How does a gyroscope work?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 авг 2024
- Why does a gyroscope not turn in the direction you push it? Seeing the equations that tell me this is not satisfying to me. I have found a way to think about it that allows me to sleep at night.
Vsauce made a much better video explaining it.
Spinning
• Spinning
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zxfEiMksZQs/mqdefault.jpg)
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
No he didn’t, u explained it great
No he didn’t- you opened a door. He got ratings.
There’s no comparison.
Don't undermine yourself. You did it just as good. (if not better speaking personally)
Maybe higher production value, but this made it perfectly clear to me. Somehow, you managed to highlight exactly where I got stuck and provide insight to the solution in the same amount of time that vsauce spent with product placement.
I have never heard anyone use the term "downstream" when describing this phenomenon, but it really makes it easier to visualise! I figured this out on my own, but this explanation makes it so much clearer.
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
Well, the direction of moving particles changes over time when affected by an applied vector force. The downstream term was totally right here.
He don't know how it works.
He is asking you a question.
.
Haha.. sadly this is true..
Skip to the last 5 seconds... That's the best part!
Hehehehahaha.
+Dude31463 ur a different kind of savage.. lol
Jackass The Movie 2.
So... this is very funy
Dude31463 I really did that when I watched this comment
Probably the only person on RUclips that uses a green screen just to replace it with blue screen
Thanks for being curious, curious people are always more interesting.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you!!!
"...I suspect that this gyroscope funny business might be keeping some of you up late at night like it did me." 2:40
-You have no idea.
It's 5:30am... How did he know 😂
XD 🤣
I hate to admit it but i still dont fully understand.
Me tooo
@@jesus2621 same, from his explanation I got the reason why the wheel tilts at a point 90 degrees from where he pushed it if the force is parallel to the axis of rotation, but for gravity its perpendicular to the axis of rotation which confuses me.
So many of us wondering about gyroscopes late at night... it's really real
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
3 am
sorry but u made nothing clear
+qualquan What do you mean, it made perfect sense.
Something can make perfect sense, but still be entirely unclear. Every _expert_ agrees relativity makes perfect sense, but the lay person still can't understand why something looks shorter along the direction it's travelling.
Nothing can be explained to a rock.
I think you maybe need to find a more simple video for more simple people such as yourself. I'm no physicists but it made perfect sense to me.
qualquan rn
5:59...lol....Gyroburn?...
I was actually up late last night bothered by the gyroscope, no joke :)
Zeteticism DotCom same here damn!
Its 1:37am in India and I'm bothered about it right now..
It's 3:34 am for me right now lolololol
You guys will all become Newton 10 years from now :)
The issue is, I understand all this and it's not enough. So I'm fairly doomed to research for a couple extra days.
The last part was funny
Bzzzzp
Ahhh
CZZZZZZZUP
5 min in and this is the best explanation I've ever heard about gyroscopes.
lol,got a lil road rash there at the end.He suffers for his craft.
For me his explanation (mostly demonstration) was exactly what i need to get it.
For dose who didn't get it, i suspect that the prospective of camera is what makes it hard to notice what he is trying to demonstrate.
Practically the reason behind the gyroscopic precision effect(cant spell the word) comes from the law of inertia.
Inertia is what should be known as resistance to change, in the context of physics that would be the masses resistance to change of motion.
Practically his demonstration shows that when he pushes on a "point of mass" (note "point of mass") there are mainly two things i imagin happen :
1. The "point of mass) he has pushed on has its Inertia( resistance to change), wich couses the particals on that "point of mass" to slightly diflect in the direction pushed, the pushed mass still keeps its perpendicular motion(reletive to push direction) from the orginal spinning motion,
This small deflection angle will result most evident 90° from the push.
2. 2nd point is that the orginal pushed 'point of mass' has moved postion with time, meaning that the point I have pushed on before, dose not find itself anymore where my finger has pushed it. Hence a fenomeno of travel and time.
Those who didn't get it focus more on what he is trying to say word by word from 5:05 to 5:10. "High point is 90 degree down streams from the point where force was applied." We observe same in case of spinning wheel also. When a torque is applied we expect it to rotate in an axis parallel to torque but it rather rotates on a axis 90 degree to the torque.
He deduced the outcome for the linearly moving particle scenario when a force is applied upwards momentarily. Similarly try to deduce the outcome of the scenario he explained with a particle rotating in the circle where a force is applied upwards momentarily at a point A but the plane of rotation moves up from a point B 90 degree further. The ball is rotating with a velocity V with constant magnitude/speed S but changing direction. As direction of velocity keeps changing, there is a change in velocity & hence a continuous inward acceleration A of constant magnitude S*S/R but also keeps changing direction. Now when an upward force is given momentarily then an upward acceleration is produced momentarily resulting in an upward velocity component V2 at point A. Now the upward velocity V2, tangential velocity V and continuously inward acceleration A (which keeps changing direction) together results in the plane of rotation move up from a point B 90 degree further. Try the mathematical deduction yourself.
