Yes, I am working on the presentation, but the message is what I am trying to emphasise. I made my first video in Nov so this has been fun learning about video production. Any suggestions to make them more entertaining?
@@BobtheScienceGuy Honestly the only thing I could think of is the typical youtuber starter kit which includes an intro, which you kind of already have, maybe some fitting background music, perhaps some witty editing of back and forth between flerf claims and your debunking too them. Again, this youtube channel is only starting out and it's already amazing based on content alone. A lot of the production stuff is quite superficial and really is only stuff to do with lighting, audio and/or setting up a nice background shot. Honestly not sure but just some simple add ons
@@BobtheScienceGuy Just so you know it's really freaking good as is and I really really do enjoy your videos. The simplicity of them is what gives your channel its youtube independent charm which a lot viewers are trying to find these days. The only thing I would say for certain that could be improved is the audio quality and thats it.
The other stuff I said before was just nonsense I was spouting trying to give advice I don't even think I'm in the position to give because I was just surprised you replied.
@@BobtheScienceGuy Indeed, that is why it's so pleasant. I'm just tired of flat earth and enjoy a change of topic and style. It inspires me to brush up on some knowledge try to come up with ideas to make my own videos. I would like to make a sextant without CAD and a 3d printer. At the moment I'm stuck with the geometric construction of the degree scale. Using compass and straight edge construction I can make a triangle as a starting point. But how to exactly fraction the rotation to get 120 more triangles eludes me.
You refer to your right hand with your class ring but my brain keeps interpreting it as your left hand because your image is mirrored. Still, great video as usual Bob. Production quality is top notch!
One dislike..... by a fleffer that doesn't understand physics...... I have an associate degree in electrical engineering technology for Penn State. I had 2 semesters of physics, mechanics and then light. Plus A.C. electricity is all vectors. Physics was probably my toughest course of study,but one of my favorites, it's not for the feeble minded! Thanks Bob for bringing physics to everyone!
I once gave my young nieces a demonstration of a gyroscope using a bicycle wheel, spinning it and supporting one end of the axle on a finger. Unfortunately I had not allowed for the amount that such a spinning wheel turns at 90 degrees to its axis of rotation, it twisted off my finger, landed on the coffee table, flying across it scattering everything left right and centre to much hilarity.
For those who are wanting a simpler practical example, imagine this: Imagine you have a ball on a string swinging around a central point (like swingball). Changing just the axis of the centre point does not not change the ball path as it rotates. This hopefully will be obvious due the the way there is no force acting on the ball simply by changing the axis of the centre. Then replace the string with a rigid bar, which is fixed securely to the ball and the centre. It will rotate around the centre just as it did with the string. Now imagine tilting the centre axis, and try to imagine what the ball would be experiencing in terms of forces. The ball wants to continue in its circular motion, so when you tilt the axis, you are changing the direction of it's path, and you will feel resistance while trying to change that angle. It's important to realise that the resistance occurs WHILE changing the axis. A gyro is a solid disc, so it is a continual "ball on the stick" at all places and at all times.
Maybe even simpler as also maybe more effective, since you can feel the forces yourself. Take out the frontwheel of your bike, hold the axle with both hands, one left, one right, have someone spin the wheel. Start slow, note that it is still easy to change the angle of the axle. The faster the wheel spins, the more difficult it is to change that angle. Note, that it is still very easy to move the wheel along it's axle without changing the angle, but as soon as you try to change the angle, you will feel the force counteracting. Basically what he's explaining from 5:15 ish onwards, but maybe easier to understand when you actually can feel it and not only see it being explained on a monitor.
I wonder if it's because they don't understand that the gyroscope is showing its own movement relative to space, that they think their explanation is satisfactory. Or it could be because they know their followers are too thick to see the obvious problem of them being totally unable to demonstrate the magical force they are claiming exists.
@@George89999 It would have to be a "vortex" centred over the top of the gyro for the instrument to always show the same speed of deviation wherever it was located. Otherwise it would be like the pendulum where its rate of deviation depended on its latitude.
@@grahvis Oh, I know that their explanation is ludicrous on every level. It's hysterically funny watching their inane attempts to rationalize their own evidence against the flat-earth.
Buckminster Fuller once described precession to some government officials by using the analogy of a spinning man with an Olympic throwing hammer in each hand. If you gave one of the hammers a bump upward it would gain momentum in that direction. It would also keep orbiting the spinning man, so the upward deflection would follow the orbit of the hammer. Of course, a rigid flywheel is a little different, but I thought it was a nice way to show the effect of force on a gyro is in a translated direction. The very best way to demonstrate gyroscopic effects is in a departure stall drill with the right rudder on the floor. Just eat the last few inches of elevator in one quick pull and maintain full throttle and full right rudder. Great way to demonstrate the prop's gyroscopic attributes, reversed p-factor from a negative angle of attack (the real kind of angle of attack), and tell if breakfast agreed with you, all at the same time.
Great video. I've always wondered how gyroscopes worked. They've never been part of my education or careers so I've never studied them. You made it very clear and understandable. Thanks for your work.
Great video Bob, but as usual flerfers will find some "real" scientific explanation of precession. Oh and Natha Oakley will surely find some logical fallacy :-)))
The funny thing is that Nathan has no concept of applied logic. I seriously doubt he ever completed a book on logic llet alone a class. But hey it's worth a laugh.
Note that the Left-Hand Rule actually does apply when determining the generation of and interaction between an electron and magnetic fields (sign change.)
Are you sure that you meant "election"? The rest of your sentence suggests an electrically charged particle instead, not some phenomenon of democratic societies.
Bob neither stated nor used the right hand rule for electrodynamics: he is using the term for a simpler problem, figuring out how to do a vector cross product. I am not sure this is a standard use of the term, but it probably should be, since the use in electrodynamics depends on the vector cross product, too. Wikipedia seems to agree: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-hand_rule
Bob you should cover Gyro Theodolites history and the German Genius Shuler who invented them and before that his Shuler Tuning . Mechanical Gyro Theodolites invented by Shuler using his Shuler tuning used in Tunnel digging are the Best proof of rotating Earth and because the manufacturers don't recommend there usage below 15% latitude because of Earth reletive slow velocity speed means they are not drifting due to Aether winds . Gyro part of Theodolite finds True North based on Earth Spin . Britain and France could not of dug the Channel Tunnel without them to guide them to within 300 Milimeters of joining up under the English Channel .
Similar story with IRS alignment - it apparently takes longer the further from the equator, and beyond a certain latitude alignment is not recommended. Also, there is a commenter knocking around (forget the name) that insists he's a tunnel engineer that's never had to account for curve or rotation, I hope you run into him. If I spot him I'll introduce you!
@@hapaxl.6075 The same guy does not understand Newton's third law of motion. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, he fails to realise a rocket is a reaction engine, and works by ejecting mass causing the body of the rocked to be propelled at 180 degrees from the force of the mass ejected.
Great video Bob. I understand that gravity makes the Gyro precess once it has begun to lean over. What force is causing the Gyro initially lean? Is that the Earths Gravity?
