure principle, whatever it was, was wrong.
www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/02files/Otis_Carr.html
The basic reason inventive and scientifically interested people go wrong in their thinking, when devising a radical energy source which uses magnetism or electric charge, is the mistaken impression that energy is being drawn from these in mechanisms like an electrical generator. The energy actually comes in by moving the armature. The energy source is in the movement of the armature, not the magnetic field. The energy that goes out as electricity, initially came from motion, not magnetism. A generator is a conversion mechanism, not an energy source. Energy is not drawn from magnetism in a generator.
He is way ahead of his time, maybe he should be working on flying saucer?
👍
Sounds like they sold his idea and left him in shambles the grass is greener where you water it!!
Interesting professor Eric used the principal of the solenoid in different way ... naw... to trying to make energy in are planet by the opposite force is complicated and possible impossible because the formulas of newton and Albert Einstein... together...F=ma and ..E=mc2....l love the job of Eric, but... the only gyroscope and antigravity and whatever else in the universe is are planet, another words antigravity not need external force and energy
newton and einstein are both crackpot, cult of science shills. Nothing brilliant about either.
Crackpot
The pattern of ridicule, ignorance, and then eventual acceptance by the ''scientific'' establishment has been repeated over and over.
It must have set science backwards by a hundred years or more.
The most obvious example, is Plate Tectonics, which is now taught as standard, but the inventor was ridiculed, and ostracised, and regrettably never saw his discovery accepted in his lifetime.
This behaviour is not confined to physics and mechanics, but is reciprocated in the medical field as well.
For 150 years or more, all doctors were taught, ''Nothing can live in the stomach, because its too acid''!
What is remarkable, is that all doctors actually believed it!
Common sense should have told them that the stomach is a living organism, and that seems to get along quite happily with the acidity.
Therefore, as human stomach cells are unlikely to be unique in the universe, there are probably other organisms that can tolerate the acidity.
In fact there was.
It was a nasty bacteria, that gave people stomach ulcers.
It took one doctor, with a functioning brain, TEN YEARS to convince the ''medical profession'' of that fact.
Meanwhile thousands, even millions of people were suffering and dying from it!
At least Eric Laithwaite was able to prove his point, with Gyros, even if only to himself, before he died.
.
A sincere ex-crackpot, who found his way back to the light of knowledge by seeking the guidance of experts in the field of mechanical dynamics.
The difference between a genius and an idiot comes from the proof. He never managed to get anything to work.... so what's the rational conclusion?
The train idea at 5:30 definitely does work and since our governments rejected it, China has now got their hands on it and implemented it and has one of the most advanced trains in the world.
The problem isn't that it doesn't work. It's that it's being rejected as this research eventually leads to zero point energy. Something the electrical industry and oil industry is heavily against as it would bankrupt them nearly overnight.
Faraday Edison et al we're not "ostracized you pompous_ The British are has-been narcissists.
Gyro is Greek and pronounced "hero" as correctly applied in sub-sandwich shops.
Thus Gyro, spelled 'Hero' in phony 'british history' invented a steam turbine that spun rapidly -the Gyro-scope.
And E-gypt was known to the Greeks as the land that kicked-out ('e') the Hipsies ('Hibaru') aka 'Gypsies'