Its 1:32am in Chicago and Ive been up all night trying to understand this phenomenon visually and intuitively. This is an excellent video. Ty
Your analysis is spot on sir, in finding where we go wrong. A little more elaboration on the real question answer portion would make it easily comprehendible.
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
I enjoyed how you told us how you came to your conclusions as opposed to just flat telling us the answer. The process of arriving to a conclusion is just as important as the conclusion it's self.
PERFECT It was so easy to understand, teachers can't explain why it happens, just that it happens.
Terrific. Concise and compelling presentation all the way through to a bigger, more challenging question at the end.
To the person who made this video:
This is a very well demonstrated video! It really cleared a few unclear things I'm my mind! I really appreciate the effort you have taken to make this video!
Ignore those few guys there and keep up the good work!:)
u only told how u learned but didnt told what u learned
Shk bit harsh there, this is a global website not a Facebook group haha least he tried
@@shk1035 I'm sure English is his second or third language. You obviously only speak English. Your comment makes you come across ignorant, simple, bratty and sheltered.
that's good enough. because if he told us what he learnt it would be his own personal opinion
r/ihadastroke
Basically, it spins really fast, the same was a bicycle stays upright with more speed happens with the gyroscope, I found this video first when looking for a more mechanical explanation so I can't really confirm what or if anything even spins really fast in a gryoscope.
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
@@WarmWeatherGuy thanks :)
One of the best videos on this subject.
Best Tim and Erich sketch I've seen so far.
The man burns himself with a tire in the name of science! Thank you!
that tire must've rubbed off some of his arm hairs
I came here to understand how How does a gyroscope work?, I understand now I can't understand how does a gyroscope work
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
If I slapped invisible Sally for breaking my momentum, would I go to jail?
This is a very interesting video, and I love your passion for physics. The fact that you spent a day in the library researching a gyroscope is true commitment. I am definitely inspired by you to research more myself.
In the end, Sally pushes the spinning ball and it turns just the same way as a non spinning wheel did?
+luwn00bz The ball is to represent a piece of the wheel, perhaps a single atom. Don't think of it as spinning but just moving in a straight line. Sally pushes up and it then starts going up retains its sideways motion.
+WarmWeatherGuy wish you had more video of the ball on the wheel. hard to follow when it cuts in and out so fast
But the tilt would be shifted by an angle of 90 degrees from the point at which the impulse was applied, wouldn't it?
One needs; some mathematical background, and time to digest this man's idealistic explanation, then it indeed makes perfect sense.
There.....there's the real scientist we got there.
I can see how people find this boring, but I find it fantastic. The author is explaining how standard "explanations" often offer no real explanation at all, and others give explanaitons which are inaccessible to someone without certain skills, and finally, how a deeply insightful REAL understanding is invaluable.
For another example, almost all explanaitons of flight are tiresome drivel about how the air "has to go faster" over the wing, and how this "created lower pressure". It's not an explanation at all, it's a trotting out of dogma imparting NO real understanding. WHY does the air have to go faster over the top? Why is faster moving air at a lower pressure? It's just moving the mystery around, not removing it at all.
The light on gyroscopes dawned for me with a simple device. A bunch of flexible spokes on a wheel with no rim. Instead of the rim - a bunch of tennis balls. It'll spin like a normal wheel but as you change the rotation axis, the ball try to carry on moving in their old rotational plane (due to Newton's first law) and the spokes flex. That flexing exerts a force on the wheel's axis which resists further deflection of the axis.
Bingo. It's all about Newton's first law.
Real deep understanding is incredibly rewarding and useful. A gyroscope is just a special case.
But why does it, I mean you can turn a wheel 180 degrees and it's happy again. Why not start it at a 45 degree angle, whoops it suddenly wants to got at right angles.
It will try to maintain whatever angle you set.
I'm leaving a comment for the RUclips algorithm. Guys, this is great content
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
Now, who is Sally in our precession problem?
Very helpful, thank you. When you explained your ah-ha moment, it gave me one.
5:13 So I think I got this correct me if I'm wrong. The ball is rotating on a plane parallel to the floor (X axis) so the ball has a certain angular momentum on the x direction and wants to keep it. So when you apply a force in the Y direction (parallel to the walls) you don't cancel the momentum the ball had in the X direction so the ball now goes up (force in the Y direction) but it also rotates around the X axis (parallel to the floor). So the net result of this two component is a tilted wheel. When you look separately at these two components on a tilted wheel it all makes sense if you were to look down from the roof (looking on the x axis on plane) without the perception of depth you would see just a ball rotating, in the same way you looked from the wall(looking at the Y plane) you would just see the ball go up. When you stop applying the force the ball does not go up anymore (there is no force to push it up) so the wheel goes from tilted to parallel to the ground. Also if the wheel and ball were not spinning(no angular momentum) the sistem would just go up.
This video by Vsauce explains it way better. ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
That phenomenon happens because the weight of the spinning wheel acting down and suspension point acting up, pushes out the upper particles and pulls in the particles on the upper half and lower half of the wheel. As the particles are spinning this action will continuously change the direction of the horizontal diameter.
