It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The top spins stable in the range from about 20 to 35 revolutions per second (rps). It is completely unstable above 35-40 rps and below 18 rps. After the top is spun and levitated, it slows down because of air resistance. After a few minutes it reaches the lower stability limit (18 rps) and falls.
The heady days when NASA paid Superconductive Components to build special disks for an anti-gravity machine are long gone.
However, in both cases, the funding did not allow for the development of the rotation system needed for the completion of the test. No attempt has been made by NASA to repeat the second impulse experiment.
Originally posted by daniel_g
I have to ask: How do these experiments violate known physics?
Originally posted by daniel_g
..note if we are not able to observe this reaction force it doesn't mean it's non existent.
How this relates to the spinning ball experiment is that the spinning of an object draws to it the quanta of inertial motion of rotation which are accumulated in the body of the flywheel and account for the altered inertial properties of the rotating object.
(ship) This explains why the spinning ball went higher than the identical non-rotating control (moving at the same initial velocity), and also explains why the spinning object falls faster than the non- rotating control. The momentous fact is that there is no special interaction between rotation and gravity.
Originally posted by skeptic_al
I'm not a Physist unlike Richard Hoagland,
Originally posted by rich23
And why the laminar flow around the rotating ball-bearing should translate into lift is quite beyond me. A ball bearing is not a frisbee. Both experiments are based on the same principle - what Hoagland calls a "hyperdimensional" interaction derived from angular momentum. A spinning object interacts with the local torsion field to produce results which anyone can replicate.
If you read ALL the material I've posted you'll have a better chance of understanding what's going on here.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by Phage
"Neat toy but the rate of rotation has nothing to do with the height of the gyro."
Nevertheless, as the rate of rotation nears zero, the gyroscope decreases in height.
As the gyroscope begins to wobble, it's height begins to fluctuate - it decreases in height (relative to the magnetic base), and then rises again to a point lower than it was on the gyroscopes last rotation... This occurs for each rotation as the rate of rotation nears zero.
*Now phage, what will happen to the wobbly gyroscope that is fluctuating in height AFTER we increase it's speed;
Will the Gyroscope continue to decrease in height relative to the magnetic base if it's rate of rotation is increased? Or do you think it will decrease in height as we increase it's rate of rotation?
You can go away now. Class dismissed.
[edit on 26-2-2009 by Exuberant1]