#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

# Eric Laithwaite - Gyroscopic Antigravity

edited December 2012
His research in later years into Gyroscopes was, and still is, a topic of much discussion within the scientific community. Here, he demonstrates the principles of a gyro using a rather large and heavy wheel. It's spun up to speed with a normal household drill.

Here a youtube member (spiritelemental) is doing experiments with spinning DOUBLE CONE SHAPED COILS and some C shaped elements (looks almost like PMH) which somehow caught my attention:
The Utron coils (the double cone shaped coils spining) create an etheric vortex which is just another name for a gyroscope. Spinning electrons push the ether with it. The Ether is the primary substance that everything in the universe is made out of it. You could call it energy that is everywhere. The electrons spin around the coil and create an energy vortex which when twirled (like my device is doing) will create the exact same anti gravity effect as seen in Erics video.

• Interesting, I was just watching a show on Netflix, Ancient Aliens, 1st Episode. They spoke about gyroscopes as an engine used in the Vimanas. It dawned on me that maybe Ed's flywheel acted in a similar way as a gyrscope does.
• edited January 2016
Eric was a childhood hero of mine .
He was ruthlessly pummelled by his academic colleagues because they were all brainwashed.

Some of his research inspired detailed mathematical rebuttals, but no consequential research . The status quo was to support Newtonian Physics . However Newton would have been shocked at what passes for his Physics!!
The Newtonian referential framework is based on at least 8 types of forces ! In particular the circular force was vital to elevate to the spiral vorticular force!

Few have ever read part 2 of the Principia in which he attempts to treat vortices in fluids mathematically ! To be honest, his simplifications were too simple and he thereby lost the essential connection he was looking for.

He lost his way in the most challenging mathematical analysis ever attempted prior to the advent of modern processing power . He could only draw very basic simple conclusions which were necessarily inaccurate!

What was surprising to him and should be to us is that his first book, based on the most radical simplifications was able to produce the most accurate results!

However his fluid dynamic investigations were set off on the wrong basis .

Euler corrected for some of this, and Navier and Stokes took it even further, but it is essentially the mathematical treatment of Helmholtz that made the break through with Lord Kelvin .

Today we can solve the differential equations by numerical computation and Claes Johnson has made remarkable progress in that field, correcting many mistaken assumptions that go back to Newton!

How was the barest simplification so accurate?

Because the complexity is fractal , but Newtons simplifications ignore that aspect of complexity. He was of course aware of the iterative approach to solving equations, but his formulations were not set up in iterative form in book 2 , or if they were, the labour intensity of iterative calculus was too much even for his computational prowess .

Today in Fractalforums.com you will find a group of hobbyist who know from experience just how the tiniest change in formulation affects the computational outcome and the consequential sculpted image or even video!!

So Eric's rotational force was not anti Newton, it was anti establishment.

The rotational force is intimately and directly connected to magnetic behaviours. Arago's disc is the simplest demonstration of that! Tribo magnetic phenomena are little understood because the prevailing paradigm is Wrong in many points. That is wrong by observational evidence not opinion .

The electro magneto gravio complexes are clearly, obviously a question of scale! . The smaller the radius of rotation the greater the frequency and intensity of force density In the vortex .

For a gyroscope this means that the elctro magnetto behaviours easily overcome the gravito behaviours . But in a spiral path!

Vector mathematics obscures this in 2 ways: first it uses an undefined composite called force. Secondly it uses a straight line force and not a trochoidal one .
The angular momentum force vector is a flawed ratio which describes torque not rotational force !

The applicable differential equations typically are found in magneto hydro dynamics . But they are only equations not laws of the universe! A lot of jiggery pokery and fudging has to be done to get eve expected results ! Thus they are of limited value, require a dedicated expertise and are not general or universal laws.

Human imagination however can generalise just about anything!!

For a deeper look into gyroscopic forces you might try Ken Wherlers book, but be warned it is dense and mind numbing! Some great pictures and diagrams and metaphors though ! Xxx

• The electro magneto gravio complex are clearly, obviously a question of scale! . The smaller the radius of rotation he eat he requency andHestenes intensity of force density In the votex . For a gyroscope this means that the elctro magnetto behaviours easily overcome the gravito behaviours . But in a spiral path!
can you point to an equation to express this thought just for my understanding? the way i understand; a geometrical modification of an experimental setup (that is, to my a gyroscope very large) would magnify gravitational effects and quell electromagnetic ones? am i close?

• The electro magneto gravio complexes are clearly, obviously a question of scale! . The smaller the radius of rotation the greater the frequency and intensity of force density In the vortex . For a gyroscope this means that the elctro magnetto behaviours easily overcome the gravito behaviours . But in a spiral path!
can you point to an equation to express this thought just for my understanding? the way i understand; a geometrical modification of an experimental setup (that is, to my a gyroscope very large) would magnify gravitational effects and quell electromagnetic ones? am i close?
I apologise for the typos!

