It's the 1974 Royal Institution Christmas Lecture. If you watch it all, he'll tell you all about it.
I'd link to hooktube, but I'm not sure if they handle playlists properly. It's a good one.
As for the lectures, they've been doing them for years. I think I've seen all the lectures they have made available - which I think is all those recorded to video. My favorite is with the physicist Dr. Brian Cox. My second favorite is by a chemist and it's mind blowing.
It's not "well understood". Eric Laithwaite's paper was declined because the pathetic "science" establishment doesn't want people to know a simple gyroscope defies man-made "laws" of physics.
Note, he finally came to his senses and admitted that gyroscopes follow Newtonian physics. There's no mystery. It's well understood. Just because you don't understand, doesn't make it magic. It's not magic, it's just weird - until you understand the gyroscopic effects and then, after that, it is pretty intuitive.
.... wow. That is one of the most pathetic and slanderous Wikipedia articles out there.
He never "admitted" anything. Stop spreading pathetic slanderous lies. But then again we know why you are here... #Disinfo
Ping @the_cat (maybe he's interested in giggling).
That you think I'm here for some sort of "disinfo" makes me giggle. I'm a retired old mathematician in Northwestern Maine. I'm not some disinfo anything. I'm just a people - a people who actually has some grad-school level physics under his belt.
wow.... F = ma cover up the fact you are spreading pathetic "Wikipedia" lies. A gyroscope precesses with zero angular momentum and centripetal force. Again stop your pathetic disinfo, but then again we know why you are here.
Dude, there's no mystery about how gyroscopes work. The dude himself even came to his senses - you can READ the citation. I know you can read, you keep responding.
Also, voting my replies down only makes you look immature and silly. I don't mind, but you aren't doing your reputation any favors. Go see a psychiatrist. I am a doctor, but not that kind of doctor. Unlike you, I have a PhD in applied mathematics. Read a book!
BBC has blocked it - so fire up your VPN and skip ahead to 20 minutes and then watch the following 10 minutes of the program.
Nah, I'm not writing this for you - I'm writing this so that it's now very public and people can identify you as an idiot. I tried being nice but I'm just not feeling it anymore. I've been progressively losing respect for you as you continue to type responses.
The only one here who is lying is you. I'm the one providing citations. I'm the one giving the math. I'm the one showing the facts.
There's no hidden science. There's just people too stupid to understand the basics. (That's you, in case you don't know.)
And, again, you can vote my comments down all day long. I don't mind. I've got enough CCP to choke a horse. What you lack is enough votes to hide them.
So, everyone will see you're not very intelligent and you're belligerent when threatened with someone smarter than you, that you're unwilling to extricate yourself from your ignorance, and that you'll wallow in your filth for a very, very long time.
For those folks who read this, I'd suggest looking up the psychiatry behind people who believe this shit. They're marginalized, poor, uneducated, and want to feel as if they're special by knowing something other people don't know. That's why they believe in stupid things - like this being hidden science.
It's not hidden science. It's just science.
And now, I'm done with you. You can go ahead and get in the last word. I don't mind. I just need to correct the misinformation you're spreading and, well, I've done that. I've not only done that, I've sourced it.
hmmmm interesting. So that makes the Wikipedia article less slanderous, yet still VERY slanderous indeed. My take on your previous responses, and the pathetic Wikipedia article, is that anyone downplaying the still-to-this-day hidden science of gyroscopes has no idea about how physics works. Eric Laithwaite proved he can lift a 40 lb gyroscope with one hand as if it was as light as a feather (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUh6QXe4mMY&list=PLai3U8-WIK0HkT4DmvQSg0XZfY5Bxkxq1&index=2&t=5s)).
So yes Eric does "admit" that Newton's Laws are not "violated" but explains this by what he terms as "Mass Transfer": http://www.gyroscopes.org/masstran.asp
This "mass transfer" raises even more questions to uncover. Such as "why" does it do this, and how to get some useful electrical energy out of it.
Once again, a heavy spinning wheel precesses without "conventional" centripetal force or "conventional" angular momentum. This doesn't mean that necessarily mean that "Newton's Laws" are wrong in that sense that energy is produced from nothing, but rather that energy/mass/weight is unconventionally being displaced... somehow...
Maybe stop trying to "embarrass" people and stop downplaying the still hidden science of gyroscopes. And especially stop gloating like you've won a gold medal for showing that Eric used a workaround to "admit" Newton's Laws are still valid for precessing gyroscopes, just so he can avoid the pathetic ridicule by the "scientific" establishment.
view the rest of the comments →
Mumbleberry ago
YT channel spam.
TheBuddha ago
To add to your post:
It's not antigravity. It's not magic. It's gyroscopic effects that are well understood. If you want to see the full lecture:
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8E9B08118DE0C4EB
It's the 1974 Royal Institution Christmas Lecture. If you watch it all, he'll tell you all about it.
I'd link to hooktube, but I'm not sure if they handle playlists properly. It's a good one.