Once again excellent well researched and presented content. You never disappoint. I do prefer the more laid back look than a jacket and tie. Seems to fit the look, sound and feel of your personality better. And finally thank you for your efforts! ❤️👍
Me too! I got it for a nickel at a gumball machine! Oh, you meant a calibrated one and not a mass produced plastic toy, probably. Maybe the museum has a gumball machine :p
I'm ready to turn in my homework assignment. The rotation of the earth imposes torque onto a spinning gyroscope when it is standing upright relative to the local horizon. This torque causes the gyroscope to precess, which causes the axis of the gyro to be deflected at a 90 degree angle from the direction of the imposed torque according to the right hand rule. This precession gradually pushes the axis of the gyro over towards true north. Once the axis of the gyro and the axis of the earth are aligned there is no longer any torque being applied to the gyro so at this point there is no longer any precession and the axis of the gyro is pointed toward true north. Further, if the axis of the gyro becomes slightly misaligned with the earth's axis for any reason a small amount of precession will occur to realign it again. Essentially the rotational axis of the gyro becomes locked in the same direction as the rotational axis of the earth due to the gyro's precession characteristics. This alignment between the axis of the earth and the axis of the gyro can then be used as the navigational reference for a ship. And of course this action is also direct observable evidence that the earth is a sphere and that it is rotating on its axis.
@@BobtheScienceGuy Thanks. I saw your explanation in the video a week later. I think adding all the references to the sun made your explanation unnecessarily complicated and confusing. This has nothing to do with the sun. The whole point is that no matter what the original orientation of the gyro happens to be the torquing effect of the earth's rotation will cause precession, which will drive the gyro's spin axis into a parallel alignment with the rotational axis of the earth. It's really just that simple.
Question, does the precession of a gyroscope with a constant velocity happen to match the precession of the earth? Also, I had the fortunate experience to test bed one of the early RLG systems in the F15 Eagle in mid 1986 replacing our Inertial Navigation System which was gyro referenced. INS took a minimum of 15 minutes to stabilize, sometimes longer, before the aircraft could move. The RLG system(Inertial Measurement Unit) was stable within 5 minutes and the accuracy was such that it could bring the aircraft back to within 6 feet of it's initial position. Another aspect of the IMU is that it was a third of the weight of the INS, 40 lbs. vs 100+ lbs. Recently read an article where they described the newer navigation systems where the inertial reference system is coupled to the GPS which effectively cancels any and all errors in navigation. Amazing, when I think back to those early models of the RLG (forgot to mention the systems we tested were Honeywell)
Cajun Drifter Nice. Here’s one ATPL Training film. The point that it made is that you need powerful computers to sort out the signal information. The algorithms also compensate for earth’s rotation, the Coriolis effect, transport wander, and one more effects. ruclips.net/video/dzzi5dcIhag/видео.html
Imagine a box to represent an x,y,z axis system. Put a ball in that box. You can describe every spot on the surface of that ball with an x,y,z coordinate right? The LRG will shoot a line through that ball which intersects the surface at 2 and only 2 points. You are located at one of them
Yeah but that doesn't explain how it came into existence so it's a perfect being who loves us and doesn't want you to sleep with people from the same sex and has serious issues with reverse cow girl. Which also puts me into a nasty position where I have to deny that and choose to go to hell because I just want to sin. How does one live without reverse cowgirl? o_O
@@extinctoshlibber6384 lol I KNOW how cowgirl works! But I was asking how life would work without it! By the way, you could do a lot of things in the opposite way of cowgirl and end up with entirely different scenarios that also aren't reverse cowgirl :p Just sayin' :p
This is a great summary. However the gyroscope is not an easy topic. I would say: to fully understand the gyroscope, you need university level physics, vector multiplication ( which Bob demonstrates with his hand and thumb ) etc... I remember in university physics class, we used the Hamiltonian formalism (still Newton’s laws) ..
@@eric Kystrom It is true, of course, that there are many details of gyroscopic motion that are best investigated with Lagrangian techniques (less so for Hamiltonian) and other advanced physics/mathematics. But they are not necessary to explain gyroscopic stability, precession or nutation. That said, Feynman's coverage of the topic did use vectors, both polar and axial, and the vector cross product. That was enough for explaining precession and nutation in www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_20.html. The classic text on more advanced gyro/top problems is by Klein and Sommerfeld, Ueber Die Theorie Des Kreisels I managed to download a free PDF of it from somewhere, I think it was Internet Archive, but if you need it in English it will cost over $100!
J T , I already have a good grasp of the behaviour of gyroscopes, so am happy to watch the video in any orientation. ;-) I’m actually more interested in why Bob had the video mirrored.
This is just wording, but what you call torque I would call moment. Yes the units are the same (Nm). But torque is a twisting action, say like on the prop shaft in a rear wheel driven car. Or the drive shaft in a front wheel driven car. Moment is more like force at the of a beam. Just my 2 cents.
I think you mean “moment of inertia” or “moment of force”. (Just “moment” can mean a number of different things.) Moment of inertia”, “moment of force”, and “torque” are different names for the same thing. Some reckon that there are subtle differences, like torque is a static force but moment of inertia is a dynamic force. But that probably just depends on your area of expertise and where you learned the terminology, and doesn’t seem to be consistent.
An interesting topic, anyway, but the fact that dedicated and learned folk such as yourself are pitting their wits and knowledge in the battle against FE stupidity, is a very gratifying feeling indeed
@@BobtheScienceGuy I'm aware of that, but the comment still holds. It's why I prefaced my comment with the remark, 'it's an interesting topic, anyway'. I watched the whole video because it was informative and interesting, but as I know you also debunk flerthers, it's a comforting thought that you know your stuff
Hmm Bob? "Right hand rule" and it still looks like you do it with your left hand. Light is slightly affected by gravity but I'm guessing for the distances involved in a RLG or FOG its just a insignificant uncertainty error.
@@BobtheScienceGuy aah, maybe you did and I missed it. Was listening mostly not 100% viewing/fokused. Did you see my note about gravity does affect light?
Cool ! Unlike a gyro on the earth, for a planet in space it would seem that there shouldn't be a torque provided by gravity trying to tilt it. That is, any force from its own gravity acting on a vector normal to the surface(including the axis of rotation) should just be in a direction that only subtracts from the magnitude of the angular momentum without changing its direction, never causing a tilt in the 1st place or so it would seem, especially under such symmetry. Where is the flaw ?
@realcygnus -- Here are a couple ideas that might explain why precession starts in the first place. First, real gyroscopes are imperfect to some degree. Second, on a rotating spherical earth while the gyroscope attempts to maintain its orientation in space the gravity vector of the planet changes beneath it thus starting the precession.
The force is provided by gravitational interaction with the sun (and moon to a lesser degree). If the earth was a perfect sphere, there wouldn't be any precession, but it's not. It's an oblate spheroid with the equatorial diameter being larger than the polar diameter. Secondly there is an axial tilt of about 23.5°. The bulge around the equator combined with the tilted axis means the gravitational pull from the sun is uneven and applying a force on the rotation axis, inducing precession.