The in erase square law for orbital dynamics is not the only mathematical rule Newton considered. You will find cubic, quartile and quintic ( degree 3,4,5 inverse) explored in the Principia . By this I mean Newton regarding space as a resistive medium of variable density explored the geometrical consequences on observed orbital motions.
Today this might be obscured by differential calculus techniques, but Newton employed differential Geometrical practice common to his day, and always set it out in elegant geometrical form. Algebra as recording his thinking process was not valued by Newton. It was Wallis who believed in the value and efficacy of Algebra! Most of us naturally find it abhorrent!

That being said the meaning of the word has significantly changed since Wallis and Newton.

So the best formula is in fact the Cotes version of the Cotes Euler equation.

Ln ix = cos x + i sinx

When these are replaced by their geometrical progression versions it becomes clear that rotational motion involves all the inverse power rules to varying extents.

Cotes died before he could converse with Newton about this modification to his famous inverse square law!

The same law applies to both gravity and electric charge , where the constant factor marks the difference in scale! However it is incorrectly believed that magnetic force follows a different law. However the summation of the inverse laws of differing powers gives the best model of observed magnetic force measurements .

The technical details are not to override plain observation. Magnetic variation generates a deformation in the magnetic field which we have differentiated as " electric induction" . It is clearly magnetic variation!

Ampère worked on a theiry that this "dynamic current' in a circuit was the fundamental model. Thus he described his theory as Electrodynamics. By this he meant the dynamical variation of magnetism in a circuit . Many still do not understand that Gilbert's magnetic philosophy ruled until Einstein explained the photoelectric effect! Until then, electrons did not " exist" .
Surprisingly, they still don't! But that's a different matter!

The Fourier expansion of any varying " signal" shows how we can describe any force transfer in these exponential forms. It is these exponential forms that highlight frequency and amplitude/ intensity .

Any gyroscope therefore can be modelled by a series of exponential forms to whatever level of accuracy one requires. The mathematical exposition of the gyroscope obscures this, using a curl differential form to express rotation without expressing the general exponential solution!

It is not that mathematics found the solution, but rather that Eric demonstrated the solution that should be chosen! In other words Newtonian mechanics is sufficiently systematic enough to describe the force system provided the expert understands what to look for. Until Eric few bothered to revise even their torque laws to sufficiently explain it!

I say even their Torque laws because torque is a pseudo Newtonian idea of rotation! Newton believed in rotationalor trochoidal force laws, not straight line force laws as the French and others interpreted his principle! This is what Amoères laboured to change in the French Ecole! An unfounded belief that all forces acted in straight lines!

• edited January 2016
With regard to your experimental set up, it is my opinion that gravity is a resultant force! The magnetic forces( called dipoles simply because there are 2 of them at all times) are more fundamental.
Thus coherence of magnetic domains reveals these fundamental force densities, but incoherence reveals what we call gravitational force density.

For me the key is to let go of the conceptt of Static! All equilibria are dynamic, and any apparently static equilibrium is an exact balance of dynamic force densities!

We are "attracted" to the earth because the magnetic influences are way bigger and more powerful than we ever imagined, and our measurements on the sun amply demonstrate that!

Materials of which your gyroscope are made, rotational intensity, alignment with the earths magnetic field locally and the earths rotation should all have an effect on your gyroscope. But you knew that any way right?

Mathematics does not tell you the plain obvious!
• edited February 2016

Magnetic double layers !
The variable magnetic dynamic naturally produces deformations that become standing wave patterns! These patterns are renamed as electrons, protons neutrons etc.

Very good but he leaves out Örsted and Ampère in his brief introductory speech. And he misquotes Newton and wrongly emphasises others contribution but essentially this is a broad classical view.

When Maxwell is mentioned as a genius understand the Maxwellians! Maxwell was never understood in his time or to this day ! Heaviside and Hertz are the true workhorses.

Of course Aether/ space is nowhere static!
• Simply the usefulness of topology in modelling magneto sono Thermo electro complexes was simplified by some standard geometrical forms. The algebraic labels developed lowly thereafter. The most enigmatic label is Sqrt(-1), which essentially Cotes& DeMoivre developed from Newtons practice of deriving Multinomial solutions .

These 3 developed their practice from the unit sphere! As a consequence Cotes concluded sqrt(-1) was an arc measure! It took another 3 centuries before it was associated with rotation! Yet Brahmagupta and then Bombelli, prior to Newton understood this circularity.

The Pythagoreans knew that the process of rooting involved the circle"

The upshot is, until this labelling was understood , no mathematical algebraic model could be made to represent a measurable quantity.

• edited March 2016
Interesting