With the horizontal diameter continuously changing the "thickness" of the voluminous path/channel through which the wheel travels will permit the mass particles to fluctuate laterally in the thicker volume of the cycloidal path in which the mass particles are made to follow. Surprisingly enough the lateral fluctuating accelerations/decelerations will create in INWARD acting centrifugal force on the upper half of the spinning wheel and an OUTWARD acting centrifugal force on the lower half of the spinning wheel. It is these two opposite centrifugal forces that keep the wheel precessing and spinning around the suspension pivot.
What you said seems to be right, it's best to have a diagram to illustrate it.
I think we agree. That linear thing along the side is what starts it, but take that a step further, because it does not explain why a gyro 'resists' tilting motions. The next step is realizing that that initial reaction is itself a second input effect, but it is 90 degrees later than your initial input. The cool thing is that the second effect has inverted forces compared to the first. That's why a gyro is stable. Any input tilt gets ejected by the second effect. Brace the gyro along a diametrical axis, and it will tilt easily without resistance. Mechanisms are great right? You won't get it published, because it contradicts the math.
@5.58 this must be the gyro-scrape that kept him up all night. What a gyro-pain in the arm-ascope
I don't understand it just as much as I didn't before I saw this video, but now I'm anxious because I now know there is someone who does understand it. Conclusion: I wish I hadn't seen this video.
Now I learned that gyroscope can give you bruise
"I had to go through a lot of books because none of them would answer my question."
Jeez man, I have no idea what that's like...
sarcasm?
mlg Yes, referring to the eternity he takes to start fucking explaining.
Christopher Hayes You have some issues man.
Christopher Hayes You have some issues man.
WHAT I UNDERSTOOD IS IN A GOOGLE CARDBOARD WHEN I LOOK TO THE RIGHT THE SCREEN OR THE PARONAMA PHOTO ,MOVES TO THE LEFT
Awesome explanation, i've been searching for an hour and this video explains it perfectly
I had made a gyroscope with this idea thanks for this video
Finally I understood it. Thank you for sharing this.
Too many thumbs down, too many blinds.
I had a similar way to make it more intuitive, a train (or many) over a circual railway around a planet. Yours is even easier to understand
My question is why the middle of a 3 axis gyroscope needs to spin at all. Why not just put a weight slightly below the gyroscopes center of gravity? Wouldn’t it stabilize in the same way?
Bt y does a stationary wheel fall when we tried to stand it vertical?? Although the vertical forces are balanced (N =MG) , bt still it falls rightwards or leftwards ?? Why ?? And which force is responsible to make it fall?
im really thank you about your teaching im also one person who searching how gyro works why does it works like that in the late night like you saidi just thank u from korea
That wheel burning is going to keep you awake at night as well
this was super helpful in discerning the basic of it. Thanks so much
This is still unclear. I don't understand how does the correction works? With some external force applied, there must be some change in the angle of rotation.
Vsauce did a way better job of explaining. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
All those who liked this video, please don't lie to me that he explained gyroscopes to your satisfaction.
I still don't understand why it 'resists' gravity. Wouldn't there be a net downward force over the whole system? It's not a single force applied to one point "tilting' the system, but should be pulling every particle in the system downward...
I should clarify I mean when the wheel is attached to the string. There is no 'counter weight' to offset the wheel, so why does the wheel not 'fall'?
Yeah right , in the old days you had to go to the library.
The entire reason a gyroscope displays "precession" and "angular momentum" is because of the bearings (or rotation point) of the spinning wheel's axle. I prove it in the video in the link below. The video It's a little long (put it in 1.5 speed if my helium voice isn't more irritating than normal speed...) - but I explain beyond a shadow of a doubt why gyroscopes display angular momentum and precession. The "torque" of centrifugal force the spinning wheel creates is transferred to its bearings (or left & right or front & back) points of contact between the wheel (rotating mass) and its axle (stationary mass). The above is also why when outside torque is applied - the "motion" of the entire gyroscope always makes a 90 degree angle of movement transfer in the direction of rotation of the gyroscope - from the direction the torque is applied (the actual degree of the angle of energy direction transfer is proportionate to speed of rotation (flywheel energy) and amount of side direction torque applied) . Check this out and tell me that I am wrong. ruclips.net/video/cF5fAQcZMvM/видео.html&lc=z23rvnupezfzvjjbn04t1aokgln1ldx1ctwjatxo0ozxbk0h00410
I like this analogy, think it is reasonable and will probably use it in this simple form. It is ok, but careful analysis shows the limitation. In the linear model, the speed after Sally "pushes", becomes the vector sum of the before speed and after. The speed in the new direction is greater. However, the wheel does not speed up. You must be careful with this aspect of your explanation
I am not some genius physicist and im not here to argue. That being said, does it not speed up? The entire wheel starts rotating in a direction perpendicular to a direction that it was spinning. There is a new SUM ROTATIONAL VELOCITY, just like there is a sum linear velocity in the linear example with the force applied in the Y direction.
