Tap to unmute

How Does The Anti-Gravity Wheel Work?


Comments • 1 206

  • c4rlo Rossi
    c4rlo Rossi Month ago +8

    I would think with really precise measurements all the forces would cancel out, 10 total seconds at -6 would mean 1 total second at +60, or something to that effect. The refresh rate on the scale didn't show the positive wieght spike because it was only for such a short time.

  • j p
    j p Month ago +5

    Wow! I would have bet money that this effect would not occur. I guess there is always an opportunity to learn something new about basic physics. Great video!

  • Prabhakaran Nandhagopal

    You may have a scale for each string and then measure the mass. Each scale may show different value due to the gyroscopic effect. When this wheel rotates in a direction one sting may have less tension and the another one may have tension equal to half (or zero) of the (wheel) mass. But due the change in direction for each cycle, string alters.

    • Dilip Das
      Dilip Das Month ago

      Great. I think it's correct explanation

  • 열유체101
    열유체101 Month ago +3

    Acceleration is not always downward. Where Wheel reaches the bottom and roll up, there is acceleration acting upward.

  • tom bufford
    tom bufford Month ago +1

    Interesting Video. 'Newtons Balls' , the popular desk top toy, I Learned when training, requires balls made of Tool Steel , hard enough to transmit Kinetic energy with very low losses. A mathematical analysis of the Maxwell wheel to accompany your Video would be well worth watching. Is there any Stored energy in the winding cables in the maxwell wheel shown ?

    • Littleprinceleon
      Littleprinceleon Month ago

      Another thought: if there was negligible friction between the wire and the axle, one would have to fix the end of the wire to a point on the axle to be able to wrap the wire around it....
      I'm not a physicist (to say the least): would such a reduced friction preserve remarkable amount of energy in this system?

  • Suman Sengupta
    Suman Sengupta Month ago

    Interesting, doesn't the rotational direction also change when it goes up ? In the process is it not pulling the rope to sustain it's weight ? That should reflect on the scale..

  • iTony G
    iTony G Month ago +1

    Man, your channel , your videos, your explanation are Fword AMAZING, please keep it up.

  • john cope
    john cope Month ago

    I think I figured it out. As the earth rotates, we are continuously accelerating downward. Six hours from now, we will be half the Earth's diameter lower, and 12 hours we will be a full Earth's diameter beneath our feet. I'm guessing that we are continuously moving in the downward direction at almost 600 miles an hour. The gyroscopic action tries to keep it going tangeantly towards the horizon, so it helps the gyro "float" a little. If you can triple the speed of the gyro, I think you will see a substantial increase in negative weight. The reason you didn't see the weight change in the other gyro was because it's articulate housing allowed it to stay spinning tangeantly toward the horizon.

  • Johnnie Fujita
    Johnnie Fujita Month ago

    one of the most interesting videos about classical gravity

  • Denalo Zecon
    Denalo Zecon Month ago

    Fascinating and not at all something I'd guess looking at it. I'm curios if there would be an actual use for this besides science novelty.

    TOM SKY Month ago

    The inertia of the spinning wheel interacts with earths inertia = weight is result of field interactions a relative to one another

  • babybirdhome
    babybirdhome 6 months ago +121

    You always come up with tons of amazing content for your channel, but this simple demonstration really drove home a fundamental concept that I only now realize at 49 years old that I had never actually understood. That is phenomenal work!

    • Littleprinceleon
      Littleprinceleon Month ago

      @Jerry Wiessner not that "old-school" guy 🤫 apparently

    • Jerry Wiessner
      Jerry Wiessner 2 months ago +1

      @3DPeter Use of gyroscope action 120yrs ago.

    • 3DPeter
      3DPeter 5 months ago

      @JC MSchott ????? where do i say that i'm 120 years old?

    • JC MSchott
      JC MSchott 5 months ago +1

      @3DPeter, when you were 120 years old? OMG! How old are you?

    • 3DPeter
      3DPeter 5 months ago +1

      This is old school science that i already learned when i was 5! Take a bicycle wheel and try to hold it up at one side of the centre axle.
      You won't be able to hold it upright but as soon you spin the wheel, you can hold it up with only the tip of your finger.
      The reason why you can hold it then is because the centrafugal force moves in all directions so the wheel wants to move in all directions.
      there's even a guy that has a large and real heavy metal wheel on an axle and you can't lift that up with one hand, let alone lift it up above your head,
      but as soon the wheel is spun around, the whole thing weighs almost nothing and then you can swing it with ease above your head.