Peanut Gallery right..... after posting, i was thinking that even the slightest imperfection in spherical symmetry & even density distribution could do the trick even without orbital/tidal effects/forces, which probably also contribute.
Why is the video flipped left to right? Even though you pointed out which your right hand is, visually it'll be easier on the audience if your right hand is actually on your right.
probably the same thing with mirrors. Doesn't actually flip the left and right (the x axis), but instead flips close and far (z axis). Saw a physics vid a while back when I was interested in why mirrors apparently flip x axis but not y. Don't know if that's what the camera is doing though but it seems reasonable
Unfortunately it is for me, not the audience. Mirroring my own image allows me to look and point at the subject rather than away from it. Makes the video look more natural and normally isn't an issue. That's why I was so clear with this one.
This makes me think about those evacuated bulbs with the black and white vanes on it that spin in the presence of light. I can't quite articulate what I mean, though. When light hits those, is it as a particle?
You are thinking of Crooke’s Radiometer. Quite fun. For several years it was thought that it was “light pressure” causing the rotation. But no, it is a heat engine. One way this can be demonstrated is that how well the radiometer spins depends on the vacuum in the bulb. If the vacuum is too complete, it will not spin. Thus we can demonstrate that SOME air is needed, but if you evacuate all (or most) of the air, it doesn’t work. Therefore, it can’t be light pressure.
They operate by heat rather than light, the heat is absorbed by the black surfaces and, though it is quite complicated, essentially pressure to move the vanes, is created by the gas molecules (the bulb only has a parial vacuum) being excited by the heat. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer
What you are talking about is a Crookes's Radiometer, more commonly called a "Light Mill". It's difficult to explain how it works, or at least I find it difficult, but it's not to do with photons hitting the surface. If this was the case it should turn in the opposite direction. Light Mills only work when the gas in the bulb is at a very low pressure, it *would not* work if it were a total vacuum. It actually moves as a result of unequal heating on the dark and light side of the vane and the way the gas moves as a result. That's the best explanation I can give but like most things there is plenty of good explanations on 'tinternet. Just be careful there are sure to be a lot of bad explanations as well.
@@cguy96 Oh, I didn't know that. Now everything makes sense again. I am fairly confident that when I was a kid, I was told that it was literally the light moving it. I hadn't thought about it again until now, when I realized that something was off. It is pretty dismal that I was given an explanation refuted in the 19th century.
@@traog Wish he had changed the narration to reflect what is on the video since he is aware of it. The topic is complex enough without adding additional confusion.
@@hhampton Changing the narration to match what you see in the video versus what he is actually doing would be more confusing. Right hand, rotation going from wrist to fingertips, the thumb points in direction of angular momentum, if you use your left hand the thumb points the opposite direction. What he is describing can be explained with right hand or left hand "rules" but the description of the rotation relative to the hands changes, (the actual rotation remains the same). With the right hand the rotation goes from wrist to fingertips, thump points in direction of torque, to do the same with the left the rotation must go from fingertips to wrist. He could have done it with his left hand as if it was his right and that may have helped, relieve confusion.
The Red and Blue vectors represent the Angular Momentum of the same gyroscope, at two different times. The Red vector is the angular momentum, L , of the gyroscope when it was given a faster spin, so it has a greater angular momentum at this time. The Blue vector has a smaller angular momentum using the same gyroscope, just spun slower, and in both cases were facing up, along the y axis, originally. [ note L = Iw, L is the Angular Momentum, I = moment of inertia ... think of it as the resistance of the gyroscope wheel to be spun, and w = angular velocity... e.g., how many revolutions per second spin given to the wheel of the gyroscope. ] Now, if a force is applied to the gyroscope with the Red angular momentum vector from left to right in the diagram, it pushes the Red vector over LESS than the Blue vector, since the greater Angular momentum of the Red one resists that change more than the Blue one does. The Blue vector L is smaller ( being the same gyroscope, it must have had a smaller w ... angular velocity to start with ) , so it is easier to push over with the same force. Bob should have compared the Red, Blue vectors to the y axis, in which case the angle between the y axis and the Red vector is smaller than the angle between the y axis and the Blue vector, which we would expect since the Larger angular momentum "resists" changing it's direction more than the smaller angular momentum. BTW...you can actually feel the resistance to changing the direction of the Angular momentum of a bicycle gyroscope. Check out youtube demos on " conseravtion of angular momentum" .... it's a fun science demo !
@@phasma6669 Why are we even comparing red and blue vector? What are we trying to explain? What's the Y-axis and X-axis? Are they spatial coordinate or inertia and speed? Yeah, I've seen the bicycle wheel gyro and the lecture.
some of the video was missing. Let me help here, Angular momentum is the resistance to tilting the gyro. The point being made was that with a larger angular moment, the same force applied will tilt the gyro less. The higher the spin rate, the more rigid the gyro is in space, I'll explain it better in the second video.
@xdragon2k It helps to look at vectors with a coordinate system. The X and Y axis are in this case spatial coordinates, you could have used any two orthogonal axes for this diagram, e.g. X and Z, Y and Z. { not sure how inertia would be along an axis, anyway }. Most people think of the Y axis as " upwards" and the horizontal as the X axis, when working with a 2 dim. diagram. Since Bob was using the gyroscope earlier in the video, starting with it's angular momentum aligned with the upwards direction, he called that the Y axis. As for what we are trying to explain, Bob just wanted people to understand that L resists a change in direction, the larger L is, the more it resists the change. Thus the Red vector will move less in the direction of the applied force [ or should I say it will have a greater resistance to being moved in that direction than the "blue" vector, with a smaller L ]. That will, in fact , cause it to react by moving in the third direction [ in this case, the Z direction, using the Rt. hand Rule ....I like the XYZ form of the Rt. hand rule... index finger is pointing in the direction of the vector L, three remaining finger bent 90 deg. represent the applied force, then the thumb extended points in the direction of the "precession" of the gyroscope ]. Bob will cover that in the video with Gyro compasses he just published... it's nicely done, go check it out. Take care :)
@Flat Earth Math -- Another interesting bit of history on the Sperry Gyrocompass is the manufacture of 5500 gyrocompasses by Chrysler corp during WW2. The pamphlet was titled "A War Job Thought Impossible". There is an online version at www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1945/45Impossible/Cover.htm
Spin velocity is a perpendicular vector to the tilting seesaw end velocities of the plane, and this tilting end velocity switches ends twice per rotation, instantaneously resolved to acceleration at the tilt axis. Perpendicular vectors DO NOT affect each other, so tangential spin velocity is NOT affected by tangential tilt velocity. Math has people thinking that rules and laws are causal. Contemporary math is analogous and wrong. If you want the truth, go to Elsevier science's SSRN site. It is somewhat hidden. Search SSRN on Elsevier site, at the bottom, a link says "Visit SSRN." Ends up www.ssrn.com. Search abstract ID: 3587972 Or, if you aren't afraid of links: ssrn.com/author=4143288 Please read this paper and support it or refute it if you can. It needs political backing or it will not get published.