+David Tregaskis Hi David, Discus: I had to stop and think about your comment. If I understand you correctly, you have run into the limitation that I mention above. His simple linear model is incomplete as we shall see....At first, it is tempting to think that we can't violate Newton (we cannot) and, therefore, must see some acceleration and net speed increase, just as in the linear motion version. This means we should see a net speed increase in a new direction. Forces and, therefore velocities add vectorially. In the traveling ball, linear case we apply a single force in the Y dorection. This is called translation. The object's center of mass experiences a translation of its center of mass along a new direction. So far so good....But, when his wheel precesses due to gravity, we don't see that anything appears to be speeding up. The wheel spins on the axel at the same RPM and it precesses at a constant rate. SO, where is this new speed? If we are applying some constant force, then we expect to see some constant acceleration and, therefore, a steady speed increase somewhere, right? But we don't see this happen. We see, instead, what appears to be a constrant rate of precession. ... However, the force we have placed on the wheel is not a translational force, but a rotational force - a torque, or a moment. In some places this is called "a couple", meaning a couple of forces. We must apply two forces that act in opposite directions, but on two different parts of the object and not along the same line. They are not co-axiel, or co-linear. One is upward by the string at one axel end and the other is on the whole wheel's center of mass by gravity (at the center of the axel) and there is no resulting translation. The wheel does not fall, nor climb in altitude. Doing this we do not translate the center of mass and have no (linear) velocity change. ...So, now we must improve the "linear model" to include two balls on opposite ends of a diameter. These two accelerations are now equal and in opposite directions, but not co-linear, so there is no acceleration of the wheel's center of mass and we do not violate Newton, at least in the linear way of looking at it.. ...What we see is the characteristic of the gyroscope. A "couple" applied to it causes a constant change in direction of the axel which is at 90 degrees to both the couple and axis of rotation...and it "sort of" makes sense from the linear model....Make sense?-- Cheers
So its easier to understand why the gyroscope changes to a particular direction when it's pushed at a right angle to its spin, if you image you are actually on the gyroscope.
The direction change is the sum right angle vector (pythagoras), of the gyroscope's angular acceleration force and the additional force applied.
I somehow finished this vid more confused then when I started
I still don't get it. Why is the highest point 90 degrees downstream from where the force was applied?
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
@@WarmWeatherGuy Thank you! I finally understand it now
It's sorcery Dude.
Sorry. Had to say something after I thought a bit myself.
Let’s just make it easy and less confusing.
If you’ve ever swung an object on a piece of string or a rope you may recall the tugging force you felt at each revolution of the object on the string.
In between each tugging force you may recall a relief in the force almost like it felt lighter.
This back and forth forms an equilibrium at the axle of the gyroscope.
The gyroscope has a wheel but the principal is the same with the string and object example. The only difference is the energy transferred to spin the wheel is likely concentrated in the heaviest part of the wheel (subtle imperfections) and that is at its greatest momentum.
If the gyroscope wheel had perfect anatomical roundness and equal proportions then when sufficiently spun it would not bounce up and down on its axis as much as gyroscopes normally do.
Or if at all
Its 12:37am. This was keeping me awake! Good explanation.
There's mistake on the 1:16, it must turn on the left and this point, what happens in the demonstration in the end.
Updated ***Synopses***: Energy & Matter - Centrifugal Force - Inertia - Orbital Mechanics of Celestial Bodies - Magnetism - Gravity.
Energy: To quote from Mike Flynne’s book “Infinity In Your Pocket” page 68;
Energy is a controversial topic among scientists. Everyone knows what energy does but no one seems to be certain what it is. Essentially there are two models used to describe the nature and behaviour of energy; the transformation model and the transference model.
Rather than rely upon two contradictory theoretical models, we will be relying upon knowledge which is commonly available, and make use of this to take a step by step approach toward understanding energy and matter.
Oxford English Dictionary (Abrv, OED)
OED: Energy: The capacity of matter or radiation to do work: The means of doing work by utilising matter or radiation.
OED: Matter, a *physical* substance in general as distinct from *mind and spirit*.
Three Universal Foundations - Fundamentals
Regardless of all assertions and all theories to the contrary, all things of the universal Cosmos are made up of two primary things, physical matter and energy,
Matter could not do any work or exist without energy, energy could not do any work or exist without matter.
Life could not exist without physical matter and energy, intelligent life could not exist or do any work without metaphysical energy,
Law of Physics
Gravitation: A force of attraction between any particle of matter in the universe and any other”.
Rational
Fact: Particles of matter exist both at the lower invisible level of the quantum microcosmic universe, and higher visible level of the macro-cosmic universe.
Laws of Physics
There must be an input of energy for there to be an output of energy (Equally, without an input of energy, there cannot be an output of energy).
Given a continuous input of energy there must be a continuous output of energy.