  • Cleon Teunissen
    Cleon Teunissen 6 months ago +343

    On why the scale does not show the peak value when the disc bounces at the end of its tether: I assume the processor of the display is programmed to display an *average* over some time interval, probably half a second or so. Without that smoothing the value in the display would jump all over the place, making it unreadable. So the fact that the display does not show the short duration peak value is not due to 'slow refresh rate', I think. I think the processor may even be programmed to discard short duration peaks.

    • Littleprinceleon
      Littleprinceleon Month ago

      @David Mudry I can't find the comment from rdcoupal... However:
      The collapsed floors falling on top of an intact floor surely had to decelerate for a very brief amount of time at each floor. The bigger the mass (more collapsed floors) the shorter this interval.
      They made calculations (based on unbiased measurements) and contrary to popular conspiracies: the collapse didn't happen at the speed of freely falling floors....
      But still amazing how quickly it went down

    • RF1204
      RF1204 3 months ago +1

      The other Clip-Share experimentalist, Alfa Phoenix, which takes measurements with oscilloscope, can clearly expose this transients and ,I bet, give reason to you who said the scale is hiding the reality by integration time.

    • Matthew Flamini
      Matthew Flamini 5 months ago +1

      I believe this is correct. It can be tested as well. Use a weight with the same mass, but different radial distribution. The angular momentum will be different, and the rare it bounces will be different, so you should expect a different result. And of course, the mass is the same, so the difference must be in the timing of the scales measurements.

    • David Mudry
      David Mudry 5 months ago

      @rdcoupal downward acceleration = less weight = objects have no hammer power when falling objects are lighter than when they were standing still = Question, can a hammer ever hit the nail before it reaches the nail? It's the instant the hammer contacts the nail when the hammer decelerates and gains weight (dynamic weight). And the deceleration can never happen before the hammer reaches the nail, ie. when it is still accelerating.
      The WTC twin towers never decelerated during the 9/11 collapses.

    • rdcoupal
      rdcoupal 5 months ago

      Your theory explains why the experiment is flawed. Well said.

  • Mystic Point Water Sports

    The gyro turns the cast mass back into itself due to the cross axial movement .. all motion is anti gravitic except into

  • Friday Californiaa
    Friday Californiaa 6 months ago +146

    You should show it with an old scale (mechanical). We should see the thing bounce a bit at the bottom =)

    • Abdilahi Mohamed
      Abdilahi Mohamed 2 months ago +1

      @Benoit Avril lol no need to do all that math, Emmanuel was right. Force = dp/dt. The bounce happens in a fraction of a second, the change in momentum is 180 degrees in the opposite with equal moment. That spike would not be negligible and we would definitely see it. I'm not convinced.

    • Richard the Weaver
      Richard the Weaver 4 months ago +3

      Yes, the average weight does not change. And his glossing over of said fact was disappointing. The title could have been:
      “It’s MAGIC! Or my scale’s refresh rate is too slow to do this experiment”.

    • Two_Number_Nines
      Two_Number_Nines 5 months ago

      @Benoit Avril no I am always absolutely correct. You are wrong for disagreeing

    • Emmanuel Pil
      Emmanuel Pil 5 months ago +3

      Just a simple calculation. If the effect of lowering the wheel during 3 seconds is -6 grams; in a bouncing spike of let's 1/10 of a second you would feel a 'weight pulse' of 30*6 = 180 grams. Thats a whole lot It should be visible somehow, but even playing the video in slow motion I don't see any movement(shock) of the balance indicating this

    • Friday Californiaa
      Friday Californiaa 5 months ago +1

      @Two_Number_Nines Oh, ok... ^^

  • smarafino10
    smarafino10 2 months ago

    f=ma so assuming you're correct in stating acceleration is only in one direction then it's decelerating or has a negative acceleration. hence -6 g

  • Bindi Berry
    Bindi Berry Month ago

    So should we spin ourselves before a high jump and a long jump ???