Your blue and red line explaination was terrible. You didn't explain anything. Just that they were red and blue lines at different angles. Alot of words, but no WHY all this is happening.
The Red and Blue vectors represent the Angular Momentum of the same gyroscope, at two different times. The Red vector is the angular momentum, L , of the gyroscope when it was given a faster spin, so it has a greater angular momentum at this time. The Blue vector has a smaller angular momentum using the same gyroscope, just spun slower, and in both cases were facing up, along the y axis, originally. [ note L = Iw, L is the Angular Momentum, I = moment of inertia ... think of it as the resistance of the gyroscope wheel to be spun, and w = angular velocity... e.g., how many revolutions per second spin given to the wheel of the gyroscope. ] Now, if a force is applied to the gyroscope with the Red angular momentum vector from left to right in the diagram, it pushes the Red vector over LESS than the Blue vector, since the greater Angular momentum of the Red one resists that change more than the Blue one does. The Blue vector L is smaller ( being the same gyroscope, it must have had a smaller w ... angular velocity to start with ) , so it is easier to push over with the same force. Comparing the Red and Blue vectors of the angular momentum of our gyroscope to the y axis, the angle between the y axis and the Red vector is smaller than the angle between the y axis and the Blue vector, which we would expect since the Larger angular momentum "resists" changing it's direction more than the smaller angular momentum. BTW...you can actually feel the resistance to changing the direction of the Angular momentum of a bicycle gyroscope. Check out youtube demos on " conseravtion of angular momentum" .... it's a fun science demo !
When I looked at the video released, it was missing a scene where I lay the foundation for that demonstration. I'll make sure it is in the second part . I must have accidently cut it.
If gravity is just a theory and cannot be "proven", and we need to "trust our eyes" rather than all the CGI, then how can these douche bags "trust they're eyes" given that a photon is neither a particle nor wave at any given moment? How can they "trust their eyes" when a photon is not a photon? Also, how do they know they're seeing what they're seeing given persistence of vision? In P.O.V. displays (all displays) we're seeing things that aren't there, they were milliseconds ago, but they're not there in the moment. Ask these flerfers if they think they're living in the "present" :D
That brings up a good point. We are always seeing the past. Light travels at about 1 ft every nanosecond. So what you are seeing on your computer monitor happened a nanosecond ago.
Bob, You are still trying to debunk the Flat Earth, You will convince the ignorant, that is obvious by some of the comments. Those of us who have seriously studied the matter... Not going to happen. Bobby, There is no curvature.
folks that have to believe will not change their minds. Those with open minds and respect for evidence know the earth is spherical, because that is what the evidence rather than the doctrine shows.
I have studied it seriously - by looking at the actual evidence and gaining a deep understanding of that evidence, and testing the theories that explains the evidence. It was NOT done by watching RUclips videos and ignoring anything that didn't fit a preferred model. I've seen the evidence, and tested it, and understood it. The Earth is spherical, it rotates and moves. Your refusal to accept or understand the evidence doesn't change reality.
@MomoTheBellyDancer - That reply to Janey defies your fantasy & mask . Bob TSG ain't your channel , but Banshee Moon is . Don't quit being civil though , SUCKER .
@@abhroy Thank you sir, my hat off to you for all your other successes. Watch out though, I might get my Grandkids on to this and they'll just keep clicking till the next ones up and beat everyone. LOL just kidding they'd probably go _"awww gran do we have to"_ then start doing other things. And I would not do it to them anyhow
50 years after frustrating my science teacher, I finally get it.
Thanks Bob
Production wise these videos are simple but these are some of the best educational videos I've been seeing on this platform. Cannot wait to see more
Yes, I am working on the presentation, but the message is what I am trying to emphasise. I made my first video in Nov so this has been fun learning about video production. Any suggestions to make them more entertaining?
@@BobtheScienceGuy Honestly the only thing I could think of is the typical youtuber starter kit which includes an intro, which you kind of already have, maybe some fitting background music, perhaps some witty editing of back and forth between flerf claims and your debunking too them. Again, this youtube channel is only starting out and it's already amazing based on content alone. A lot of the production stuff is quite superficial and really is only stuff to do with lighting, audio and/or setting up a nice background shot. Honestly not sure but just some simple add ons
@@DanBorens I'll keep working to make it better.
@@BobtheScienceGuy Just so you know it's really freaking good as is and I really really do enjoy your videos. The simplicity of them is what gives your channel its youtube independent charm which a lot viewers are trying to find these days. The only thing I would say for certain that could be improved is the audio quality and thats it.
The other stuff I said before was just nonsense I was spouting trying to give advice I don't even think I'm in the position to give because I was just surprised you replied.
3C + 2C = Very nice. Thank you, Bob.
(Cool, Calm & Collected + Crystal Clear)
(This is a repeat of my comment to Friday Physics from June 21 ;)
This episode was very pleasant. No quotes from Flerfs and a good summary of the topic. I hope the people, who need the education will find this video.
This is north woods scientist not flat earth. Education series
@@BobtheScienceGuy Indeed, that is why it's so pleasant. I'm just tired of flat earth and enjoy a change of topic and style.
It inspires me to brush up on some knowledge try to come up with ideas to make my own videos. I would like to make a sextant without CAD and a 3d printer. At the moment I'm stuck with the geometric construction of the degree scale. Using compass and straight edge construction I can make a triangle as a starting point. But how to exactly fraction the rotation to get 120 more triangles eludes me.
You refer to your right hand with your class ring but my brain keeps interpreting it as your left hand because your image is mirrored. Still, great video as usual Bob. Production quality is top notch!
One dislike..... by a fleffer that doesn't understand physics...... I have an associate degree in electrical engineering technology for Penn State. I had 2 semesters of physics, mechanics and then light. Plus A.C. electricity is all vectors. Physics was probably my toughest course of study,but one of my favorites, it's not for the feeble minded! Thanks Bob for bringing physics to everyone!
I once gave my young nieces a demonstration of a gyroscope using a bicycle wheel, spinning it and supporting one end of the axle on a finger.
Unfortunately I had not allowed for the amount that such a spinning wheel turns at 90 degrees to its axis of rotation, it twisted off my finger, landed on the coffee table, flying across it scattering everything left right and centre to much hilarity.
I misread that as "it twisted my finger off, landed on the coffee table... to much hilarity" and thought what a strange family.
@@rootlessmisanthrope2611
Lol!
YAY glad you fixed that double audio thing you had going on this sounds much better.
Love the new format Bob. Simple,understandable and informative.
Why couldn't my physics or engineering professors explain it that well. They were goid teachers too.
Thanks Bob.
You will like tomorrow’s video on gyrocompasses
Nicely corrected second version of the video. Thanks!
Ahhhh... This is why my yoyo stays in one direction while spinning and why a thumb spin makes it turn.
Awesome video! Loved it.