Fact: The use of the two words input and output denotes that, particles of matter are *intermediary vehicles* between an energy input and an energy output.
Fact: Particles of matter both at the invisible quantum level and the macro-cosmic level of the universe, serve as the input and output vehicles for the transition of energy between any particle of energy in the universe and any other.
Fact: As quantum energy is the only substance that surrounds fuels and pervades through all particles of matter throughout the Cosmos, so it is that quantum energy also serves the role of being the universal oceanic medium of transit for all particles and wavelengths of particles of matter.
Further confirmation
Law of Physics: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction
Given that NASA uses jet propulsion to drive and steer its space rockets through outer-space, and the propulsion of rockets is reliant upon there being matter present for the jet exhaust to react against and convert it into the power of thrust.
So it is that the oceanic medium of outer-space is comprised of invisible quantum particles of matter and energy.
OED: Energy: The capacity of matter or radiation to do work: The means of doing work by utilising matter or radiation.
Rational
Fact: It is the input of energy into particles/vehicles of matter both at the invisible quantum level, and the macro-cosmic level of the universe, that causes particles of matter to move and to do work throughout the universe.
Fact: Energy is the fundamental fuel of the motions (work) of all particles of matter, in the universe and their outputs of radiant energy..
Fact: It is the outputs of radiant energy between all particles of matter in the invisible universe and the visible universe that causes them to be attracted toward and interact with each other.
Fact: Particles of quantum and macro-cosmic matter exist within all fluids, gases, plasmas and all solids of the universe, regardless as to where these states of matter may exist in the universe.
Fact: Particles of matter require an instantaneous and constant input of energy, in order to fuel their instant and constant speeds of motion, and their constant outputs of radiant energy, regardless as to where these states of matter may exist in the universe.
Fact: All sizes of the particles of matter of the quantum and the macro-cosmic universe require this invisible and instantaneous supply of energy, in order for them to be able to attract and interact with other particles of matter.
Fact: It is the size and the density of particles/vehicles of matter that determines, the quantity of input energy that is needed, to fuel their motions and the quantity of radiant energy output force that is needed to cause them to be attracted toward and to interact with each other, so that they can combine and grow.
OED: Force: A measurable influence that causes something to move.
Rational
Fact: Potential force is the sum of the quantity of energy that is present within particles of matter.
Fact: Without an input of energy into particles of matter, their structures could not exist or possess any form of motion.
Fact: Without greater inputs of energy into particles of matter than that of their basic requirements for motion, particles of matter could not emit outputs of influential radiant force.
Fact: Without the presence of smaller particles of matter within the emitted radiations from larger particles of matter, the radiations emitted could not possess a motion of influential force.
Fact: Force is the sum of the quantity of energy and particles emitted during their radiant interactions with other particles of matter, or the sum of the energy that is released when a particle of matter is invested with a greater amount of energy than its limits of matter can contain.
Fact: Given particles of matter that become invested with a greater quantity of energy than they can contain (e.g. a nuclear mass going critical), the released energy and matter returns to a free state of existence within the surrounding quantum universal ocean of energy and matter.
First Law of Thermodynamics
Energy may be converted but energy cannot be either created or destroyed.
Fact: Quantum energy and quantum matter cannot be created or destroyed
Rational
Fact: Energy is not matter (m) and matter is not energy (e).
Fact: Neither energy or matter is mass.
Fact: Energy does not equal mass, matter does equal mass
Fact: Mass equals the quantity of energy present within particles and bodies of matter, relative to the quantity of matter present within the structures of particles and bodies of matter, which equates in each case to being their combined density of potential force.
OED: Matter, a *physical* substance in general as distinct from *mind and spirit*.
Fact: As the substance of energy is not physical in nature, it is *Metaphysical* in nature.
Fact: As energy is metaphysical in nature, it cannot be in a physical sense *Any---Thing* whatsoever.
Fact: As the substance of energy exists but it is not *Any---Thing* whatsoever, so it is that energy exists as an all-pervasive state of being *No-Thing* physical.
Fact: The Cosmos is made up of some-thing called matter, and no-thing called energy.
Fact: Energy and matter may be converted, but energy and matter cannot be created or destroyed. Please see also: Centrifugal Force - Inertia - Orbital Mechanics of Celestial Bodies - Magnetism - Gravity continued as a reply to this comment www.fromthecircletothesphere.net
SYNOPSES: Centrifugal Force - Inertia - Orbital Mechanics of Celestial Bodies - Magnetism - Gravity
OED: Centrifugal force an apparent force that acts on a body moving about a centre.
OED: Centrifugal moving or tending to move away from a centre.
SYNOPSIS CENTRIFUGAL FORCE
Fact: All of particles of matter, bodies of matter, celestial bodies, and all galaxies of the Cosmos possess a rotation of spin around a central axis point which is their centre of gravitation.
Fact: The centres of gravitation of all of particles of matter, bodies of matter, celestial bodies, and all galaxies of the Cosmos[ according to their sizes, densities and rates of spin receive a centripetal input of quantum energy from their surrounding space, and subsequently generate an outwardly driven power of centrifugal force from their centres of gravitation.