  • modernviewscience
    modernviewscience 6 months ago +1

    Eric Laithwaite (Dec 74 lectures on youtube) did brilliant demonstrations for sure. Without spin at 2,500 rpm or more, you cannot lift that weight, especially since it's located a foot and a half away from your hand. So this effect is classically explained by the math of objects in rotation with angular momentum and torque. BUT looking a bit outside that "box" the question is about action-reaction (3rd Newton's law); What is this "torque" pushing against? Without something to react against, you just cannot have torque, and without it, you cannot explain why it's so easy to lift. I toyed with this (you need a decent mass and speed to perceive it), and when your body becomes the axis of rotation, hold it in one hand moving it around in one direction (clock wise or counter clock wise, depending on how your gyro is spinning) then it will "want" to lift. And (amazingly) when your body tries this in the opposite direction, the thing becomes nearly impossible to hold as it "wants" to dive downward! Try this with a decent (heavy and large) gyro. No, it's not a gravitational effect for sure, otherwise gyros would not work in deep space. But if you care to look very carefully into it, and find similar studies (practical studies; try to stay clear of arm-chair or purely mathematical interpretations) then you may conclude that it affects the inertial properties of that object. Some believe that inertia is an intrinsic property of mass, whereas you'd be at a loss trying to find one aspect of physics that isn't affected by or affecting something else. Angular momentum does influence inertial properties. Again, rotating it in one direction makes it easy to move 10kg on a lever, upward (while circling it in a corkscrew motion), while the opposite makes it very difficult - I promise you will need to wrestle with both arms to keep it from sinking down! all the while you stand of a scale that won't budge. Spinning a Fidget and trying to move it this way and that way, will do the same but weakly. Your show is one of the very best and most exiting science show-and-tell that exists in the world. We are very grateful for all that you do! May the day, when the muse of Science has revealed all her secrets, never come for we will die of boredom. 🚀😀

  • surestab
    surestab 6 months ago +2

    Questions: If you figure out how much the acceleration is of the wheel and compare it to gravity, is this the same percentage of lost force on the scale compared to the entire weight of the wheel?

  • Ben Coman
    Ben Coman 2 months ago

    Can you try it in a vacuum?

  • Kazimierz Czartoryski

    You converting mass into kinetic energy. When the kinetic energy get dispersed then the mass will return to the right weight.

  • Mike Fochtman
    Mike Fochtman 6 months ago +3

    Another little side measurement. If you put a couple of reflective 'dots' on the rim of the disk and use a high speed camera, we could see that the disk rotation is also constantly accelerating. If the system was made taller and 'fins' added to the disk, you could reach a point where its rotation stops accelerating (and therefore it's downward acceleration zeros). At this point, the scale should return to zero even though the disk is still moving upward/downward.
    So you might have a negative weight shown as it starts to fall, weight returning to zero when the disk isn't spinning any faster, and that positive 'spike' at the bottom of travel when the disk 'bounces'.

    • JC MSchott
      JC MSchott 5 months ago +1

      Nice one, dude! I did some calculations here and if I am not wrong, the angular acceleration is, roughly speaking, proportional to the r radius of the rod and inversely proportional to the mass and the square of the disc radius R. So, for a large disc, maybe you can capture the image with a smartphone camera and analyse the footage with a software called Tracker Motion Analysis. It's for free.

  • E B
    E B 6 months ago +87

    Very cool! (The “missing” grams on the positive side of scale is collected in the knock when direction change at the bottom - just like one feels operating on a yo-yo.)

    • David Mudry
      David Mudry 4 months ago

      Action Lab, you said when you accelerate down your weight decreases ? But weight comes from being accelerated UP. You should have said when the wheel is going down faster and faster then the UPWARD acceleration is LESS, therefore less force down on the scale.

    • Annu Nacky
      Annu Nacky 5 months ago

      Below the power of inertia…

    • captain helias
      captain helias 6 months ago +1


    • Tom Blakley
      Tom Blakley 6 months ago

      @E B negative... the force of gravity is in assistance on the down stroke.

    • Carl Hansen
      Carl Hansen 6 months ago +1

      @Jose V The impulse-momentum theorem, and the acceleration of the center of mass, are the physical principles at play.
      Regardless of what system is on the scale, study the acceleration of the center of mass of that system. This will tell you what forces have to add up to, and the scale's constraint force will be the flexible force that adapts to this acceleration. If the system on net, has downward acceleration of the center of mass, then the scale reading decreases. And the opposite is true for a center of mass accelerating upward. A steady speed center of mass, or stationary center of mass, would mean no change in the scale reading from its reference frame.
      Between two equivalent points with no net change in the center of mass velocity, the impulse of the scale will add up to the same as the rest weight of the system being weighed, because the net impulse would have to add up to zero. Center of mass velocity unchanged means there is no change in momentum, and thus no net impulse.