As for the lectures, they've been doing them for years. I think I've seen all the lectures they have made available - which I think is all those recorded to video. My favorite is with the physicist Dr. Brian Cox. My second favorite is by a chemist and it's mind blowing.
matheasysolutions ago
It's not "well understood". Eric Laithwaite's paper was declined because the pathetic "science" establishment doesn't want people to know a simple gyroscope defies man-made "laws" of physics.
TheBuddha ago
...
Start here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Laithwaite
Note, he finally came to his senses and admitted that gyroscopes follow Newtonian physics. There's no mystery. It's well understood. Just because you don't understand, doesn't make it magic. It's not magic, it's just weird - until you understand the gyroscopic effects and then, after that, it is pretty intuitive.
matheasysolutions ago
.... wow. That is one of the most pathetic and slanderous Wikipedia articles out there. He never "admitted" anything. Stop spreading pathetic slanderous lies. But then again we know why you are here... #Disinfo
TheBuddha ago
F=ma
It's pretty basic.
Ping @the_cat (maybe he's interested in giggling).
That you think I'm here for some sort of "disinfo" makes me giggle. I'm a retired old mathematician in Northwestern Maine. I'm not some disinfo anything. I'm just a people - a people who actually has some grad-school level physics under his belt.
matheasysolutions ago
wow.... F = ma cover up the fact you are spreading pathetic "Wikipedia" lies. A gyroscope precesses with zero angular momentum and centripetal force. Again stop your pathetic disinfo, but then again we know why you are here.
TheBuddha ago
You've never taken a physics class, have you?
Just because it's too difficult for you to understand, doesn't make it magic. Read a book. Take a class. Take your medication.
matheasysolutions ago
You just never stop with your garbage.
TheBuddha ago
I think you have that backwards.
Dude, there's no mystery about how gyroscopes work. The dude himself even came to his senses - you can READ the citation. I know you can read, you keep responding.
Also, voting my replies down only makes you look immature and silly. I don't mind, but you aren't doing your reputation any favors. Go see a psychiatrist. I am a doctor, but not that kind of doctor. Unlike you, I have a PhD in applied mathematics. Read a book!
matheasysolutions ago
Again stop spreading disgusting slanderous lies. He never "admitted" anything.
TheBuddha ago
Well, now it's time to embarrass you.
Allow me to quote:
Let's see - do you see that "[2]" part? Yeah, that means there's a citation.
That takes you to here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy6hLZ02naM
BBC has blocked it - so fire up your VPN and skip ahead to 20 minutes and then watch the following 10 minutes of the program.
Nah, I'm not writing this for you - I'm writing this so that it's now very public and people can identify you as an idiot. I tried being nice but I'm just not feeling it anymore. I've been progressively losing respect for you as you continue to type responses.
The only one here who is lying is you. I'm the one providing citations. I'm the one giving the math. I'm the one showing the facts.
There's no hidden science. There's just people too stupid to understand the basics. (That's you, in case you don't know.)
And, again, you can vote my comments down all day long. I don't mind. I've got enough CCP to choke a horse. What you lack is enough votes to hide them.
So, everyone will see you're not very intelligent and you're belligerent when threatened with someone smarter than you, that you're unwilling to extricate yourself from your ignorance, and that you'll wallow in your filth for a very, very long time.
For those folks who read this, I'd suggest looking up the psychiatry behind people who believe this shit. They're marginalized, poor, uneducated, and want to feel as if they're special by knowing something other people don't know. That's why they believe in stupid things - like this being hidden science.
It's not hidden science. It's just science.
And now, I'm done with you. You can go ahead and get in the last word. I don't mind. I just need to correct the misinformation you're spreading and, well, I've done that. I've not only done that, I've sourced it.
Have a shitty day.
matheasysolutions ago
hmmmm interesting. So that makes the Wikipedia article less slanderous, yet still VERY slanderous indeed. My take on your previous responses, and the pathetic Wikipedia article, is that anyone downplaying the still-to-this-day hidden science of gyroscopes has no idea about how physics works. Eric Laithwaite proved he can lift a 40 lb gyroscope with one hand as if it was as light as a feather (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUh6QXe4mMY&list=PLai3U8-WIK0HkT4DmvQSg0XZfY5Bxkxq1&index=2&t=5s)).
Here is the BBC video but playable worldwide: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2ya0y4
So yes Eric does "admit" that Newton's Laws are not "violated" but explains this by what he terms as "Mass Transfer": http://www.gyroscopes.org/masstran.asp
This "mass transfer" raises even more questions to uncover. Such as "why" does it do this, and how to get some useful electrical energy out of it.
Once again, a heavy spinning wheel precesses without "conventional" centripetal force or "conventional" angular momentum. This doesn't mean that necessarily mean that "Newton's Laws" are wrong in that sense that energy is produced from nothing, but rather that energy/mass/weight is unconventionally being displaced... somehow...
Maybe stop trying to "embarrass" people and stop downplaying the still hidden science of gyroscopes. And especially stop gloating like you've won a gold medal for showing that Eric used a workaround to "admit" Newton's Laws are still valid for precessing gyroscopes, just so he can avoid the pathetic ridicule by the "scientific" establishment.