Fact: The greater the quantity of energy input, the greater is the concentration of energy at a centre of gravitation, and the greater is the power of outwardly driven centrifugal force.
Proof: E.G. The hammer of a hammer thrower; the faster the rotation of the hammer around the central axis of the thrower, the greater is the input of quantum energy and hence the outwardly driven power of gravity defying centrifugal force acting on the hammer.
SYNOPSIS INERTIA
Fact: A gyroscope without an input of rotational force to its disc, will lie upon a surface and do nothing.
Fact: When a gyroscope is given an input of rotational force and then stood on its vertical axis, the gyroscope stays erect without any visible means of support as long as the disc continues spin around the vertical axis.
Reiteration: Quantum energy serves as the transit medium for all particles and wavelengths of particles entering the atoms of the Earth’s atmosphere and its body of structure, and as fuel for all particles of matter within the Earth’s atmosphere, upon its surface, within its structure, magnetic core, and its surrounding magnetosphere.
Fact: It is the input of rotational force into the gyroscopes disc, acting in combination with quantum energy and particles that enable the gyroscope to stand erect and defy gravity.
Mechanics
Mechanically speaking, what occurs when rotation is applied to the disc of a gyroscope is essentially no different, to that which occurs when rotation is applied to any body of matter.
What occurs when a force of rotation is applied to the disc of a gyroscope, is that the downward travelling q-energy and gravitons are blocked from passing down through the disc and on toward the Earth’s centre of gravity.
Instead, the q-energy and gravitons enter into the surface and body of the rotating disc, and then centrifugally driven toward, and outwards from the rotating edge of the disc. In effect this serves to form an invisible halo of q-energy and gravitons around and rotating with the edge of the disc.
As such, and as with the nature of a common seesaw, the central disc is converted into being a circular fulcrum point of balance, and the circular halo serves as a surrounding rim of circular leverage.
The result being, that as the downward acting force of gravity (q-energy and gravitons) (gravity) is perfectly distributed over the surface of the disc and the surrounding rim of circular leverage, so the disc is forced to stay level and its axis vertical, until the discs force of rotation runs down.
SYNOPSIS ORBITAL MECHANICS OF CELESTIAL BODIES
Fact: Without exception all rotating spheres generate centrifugal force from their centres of gravity.
Fact: Without the surrounding presence of the oceanic medium of q-energy and gravitons, for the outputs of centrifugal and gravitational force to react against, none of them would be able to maintain their spatial positions in outer and interstellar space.
For example, our Sun is continuously receiving an enormous input of quantum energy and matter (gravitons) from the surrounding ocean, which serves to fuel its rotation, its nuclear reactions and its continuous output of centrifugally driven gravitational force.
As such given its humongous size and density of energy and matter, it exerts such a tremendous power of centrifugally driven gravitational attraction and centrifugally driven repulsion (Bipolar forces) towards the planets of the solar system, that it is able to (As with the nature of hammer-throwing) both repel and restrain the positions of orbiting planets at one and the same time, and so maintain their orbital positions in outer-space.
However, given that the Sun is a seething volatile mass of fluctuating nuclear reactions and explosions, from a theoretical standpoint, one might assume that this would serve to destabilise the orbits of the planets.
But this is not the case, because the planets are also rotating and exerting their own levels of centrifugally driven gravitational force into the surrounding ocean q-energy and gravitons, which serve to stabilize and maintain both their own spatial positions in orbit around the Sun. And to stabilize and maintain the spatial positions of any moons and satellites orbiting within their gravitational fields (Saturn being the perfect example of planetary centrifugal and gravitational balance).
SYNOPSIS MAGNETISM
Fact: The planet Earth is a bipolar magnetic Celestial body which is rotating around the axis of its molten iron and nickel magnetic centre of gravity, at a speed of 1,000 miles per hour.
Reiteration
Fact: As quantum energy is the only substance that surrounds fuels and pervades through all particles of matter throughout the Cosmos, so it is that quantum energy also serves the role of being the universal oceanic medium of transit for all particles and wavelengths of particles of matter.
Fact: Quantum energy serves as the transit medium for all particles and wavelengths of particles entering the Earth’s atmosphere and its body of structure, and as fuel for all particles of matter within the Earth’s atmosphere, upon its surface, within its structure, magnetic core, and its surrounding magnetosphere.
Fact: Given a continuous input of energy there must be a continuous output of energy.
Mechanistically speaking, the Earth is a large bipolar permanent magnet rapidly rotating at a speed of 1000 mph, and as with the nature of all spinning objects, it generates an outwardly driven centrifugal force from its centre of gravity.
And it is this outwardly driven centrifugal force which serves to drive the concentrated and formed waves of electromagnetic quantum particles of matter from the magnetic core of the Earth, to form its surrounding magnetosphere (Magnetic Field/Gravitational Field).
