Apparatus for Gyroscopic Propulsion Explained

Back


Inventor, Kelly Tippett, explains his Apparatus for Gyroscopic Propulsion, U.S. Patent Number 6,705,174.

Channel: Science & Technology
Uploaded: November 17, 2007 at 12:59 am
Author: ganidllc

Length: 00:07:14
Rating: 4.28
Views: 45298

Tags: apparatus for gyroscopic propulsion antigravity gyroscope angular motion equal force presence

Video Comments:
Daemo4 (November 18, 2008 at 8:25 am)
I know this set is kind of crude and not what you are proposing exactly, but it shows what I think would happen with your apparatus.

/watch?v=gdAmEEAiJWo

I think it shows that although it would not exhibit propulsive properties, it would be useful as a stabilizer in zero g.
Unknownbmxr (November 17, 2008 at 10:12 pm)
consequences that they cannot predict:
1)it divides by zero and the universe implodes
2)it develops intelligence and destroys all life
3)it creates a vortex which in turn creates a black hole
repent :(
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 10:12 pm)
How could you test your theory without creating the device? Computer image modeling? If so, the model is faulty if the "overcoming" of gravity in any way exceeds the external forces applied against it. There are only 3 known principles which can temporarily cause objects to "overcome" gravity: acceleration, electromagnetism, and superconductivity. Aerodynamics is a fourth but requires the medium of air. Only 1 of these exists in a gyro: acceleration but the sum of all vectors=0 so no net accel.
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 5:25 am)
Final word: Save yourselves a lot of time/money/energy by trying this experiment which will virtually MATCH what you are trying to do: Mount 3 identical flywheels on a single fixed equilateral flat triangle of plywood. Place 1 flywheel in a fixed position at each of 3 equilateral points, making sure the rotational planes of axis are fixed on the x,y,and z axes respectively. Weigh the assembly. Accelerate each flywheel to identical speeds. Weigh the assembly. There will be a net zero change.
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 5:53 am)
Despite your ridiculous logic regarding linear vs. angular momentum, no matter how you calculate it, the sums of all your vectors are equal to ZERO, and the only constant is gravity. You are absent 2 things:
1) An energy sufficient to overcome the force of gravity. And even if you somehow got that:
2) A net vector of force operating in opposition to the vector of gravity.
Even in the vacuum of space, this thing will not exhibit "propulsion".
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 4:49 am)
AGAIN FROM THE PATENT: when the rate of rotation for the three spinning ring rotors reaches the appropriate level, the composite structure of the three associated rings resists any change in orientation from any external force, including the gravitational field of the earth or other [large bodies]. Accordingly, as the earth spins about its axis, the mechanism moves in the only direction possible, which is up, or away from the center of mass for the body exerting the gravitational force.
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 4:58 am)
This is where the theory gets completely crazy. The ONLY motion generated by imbalances in the 3 rotors will be precessional. These are inherently weak forces relative to the total mass of the object. In no way will this result in "lift" except that with a huge energy potential, it could wobble enough to "hop" off the ground slightly and sporadically, ALWAYS returning to the ground as the counteracting forces take over. The energy required to break free of earth in this way would be phenomenal!
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 5:09 am)
Bottom line: this device is a pipe dream based on faulty science. Any force high enough to overcome gravity using such a device would have to be equivalent in energy to that of a rocket engine capable of the same level. Furthermore, the conflicting internal forces introduced into the device would cause it to break up long before it could "bounce" out of the atmosphere - and slight "bouncing" is the most this will ever achieve. I will match any bet you can come up with to support this assertion.
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 4:29 am)
FROM THE PATENT: At high enough levels of angular momentum, outside cosmic forces, including
the gravitational force of the surrounding environment, will cause the
interconnected rotating masses to seek equilibrium by moving away from the
strength of the gravitational force. By controlling the angular momentum
of the individual rotating rings, and/or by changing the orientation of
the rotating masses with respect to one another, the direction of movement
can be controlled and changed.
axe2grind911 (November 12, 2008 at 4:42 am)
Slowing down 1 or more of the gyros will not cause the ball to move linearly because the "opposing" 2 gyros will resist. The only thing this will cause is a wobble around a slightly offset center of gravity. If perfectly tuned, the ball will remain motionless. The further out of tune, the more wobble will be introduced. At best, it might be able to "walk" around 2 points of imbalance, still in a nonlinear direction. With enough imbalance, it could zigzag, always impeded by friction.