Great video. I learned some things that I didn’t know. 👍
For those who are wanting a simpler practical example, imagine this:
Imagine you have a ball on a string swinging around a central point (like swingball). Changing just the axis of the centre point does not not change the ball path as it rotates. This hopefully will be obvious due the the way there is no force acting on the ball simply by changing the axis of the centre.
Then replace the string with a rigid bar, which is fixed securely to the ball and the centre. It will rotate around the centre just as it did with the string. Now imagine tilting the centre axis, and try to imagine what the ball would be experiencing in terms of forces. The ball wants to continue in its circular motion, so when you tilt the axis, you are changing the direction of it's path, and you will feel resistance while trying to change that angle. It's important to realise that the resistance occurs WHILE changing the axis. A gyro is a solid disc, so it is a continual "ball on the stick" at all places and at all times.
Maybe even simpler as also maybe more effective, since you can feel the forces yourself.
Take out the frontwheel of your bike, hold the axle with both hands, one left, one right, have someone spin the wheel. Start slow, note that it is still easy to change the angle of the axle. The faster the wheel spins, the more difficult it is to change that angle.
Note, that it is still very easy to move the wheel along it's axle without changing the angle, but as soon as you try to change the angle, you will feel the force counteracting. Basically what he's explaining from 5:15 ish onwards, but maybe easier to understand when you actually can feel it and not only see it being explained on a monitor.
Excellent presentation. Thank you.
"Laser ring gyroscopes register the motion of the sky that is generated by heaven"
-Dr. Bob Noodles (Behind The Swerve).
I award that guy zero points and may God have mercy on his soul.
I wonder if it's because they don't understand that the gyroscope is showing its own movement relative to space, that they think their explanation is satisfactory.
Or it could be because they know their followers are too thick to see the obvious problem of them being totally unable to demonstrate the magical force they are claiming exists.
I love how now they're claiming the measured rotation is because of an imaginary "vortex" of the (long since shown to not exist) luminiferous ether. 🤣
@@George89999
It would have to be a "vortex" centred over the top of the gyro for the instrument to always show the same speed of deviation wherever it was located.
Otherwise it would be like the pendulum where its rate of deviation depended on its latitude.
@@grahvis Oh, I know that their explanation is ludicrous on every level. It's hysterically funny watching their inane attempts to rationalize their own evidence against the flat-earth.
Buckminster Fuller once described precession to some government officials by using the analogy of a spinning man with an Olympic throwing hammer in each hand. If you gave one of the hammers a bump upward it would gain momentum in that direction.
It would also keep orbiting the spinning man, so the upward deflection would follow the orbit of the hammer.
Of course, a rigid flywheel is a little different, but I thought it was a nice way to show the effect of force on a gyro is in a translated direction.
The very best way to demonstrate gyroscopic effects is in a departure stall drill with the right rudder on the floor. Just eat the last few inches of elevator in one quick pull and maintain full throttle and full right rudder. Great way to demonstrate the prop's gyroscopic attributes, reversed p-factor from a negative angle of attack (the real kind of angle of attack), and tell if breakfast agreed with you, all at the same time.
Great video. I've always wondered how gyroscopes worked. They've never been part of my education or careers so I've never studied them. You made it very clear and understandable. Thanks for your work.
Hopefully it was clear and easy. The magic come Monday and that really puts it all together
Styrofoam disk needed a flat earth projection for lols
Yo Bob, your stuff is great!
Just found you, been watching Al the other anti-fe guys (Scimandan, Baldy Cats, FTFE etc) nice to find another well made, concise scientific channel.
Great video Bob, but as usual flerfers will find some "real" scientific explanation of precession. Oh and Natha Oakley will surely find some logical fallacy :-)))
The funny thing is that Nathan has no concept of applied logic. I seriously doubt he ever completed a book on logic llet alone a class. But hey it's worth a laugh.
Yeah, which is the independent variable?
Note that the Left-Hand Rule actually does apply when determining the generation of and interaction between an electron and magnetic fields (sign change.)
Are you sure that you meant "election"? The rest of your sentence suggests an electrically charged particle instead, not some phenomenon of democratic societies.
Apollorion Thanks! While our elections are indeed negatively charged, that’s a different discussion.
Bob neither stated nor used the right hand rule for electrodynamics: he is using the term for a simpler problem, figuring out how to do a vector cross product. I am not sure this is a standard use of the term, but it probably should be, since the use in electrodynamics depends on the vector cross product, too. Wikipedia seems to agree: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-hand_rule
Have you seen the handheld exercise toy called a gyroball, a VERY USEFUL adaptation, demonstration tool. You might like to look it up
Bob you should cover Gyro Theodolites history and the German Genius Shuler who invented them and before that his Shuler Tuning .
Mechanical Gyro Theodolites invented by Shuler using his Shuler tuning used in Tunnel digging are the Best proof of rotating Earth and because the manufacturers don't recommend there usage below 15% latitude because of Earth reletive slow velocity speed means they are not drifting due to Aether winds .
Gyro part of Theodolite finds True North based on Earth Spin .
Britain and France could not of dug the Channel Tunnel without them to guide them to within 300 Milimeters of joining up under the English Channel .
Similar story with IRS alignment - it apparently takes longer the further from the equator, and beyond a certain latitude alignment is not recommended. Also, there is a commenter knocking around (forget the name) that insists he's a tunnel engineer that's never had to account for curve or rotation, I hope you run into him. If I spot him I'll introduce you!
@@hapaxl.6075 lol thanks .
@@rocklover7437 fite da fwat urf !!!!
@@hapaxl.6075 The same guy does not understand Newton's third law of motion. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, he fails to realise a rocket is a reaction engine, and works by ejecting mass causing the body of the rocked to be propelled at 180 degrees from the force of the mass ejected.
Hi Bob the science guy and good to see you... So to speak 😉
Great video Bob. I understand that gravity makes the Gyro precess once it has begun to lean over. What force is causing the Gyro initially lean? Is that the Earths Gravity?
Monday’s video will show you
Once again excellent well researched and presented content. You never disappoint. I do prefer the more laid back look than a jacket and tie. Seems to fit the look, sound and feel of your personality better. And finally thank you for your efforts! ❤️👍
Now, it is ideal!
Thanks. One part is missing- the math I’ll have that in part 2
...because the torque is perpendicular to the rotation of the Earth, and by the right hand rule, the force will be north.
Not exactly. As the Earth's axis is not perpendicular to the ecliptic plane. So, will vary throughout the year as the Earth moves around the sun.
My3dviews still always north.
I have that same kind of mechanical gyroscope, got it at The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in DC
Me too! I got it for a nickel at a gumball machine!
Oh, you meant a calibrated one and not a mass produced plastic toy, probably. Maybe the museum has a gumball machine :p
That was awesome, it was nice to learn some things. I do like gyroscopes. They are cool.
Too bad the flerfers won't understand this.
Seriously this isn’t for anything other than science education
@@BobtheScienceGuy ::
I know. I like science.
Q❓
The same effect of gravity can be seen on a child's spinning top when it slows down, wobbles a bit, and tips over before it stops?
A top is a gyroscope. Yes.