Proof: Again mechanistically speaking, this is exactly the same method we use to produce electricity whereby, we rotate a permanent magnet which increases the input of quantum energy and quantum electromagnetic particles into the magnet, and so increases the size of the magnetic field and the output of electromagnetic particles from the magnet.
Given a constant input of electromagnetic particles into and from the rotating magnet, when the magnet is surrounded by a conductive coil, the output of electromagnetic particles is captured along and within the length of the coil and there concentrated into a flowing current of electricity.
SYNOPSIS Gravity
Fact: Given that we have shown that it is an input of cosmic quantum energy and quantum electromagnetic particles into both the Earth's magnetic core and the centres of gravity of permanent magnets that serves to create their magnetic fields.
OED: Gravitation A force of attraction “between any particle of matter in the universe and any other.
And that it is cosmic quantum energy that serves to create the gravitational attractions acting between all particles of matter in the universe, so it is that we can say that it is quantum energy and quantum particles of matter, that serve to create the force of gravity.
www.fromthecircletothesphere.net
2:50 is when he starts talking science and not gibberish
After a lifetime of listening to maths talking heads trying to describe the nature of calculus in overly complicated language obscure metaphors, you nailed it in one paragraph at 4:00.
Now I can see that what I thought was Newton’s genius complex mathematical ingenuity was actually Newton’s genius of a simple observation which he understood maths couldn’t describe adequately.
Kudos for everyone.
a = m / s^2 v = m/s a = v x s "Go" is in there, technically. The effect is due to the nature of the gryo, which is that it spins around an axis, meaning it has angular momentum, and the even distribution of weight energy creates a natural equilibrium that turns the kinetic energy into kinetic-potential energy. This makes the object heavier and no only appear to have more mass, but also appear to have a different gravitational signature; meaning, that gravity reads (sees) the energy distribution and not the mass location (matter is just one of the matrices that energy moves through), thus giving the object a different gravitational shape, one that balances. This happens to produce the balance needed to conserve the energy that is in the state of kinetic-potential energy and any threat to this state will be protected by giving up some of the stored energy to maintain the current state by providing an equal and opposite reaction instantaneously.
If a top is heavy enough and spinning fast enough, the affect that you have on the top when you touch it and it bounces off would reverse; it would stay still, and you would go flying. This is the energy stored in it and coming into contact creates friction and that friction resists what the energy wants to do, so it transfers some to you causing separation and restoring balance. If you upset the balance, the top will want it back but it may not have the energy to regain a higher level of balance that was closer to perfect, so will then settle at a new balance. Any balance that has motion has an energy leak. So long as energy is inside of the object and the object is a spinning object, it will attempt to conserve energy and the extra energy inside the mass changes its gravity signature. That is my theory any how.
The image you just painted in my mind of a person touching a spinning top and then flying off into the stratosphere is fucking hilarious.
Momentum, inertia, they only exist if disturbed? Does there have to be a second object of consideration to make momentum / inertia real?
This was a very clear and consise explanation, I am very thankful to you, great job!
It's definitely kept me up at night lol
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!
You had a pretty big build up and I was thinking to myself 'This guy has been down my road. He sees my light is off and he says he knows how to turn it on!' lol 😆
And boy, did you! Translating it into a linear motion totally eased my mind!
"At least," I thought "in the 'pushing a spinning wheel' sense;" I immediately wondered if it explained the (seemingly) levitating wheel when attached to a rope. ..
AND IT DID!
The 'pushing force' was originally a single blow, to the wheel, that registered 90° later *on the wheel*.
Now, this new force, gravity, is a continuous force (rather than a blow); but the force is still registered 90° later (fluid like collisions), so:
A pull down (depending on spinning) would produce a turn to the left or the right; therefore a constant pull down (gravity) would produce a constant force to the left or the right!
Thank you SO MUCH!!
The only thing that confuses me is why it's consistently 90° at nearly any speed.
As was said: 'with no spin, the force is exactly where you apply it.' Now imagine spinning it at a speed where it rotates 75° and stops. The force will complete at 75°.
Ok, so if it can go under 90°, can it go over or is it just 90°, no matter what, once you hit the minimum speed for it to go that far?
This has given me lots of other things to think about too! Thanks!!!!!!!
Vsauce made a much better video explaining it.
Spinning
ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
You might go to sleep but your mind does not, it was trying to solve, while your body was asleep.
anyway thanks for posting.
VERY interesting; i'll remember things do not always move in the direction you push on them!!! that helps understanding gyros; *THANK YOU* hope you pass the 1 million soon.
Thanks - This cleared things up for me.
I remember learning this and understanding it but I forgot after a few years. It does have to do with two competing vectors. One from the rotation of the wheel and I believe the other from the weight of the wheel.
As an engineer, I completely agree with your idea. I have also used ERICCO's inertial navigation products for two years, and they are very high-quality!
When you took out the tennis ball, I realised you were using a greenscreen. Why were you using a greenscreen only to have a plain blue background?
