|
Main Forum Page
|
The Gyroscope Forum |
19 April 2024 06:34
|
|
Welcome to the gyroscope forum. If you have a question about gyroscopes in general,
want to know how they work, or what they can be used for then you can leave your question here for others to answer.
You may also be able to help others by answering some of the questions on the site.
|
Question |
| Asked by: |
Glenn Hawkins |
| Subject: |
IP |
| Question: |
I HATE IT WHEN I TYPE AND SEND WITHOUT REVIEWING.
AGAIN THEN, I can hardly believe I spent a number of years of my life pursuing the fallacious idea that a gyroscope could produce propulsion. The confusion was because friction in every example I could find was too weak to detect. And so I accepted that it did not exist. How wrong that was.
The physical laws of the universe seem strange. Why do they exist? A gyroscope is capable of reactions in an endless sparling circle, of near endless fractional degrees’. Why then is all the motion and force therein contained inescapably and held within the boundaries and distances of its parts? Why is the center of mass incapable of self-generated movement regardless of all the motion, torque, momentum and power produced? Why must it touch and an unattached bit of matter in order to move outside its environment?
We cannot answer why the universe is the way it is; but only what it is, and how it behaves, and what its boundaries are.
Conclusion: For fifty years clever men from all parts of the world tried to produce a purely internal force for space flight. All have failed because it was never possible. The laws, why ever they are, are set and they will not allow it.
Glenn,
|
| Date: |
9 August 2018
|
| report abuse
|
|
Answers (Ordered by Date)
|
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 11/08/2018 02:16:46
| | | Sandy, I had not seen this particular apparatus. It is impressive. It is pretty and complicated and more ingenious than your earliest work. There is no one like you, no one equal to you. If anyone of us in all the world had a chance of producing thrust, it would have been you.
We worked in different fields, yours as an inventor/builder and mine as a mechanical/ theoretician. First, I worked with little toy-like inventions and it baffled me that none of them produced thrust. Next, I began scanning to scale and drawings with arrows and a number of signs and symbols, following the forces as directions, and magnitudes of changes and the effects they had and why and how on a molecular scale. Later, after many years, I became able to do all the mechanics in my mind. The great mathematician, Steven Hawking also did his work in his mind without the benefit of props. His work was many thousand times more complicated than mine, still, I became able to do the same—that is, in my mind. There is nothing I do not know mechanically about what gyroscopes are capable of doing and how and why they do it. It is most likely that no one else knows this mechanical process as I do. There is nothing else to know.
Cordially Yours,
Glenn
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 01/11/2018 18:42:14
| | | Not so fast. Inertia propulsion may be possible. I just emailed my friend, Sandy, explaining some new discoveries. We will what he thinks.
I did solve all the mysteries of gyroscopic actions and I have the explanations ready for print. But they are too complicated and without animation would be very difficult to present and to follow. They probably don’t matter much anyway. I am beginning to immerse my thoughts into a radical new design. At this point, it all seems logical.
|
| Report Abuse |
| Answer: |
Glenn Hawkins - 01/11/2018 20:53:46
| | | My new ideas do not work. I hope your day is good.
Glenn,
|
| Report Abuse |
| Add an Answer >> |
|