I'm ready to turn in my homework assignment. The rotation of the earth imposes torque onto a spinning gyroscope when it is standing upright relative to the local horizon. This torque causes the gyroscope to precess, which causes the axis of the gyro to be deflected at a 90 degree angle from the direction of the imposed torque according to the right hand rule. This precession gradually pushes the axis of the gyro over towards true north. Once the axis of the gyro and the axis of the earth are aligned there is no longer any torque being applied to the gyro so at this point there is no longer any precession and the axis of the gyro is pointed toward true north. Further, if the axis of the gyro becomes slightly misaligned with the earth's axis for any reason a small amount of precession will occur to realign it again. Essentially the rotational axis of the gyro becomes locked in the same direction as the rotational axis of the earth due to the gyro's precession characteristics.
This alignment between the axis of the earth and the axis of the gyro can then be used as the navigational reference for a ship. And of course this action is also direct observable evidence that the earth is a sphere and that it is rotating on its axis.
You get an A
@@BobtheScienceGuy Thanks. I saw your explanation in the video a week later. I think adding all the references to the sun made your explanation unnecessarily complicated and confusing. This has nothing to do with the sun. The whole point is that no matter what the original orientation of the gyro happens to be the torquing effect of the earth's rotation will cause precession, which will drive the gyro's spin axis into a parallel alignment with the rotational axis of the earth. It's really just that simple.
Question, does the precession of a gyroscope with a constant velocity happen to match the precession of the earth? Also, I had the fortunate experience to test bed one of the early RLG systems in the F15 Eagle in mid 1986 replacing our Inertial Navigation System which was gyro referenced. INS took a minimum of 15 minutes to stabilize, sometimes longer, before the aircraft could move. The RLG system(Inertial Measurement Unit) was stable within 5 minutes and the accuracy was such that it could bring the aircraft back to within 6 feet of it's initial position. Another aspect of the IMU is that it was a third of the weight of the INS, 40 lbs. vs 100+ lbs. Recently read an article where they described the newer navigation systems where the inertial reference system is coupled to the GPS which effectively cancels any and all errors in navigation. Amazing, when I think back to those early models of the RLG (forgot to mention the systems we tested were Honeywell)
Cajun Drifter Nice. Here’s one ATPL Training film. The point that it made is that you need powerful computers to sort out the signal information. The algorithms also compensate for earth’s rotation, the Coriolis effect, transport wander, and one more effects. ruclips.net/video/dzzi5dcIhag/видео.html
No, it does not match the precession of the earth.
Imagine a box to represent an x,y,z axis system. Put a ball in that box. You can describe every spot on the surface of that ball with an x,y,z coordinate right? The LRG will shoot a line through that ball which intersects the surface at 2 and only 2 points. You are located at one of them
I've got the answer, its density, or the angle of attack, or angular resolution, always presupposing the curve.🤔
Yeah but that doesn't explain how it came into existence so it's a perfect being who loves us and doesn't want you to sleep with people from the same sex and has serious issues with reverse cow girl.
Which also puts me into a nasty position where I have to deny that and choose to go to hell because I just want to sin. How does one live without reverse cowgirl? o_O
You forgot perspective.
Setekh, it's like a cowgirl but the oposite way🤠
The Snark, and superior mirages, and pouring water over a basket ball
@@extinctoshlibber6384 lol I KNOW how cowgirl works! But I was asking how life would work without it!
By the way, you could do a lot of things in the opposite way of cowgirl and end up with entirely different scenarios that also aren't reverse cowgirl :p Just sayin' :p
This is a great summary. However the gyroscope is not an easy topic. I would say: to fully understand the gyroscope, you need university level physics, vector multiplication ( which Bob demonstrates with his hand and thumb ) etc... I remember in university physics class, we used the Hamiltonian formalism (still Newton’s laws) ..
@@eric Kystrom It is true, of course, that there are many details of gyroscopic motion that are best investigated with Lagrangian techniques (less so for Hamiltonian) and other advanced physics/mathematics. But they are not necessary to explain gyroscopic stability, precession or nutation.
That said, Feynman's coverage of the topic did use vectors, both polar and axial, and the vector cross product. That was enough for explaining precession and nutation in www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_20.html.
The classic text on more advanced gyro/top problems is by Klein and Sommerfeld, Ueber Die Theorie Des Kreisels I managed to download a free PDF of it from somewhere, I think it was Internet Archive, but if you need it in English it will cost over $100!
I saw a cool meme today, attributed to Einstein. “If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it”. Pretty deep.
Bob the Science Guy OK, I agree, but you still need a lot of math and physics to predict the exact movements of the gyroscope.
Erik Nystrom indeed yes especially when you get into nutation. But I think non physics types have a decent understanding from this.
Why is the video reversed? Why add an unnecessary complexity to a subject that some have difficulty with?
watch the video in a mirror, there fixed it
J T ,
I already have a good grasp of the behaviour of gyroscopes, so am happy to watch the video in any orientation.
;-)
I’m actually more interested in why Bob had the video mirrored.
@@StevenGreenGuz He's already explained that?
J T ,
He has? Oh dear, I’m being as dumb as a flerfer!
I’ll watch it again, and pay attention this time.
:-/
Still loving Dr Bob 😊🇭🇲💕
I see the right hand as left hand. Why mirrored ?
This is just wording, but what you call torque I would call moment. Yes the units are the same (Nm). But torque is a twisting action, say like on the prop shaft in a rear wheel driven car. Or the drive shaft in a front wheel driven car. Moment is more like force at the of a beam. Just my 2 cents.
I think you mean “moment of inertia” or “moment of force”. (Just “moment” can mean a number of different things.)
Moment of inertia”, “moment of force”, and “torque” are different names for the same thing. Some reckon that there are subtle differences, like torque is a static force but moment of inertia is a dynamic force. But that probably just depends on your area of expertise and where you learned the terminology, and doesn’t seem to be consistent.
An interesting topic, anyway, but the fact that dedicated and learned folk such as yourself are pitting their wits and knowledge in the battle against FE stupidity, is a very gratifying feeling indeed
This is not related to fe. This is a science lesson for home schoolers
@@BobtheScienceGuy I'm aware of that, but the comment still holds. It's why I prefaced my comment with the remark, 'it's an interesting topic, anyway'. I watched the whole video because it was informative and interesting, but as I know you also debunk flerthers, it's a comforting thought that you know your stuff
Bring MeSunshine thanks man
Can some-one please explain to me why videos end up as a mirror image when uploaded to RUclips?
What makes the planets wobble? I know it's really slow, but what causes it?
interesting. with or without moons?
@@BobtheScienceGuy I guess start with Earth. Is it just non-perfect mass distribution or something?
Hmm Bob? "Right hand rule" and it still looks like you do it with your left hand.
Light is slightly affected by gravity but I'm guessing for the distances involved in a RLG or FOG its just a insignificant uncertainty error.
I think I made it very clear in this video that the image is reversed just to clear up that very problem...
@@BobtheScienceGuy aah, maybe you did and I missed it. Was listening mostly not 100% viewing/fokused. Did you see my note about gravity does affect light?