It doesn't keep me up. I had a eureka moment running this morning that we might be able to create a cool equivalent to semiconductors by creating a gyroscopic electromagnetic system with electric current and electromagnetism. Instead of pressure or coldness it can create the same conditions using the same system of gyroscopes. No idea how but it could create a gyroscopic equivalent.
Great demo/explanation. It answered my question.
Thanks for the clear explanation.
*"I went to the library, but the books had equations I didn't understand. So let me show you more equations and pictures so you too will not understand!"*
Vsauce did a way better job. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
Nice, I was bothered too. Correct me; Maybe it is the resulting force going along with direction of rotation in reaction to the applied force? Resultant maybe?
Hi WWG, it might help you get the grasp of gyroscopic movement. Gyroscopic Precession LONG VERSION explained logically (Spinning Tire on a string gyroscope gyro) I finally understand completely through this youtub clip and another one explaining Earth precession. Have fun friend. Here from Seoul. bye.
wouldn't this gyroscope phenomenon me easier to explain if you slow down time and think about how the wheel reacts when it loses balance as it rotates? How the rotation offsets the loss of balance and re-establishes what ever the equilibrium should be. Am i getting this right? I don't have much of a post secondary math education.
You can sit and write a few equations using simple trigonometry to calculate the force in one axis given that there's a force in another axis 90 deg apart. The key is to use a tiny increment in your equations so that the squared terms can be ignored. Easier still is to make the rotational speed of one axis constant, then calculate the required force in an orthogonal axis required to keep that constant velocity. Try it! If you know basic (I mean VERY basic) physics like, F=m*A and trigonometry, the equations will be apparent in a few minutes.
I don't think this is quite right. When 'Sally' pushes upwards on the right edge of the rotating wheel (that is, the viewers' right, not the presenter's) the top part of the wheel will tilt towards us and the bottom part away from us. The demo doesn't show that. This can be modelled using your first and second fingers and thumb, a bit like with the 'motor' rule and the 'generator rule' in electromagnetism. The fingers and thumb point along the axes of rotation. Using your right hand, point your thumb upwards. That's the axis of rotation of the wheel. Point your first finger at the screen. That's the axis of rotation of Sally's turning force. Your second finger points right to left. That's the axis of rotation of the resulting twist of the wheel.
for the people who had a hard time understanding what he demonstrated.
ill try to draw it.
the o is the body in motion.
linear motion example.
o->
moment of impulse:
o->
^
|
the push vector
result after the push:
^
/
o
sorry for the weird arrow but thats how i can draw an angled line useing text.
for circular motion:
top view
lets ignore one particle and only consider the lower one
( )
o->
now lets look from side view:
o->
side view looks the same as the linear example.
so what happens if i apply a force up to that particle in circular movement?
( )
o->
lets say i push on that particle (at that same moment and position of space)
(from underneath it)
o->
^
|
resulted vector:
^
/
o
the particle on the other side would have the opposite effect
o
/
v
so together they form
^
/
o
/
v
from the side view of both the particles seen together :
this is a flat image but:
remember that there is “depth”
that image is two particles.
when we are looking at this
from the side view, we see this:
the particle in front is covering the one behind.
we can see the vectors as if they where on the same vertical plane but they aren't.
so thats why he says its the same as for the linear example.
o->
^
|
its just harder to imagine the concept in circular motion.
i say particle, but they are actually one solid body(mass)
so that means they are jointed together,
and thats why pushing one particle(area) of that spinning mass(wheel)
it will have effect on all the members of particles of that mass.
if they where free particles, the push of one particle would not effect the other particles.
That ending was awsome
Think of the spinning rim as wanting to continue in a straight line (here made a circular rotation), and any deviation from that course (as per Newton) requires a counter force. Pushing up on the axis confronts this spinning force and the compromise between the two forces is the axial rotation. Its like the gyro says, "OK you can do that, but not without me doing this." It only seems magical because the force of the gyro is not obvious.
That helped me understand better and be able to explain it to my children better. Thank you.
Why are you in front of a greenscreen to make the background blue just literally stand in front of a blue wall
Maybe he doesnt have one dumbass
He has got green wall only. :-D
If he did a chromakey over a porn flick, RUclips would nix his video so, probably better the blue wall.
A green screen that also affects your green tennis ball in your demonstration.
please give me conclusion
working out why it moves when you push it is the easy part how about figuring out how a gyroscope does what it does after all regardless off the fact its spinning the weight should cause it to fall furthermore how can a heavy spinning wheel be lifted with ease where does the weight go?
Jason Leo You might want to watch this video: ruclips.net/video/GeyDf4ooPdo/видео.html where Veritasium discusses this phenomenon.
WarmWeatherGuy
So the spinning tire moves because the point of contact & applied force is only at 1 instance of its' cycle?
Were we to apply equal force to the entirety of the objects' rotation it would move more predictably/conventionally?
Vsauce did a way better job explaining it. Check out this video - Spinning: ruclips.net/video/XHGKIzCcVa0/видео.html
I love attempts to explain this. I've heard 'em all