Yes but that doesn’t apply to the discussion at hand.
Cool ! Unlike a gyro on the earth, for a planet in space it would seem that there shouldn't be a torque provided by gravity trying to tilt it. That is, any force from its own gravity acting on a vector normal to the surface(including the axis of rotation) should just be in a direction that only subtracts from the magnitude of the angular momentum without changing its direction, never causing a tilt in the 1st place or so it would seem, especially under such symmetry. Where is the flaw ?
@realcygnus -- Here are a couple ideas that might explain why precession starts in the first place. First, real gyroscopes are imperfect to some degree. Second, on a rotating spherical earth while the gyroscope attempts to maintain its orientation in space the gravity vector of the planet changes beneath it thus starting the precession.
The force is provided by gravitational interaction with the sun (and moon to a lesser degree). If the earth was a perfect sphere, there wouldn't be any precession, but it's not. It's an oblate spheroid with the equatorial diameter being larger than the polar diameter. Secondly there is an axial tilt of about 23.5°.
The bulge around the equator combined with the tilted axis means the gravitational pull from the sun is uneven and applying a force on the rotation axis, inducing precession.
Peanut Gallery right..... after posting, i was thinking that even the slightest imperfection in spherical symmetry & even density distribution could do the trick even without orbital/tidal effects/forces, which probably also contribute.
Do a video on Sandy Kidd..
Why is the video flipped left to right? Even though you pointed out which your right hand is, visually it'll be easier on the audience if your right hand is actually on your right.
probably the same thing with mirrors. Doesn't actually flip the left and right (the x axis), but instead flips close and far (z axis). Saw a physics vid a while back when I was interested in why mirrors apparently flip x axis but not y. Don't know if that's what the camera is doing though but it seems reasonable
@@UnlimitedLives1960 also he might be using a phone's 'selfie' camera, they're notorious for it (probably for a good tech reason).
Unfortunately it is for me, not the audience. Mirroring my own image allows me to look and point at the subject rather than away from it. Makes the video look more natural and normally isn't an issue. That's why I was so clear with this one.
@@BobtheScienceGuymakes sense. Looking forward to the gyrocompass video
This makes me think about those evacuated bulbs with the black and white vanes on it that spin in the presence of light. I can't quite articulate what I mean, though. When light hits those, is it as a particle?
You are thinking of Crooke’s Radiometer. Quite fun. For several years it was thought that it was “light pressure” causing the rotation. But no, it is a heat engine. One way this can be demonstrated is that how well the radiometer spins depends on the vacuum in the bulb. If the vacuum is too complete, it will not spin. Thus we can demonstrate that SOME air is needed, but if you evacuate all (or most) of the air, it doesn’t work. Therefore, it can’t be light pressure.
They operate by heat rather than light, the heat is absorbed by the black surfaces and, though it is quite complicated, essentially pressure to move the vanes, is created by the gas molecules (the bulb only has a parial vacuum) being excited by the heat.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crookes_radiometer
What you are talking about is a Crookes's Radiometer, more commonly called a "Light Mill". It's difficult to explain how it works, or at least I find it difficult, but it's not to do with photons hitting the surface. If this was the case it should turn in the opposite direction. Light Mills only work when the gas in the bulb is at a very low pressure, it *would not* work if it were a total vacuum. It actually moves as a result of unequal heating on the dark and light side of the vane and the way the gas moves as a result. That's the best explanation I can give but like most things there is plenty of good explanations on 'tinternet. Just be careful there are sure to be a lot of bad explanations as well.
@@cguy96 Oh, I didn't know that. Now everything makes sense again. I am fairly confident that when I was a kid, I was told that it was literally the light moving it. I hadn't thought about it again until now, when I realized that something was off. It is pretty dismal that I was given an explanation refuted in the 19th century.
Still confused on description you are using right had but the video is showing you are using your left hand .
He said the video has it reversed, and what you are seeing as a left hand is in fact his right.
@@traog Wish he had changed the narration to reflect what is on the video since he is aware of it.
The topic is complex enough without adding additional confusion.
@@hhampton Changing the narration to match what you see in the video versus what he is actually doing would be more confusing. Right hand, rotation going from wrist to fingertips, the thumb points in direction of angular momentum, if you use your left hand the thumb points the opposite direction. What he is describing can be explained with right hand or left hand "rules" but the description of the rotation relative to the hands changes, (the actual rotation remains the same). With the right hand the rotation goes from wrist to fingertips, thump points in direction of torque, to do the same with the left the rotation must go from fingertips to wrist. He could have done it with his left hand as if it was his right and that may have helped, relieve confusion.
Flying I very carefully pointed it out
I lost it at the blue and red vector. What are those?
The Red and Blue vectors represent the Angular Momentum of the same gyroscope, at two different times. The Red vector is the angular momentum, L , of the gyroscope when it was given a faster spin, so it has a greater angular momentum at this time. The Blue vector has a smaller angular momentum using the same gyroscope, just spun slower, and in both cases were facing up, along the y axis, originally. [ note L = Iw, L is the Angular Momentum, I = moment of inertia ... think of it as the resistance of the gyroscope wheel to be spun, and w = angular velocity... e.g., how many revolutions per second spin given to the wheel of the gyroscope. ]
Now, if a force is applied to the gyroscope with the Red angular momentum vector from left to right in the diagram, it pushes the Red vector over LESS than the Blue vector, since the greater Angular momentum of the Red one resists that change more than the Blue one does. The Blue vector L is smaller ( being the same gyroscope, it must have had a smaller w ... angular velocity to start with ) , so it is easier to push over with the same force.
Bob should have compared the Red, Blue vectors to the y axis, in which case the angle between the y axis and the Red vector is smaller than the angle between the y axis and the Blue vector, which we would expect since the Larger angular momentum "resists" changing it's direction more than the smaller angular momentum.
BTW...you can actually feel the resistance to changing the direction of the Angular momentum of a bicycle gyroscope. Check out youtube demos on " conseravtion of angular momentum" .... it's a fun science demo !
@@phasma6669 Why are we even comparing red and blue vector? What are we trying to explain? What's the Y-axis and X-axis? Are they spatial coordinate or inertia and speed?
Yeah, I've seen the bicycle wheel gyro and the lecture.
some of the video was missing. Let me help here, Angular momentum is the resistance to tilting the gyro. The point being made was that with a larger angular moment, the same force applied will tilt the gyro less. The higher the spin rate, the more rigid the gyro is in space, I'll explain it better in the second video.
@xdragon2k It helps to look at vectors with a coordinate system. The X and Y axis are in this case spatial coordinates, you could have used any two orthogonal axes for this diagram, e.g. X and Z, Y and Z. { not sure how inertia would be along an axis, anyway }. Most people think of the Y axis as " upwards" and the horizontal as the X axis, when working with a 2 dim. diagram. Since Bob was using the gyroscope earlier in the video, starting with it's angular momentum aligned with the upwards direction, he called that the Y axis.
As for what we are trying to explain, Bob just wanted people to understand that L resists a change in direction, the larger L is, the more it resists the change. Thus the Red vector will move less in the direction of the applied force [ or should I say it will have a greater resistance to being moved in that direction than the "blue" vector, with a smaller L ]. That will, in fact , cause it to react by moving in the third direction [ in this case, the Z direction, using the Rt. hand Rule ....I like the XYZ form of the Rt. hand rule... index finger is pointing in the direction of the vector L, three remaining finger bent 90 deg. represent the applied force, then the thumb extended points in the direction of the "precession" of the gyroscope ].
Bob will cover that in the video with Gyro compasses he just published... it's nicely done, go check it out. Take care :)
I have a front wheel drive car. It torque steers like a pig in fast corners.
Max Mac ,
That’s not the same thing. Torque steering has nothing to do with any gyroscopic effect.
@@StevenGreenGuz I should've added one of these ;) but emojis are a complete mystery to me.
Max Mac ,
Ah, cool!
I should have known better. My irony often gets mistaken for serious comment.
About Gyroscopes: ruclips.net/video/XPUuF_dECVI/видео.html
YOu might like this vid also.. able to lift 40lbs extended with one hand over his head.
ruclips.net/video/VUh6QXe4mMY/видео.html
Hello Bob! No doubt you've seen this 10 minute film from the WWII era, on the Sperry Mk XIV gyrocompass:
youtube DOT com/watch?v=EM051IXJD9Q
@Flat Earth Math -- Another interesting bit of history on the Sperry Gyrocompass is the manufacture of 5500 gyrocompasses by Chrysler corp during WW2. The pamphlet was titled "A War Job Thought Impossible". There is an online version at www.imperialclub.com/Yr/1945/45Impossible/Cover.htm
How have your experiments gone
Yes part of my prep for these two videos. It is in the one monday
@@SingleMommyOf3 they keep coming back with data 100% correlated with the globe. But I could be mistaken... :-)
@@BobtheScienceGuy The Sperry gyrocompass is ridiculously complicated, it will never work. What's that you say, it DID work? Hmm... ;-)
Spin velocity is a perpendicular vector to the tilting seesaw end velocities of the plane, and this tilting end velocity switches ends twice per rotation, instantaneously resolved to acceleration at the tilt axis. Perpendicular vectors DO NOT affect each other, so tangential spin velocity is NOT affected by tangential tilt velocity. Math has people thinking that rules and laws are causal. Contemporary math is analogous and wrong. If you want the truth, go to Elsevier science's SSRN site. It is somewhat hidden. Search SSRN on Elsevier site, at the bottom, a link says "Visit SSRN." Ends up www.ssrn.com. Search abstract ID: 3587972 Or, if you aren't afraid of links: ssrn.com/author=4143288 Please read this paper and support it or refute it if you can. It needs political backing or it will not get published.
Your blue and red line explaination was terrible. You didn't explain anything. Just that they were red and blue lines at different angles.
Alot of words, but no WHY all this is happening.
The Red and Blue vectors represent the Angular Momentum of the same gyroscope, at two different times. The Red vector is the angular momentum, L , of the gyroscope when it was given a faster spin, so it has a greater angular momentum at this time. The Blue vector has a smaller angular momentum using the same gyroscope, just spun slower, and in both cases were facing up, along the y axis, originally. [ note L = Iw, L is the Angular Momentum, I = moment of inertia ... think of it as the resistance of the gyroscope wheel to be spun, and w = angular velocity... e.g., how many revolutions per second spin given to the wheel of the gyroscope. ]
Now, if a force is applied to the gyroscope with the Red angular momentum vector from left to right in the diagram, it pushes the Red vector over LESS than the Blue vector, since the greater Angular momentum of the Red one resists that change more than the Blue one does. The Blue vector L is smaller ( being the same gyroscope, it must have had a smaller w ... angular velocity to start with ) , so it is easier to push over with the same force.
Comparing the Red and Blue vectors of the angular momentum of our gyroscope to the y axis, the angle between the y axis and the Red vector is smaller than the angle between the y axis and the Blue vector, which we would expect since the Larger angular momentum "resists" changing it's direction more than the smaller angular momentum.
BTW...you can actually feel the resistance to changing the direction of the Angular momentum of a bicycle gyroscope. Check out youtube demos on " conseravtion of angular momentum" .... it's a fun science demo !
When I looked at the video released, it was missing a scene where I lay the foundation for that demonstration. I'll make sure it is in the second part . I must have accidently cut it.
Wtf no music Bob ?
We see to far earth is flat.
#dinosaursarefake. 🤟
LOL.. Don't know how you did it... I am unable to dislike a comment. But when I gave it a thumbs up.. It was added. Pretty deceptive Bobby
Sigh. That just how RUclips works.
I just tested it, I can dislike your comment. I'm thinking you just needed to refresh the page.
If gravity is just a theory and cannot be "proven", and we need to "trust our eyes" rather than all the CGI, then how can these douche bags "trust they're eyes" given that a photon is neither a particle nor wave at any given moment? How can they "trust their eyes" when a photon is not a photon? Also, how do they know they're seeing what they're seeing given persistence of vision? In P.O.V. displays (all displays) we're seeing things that aren't there, they were milliseconds ago, but they're not there in the moment.
Ask these flerfers if they think they're living in the "present" :D
Better yet, accuse them of "being so foolish" as to believe they're actually "present" lol
That brings up a good point. We are always seeing the past. Light travels at about 1 ft every nanosecond. So what you are seeing on your computer monitor happened a nanosecond ago.
@@scott_meyer I know.. right
But NOOOOOOO!!!!!
Bruncle brucle flerflang flefer derp derp religion scientificulation derp derp a derp I'm dense az!!!!
Us: "yeah, but... REALITY"
:D
Bob, You are still trying to debunk the Flat Earth, You will convince the ignorant, that is obvious by some of the comments. Those of us who have seriously studied the matter... Not going to happen. Bobby, There is no curvature.
folks that have to believe will not change their minds. Those with open minds and respect for evidence know the earth is spherical, because that is what the evidence rather than the doctrine shows.
I have studied it seriously - by looking at the actual evidence and gaining a deep understanding of that evidence, and testing the theories that explains the evidence. It was NOT done by watching RUclips videos and ignoring anything that didn't fit a preferred model.
I've seen the evidence, and tested it, and understood it. The Earth is spherical, it rotates and moves. Your refusal to accept or understand the evidence doesn't change reality.
First again
Congrats Ma'am . I wasn't at home for the race .
@MomoTheBellyDancer - That reply to Janey defies your fantasy & mask . Bob TSG ain't your channel , but Banshee Moon is . Don't quit being civil though , SUCKER .
@@abhroy Thank you sir, my hat off to you for all your other successes.
Watch out though, I might get my Grandkids on to this and they'll just keep clicking till the next ones up and beat everyone. LOL just kidding they'd probably go _"awww gran do we have to"_ then start doing other things. And I would not do it to them anyhow
@@janeytheterrible Ma'am . Thank you . Have a nice day .