  • Shanmukhadas A C
    Shanmukhadas A C Month ago

    Here potential energy is converted into kinetic energy and vice-versa. In some point KE=PE, Then it shows 0.

  • Jesse Luna
    Jesse Luna 6 months ago +37

    Would have been nice to see the extra weight it had as it bounced back up. Maybe even showing a chart of the -6g and the spiked positive weight when it bounces. I wonder if that could be shown well with a mechanical scale.

    • David Mudry
      David Mudry 4 months ago

      Action Lab, you said when you accelerate down your weight decreases ? But weight comes from being accelerated UP. You should have said when the wheel is going down faster and faster then the UPWARD acceleration is LESS, therefore less force down on the scale.

    • Uldis Barbans
      Uldis Barbans 4 months ago

      @wishus knight Depends on how the signal from the sensor is sampled and processed. "It didn't" doesn't mean aaaanything

    • wishus knight
      wishus knight 5 months ago

      if there is a spike even as fast as 1 MS that scale will pick it up. And it didn't.

    • Mike Fochtman
      Mike Fochtman 6 months ago +2

      A hi speed recorder of a strain-gage measuring the weight would be the way to do this (IMHO).

    • Jack Boot
      Jack Boot 6 months ago +1

      @Carl Hansen Another factor is that the motion at the bottom of the fall is not a complete linear stop and reversal of direction, but is dependent on the diameter of the axle where the string begins to wind back up. So the motion is orbital. Also involves transferring force along an axle which will have some amount of flex to dampen the shock.

  • Ivan Kocher
    Ivan Kocher 6 months ago +10

    Interesting effect, first to me.
    In case you want a higher sample rate for the scale, there is a very simple option with an arduino ($5), an HX711 ($5) module and a weight sensor ($5~$20). Then on arduino interface you can plot it directly from serial port data. HX711 can sample at 10samples/s or 80samples/s configurable.

    • JC MSchott
      JC MSchott 5 months ago

      Hey, mate! Is it possible to save it to a file?

  • Amit
    Amit 6 months ago +6

    At zero, the scale accounts for the tension in the string which is less when the wheel starts to spin, reducing the normal force acting downward at the scale.

  • Ryan Johnson
    Ryan Johnson 6 months ago

    Oh... That makes sense. I kept waiting for it to peak up while it was at the bottom but it makes sense that the scale just didn't refresh fast enough to register that. I would have had thought that it would have shown a greater force while it was traveling upward... But your explanation for why that wasn't the case was really clear. Good video.

  • Jacob Crosby
    Jacob Crosby 6 months ago +69

    You need an analog scale for this. Or a scale with a much faster update speed.

    • Michael Slater
      Michael Slater 5 months ago

      @Robbie Bouchart I was thinking the same thing. Great minds think alike and all.

    • Carson Craytor
      Carson Craytor 6 months ago

      It would be cool if it was a faster scale that could output its data into a line graph

    • Stanley Bochenek
      Stanley Bochenek 6 months ago

      try 2x speed

    • Commander Zao
      Commander Zao 6 months ago

      Ye guess there is an Gravity spike when the Disk is at the lowest Point. Digital Skale is just to Slow

    • Robbie Bouchart
      Robbie Bouchart 6 months ago +1

      Start building a spaceship

  • Tom Blakley
    Tom Blakley 6 months ago

    The difference in the hanging weight vs spinning, is dissipated through the outward force from the flywheel as it's spinning. Any point located on the surface area of the spinning flywheel's outter face will measure an outward force. This force is heavier on the downward stroke due to the addition of gravitational pull, then is thrown back upward. Kinda like they do in the movie Armageddon, when they "slingshot around the moon" to catch up with the comet.

  • MrVibrating
    MrVibrating 6 months ago +1

    Decreasing the moment of inertia of the weight (the radius of the rotating mass from its axis), while keeping the absolute amount of weight, and the spool radius, constant, will likewise reduce the net gravitating weight. Conversely, increasing the MoI while keeping all else equal will decrease the effective weight variation..

  • Gregory Smith
    Gregory Smith 6 months ago +1

    I remember something about moments - is it possible that the weight is distributed in the X/Y dimensions rather than the up/down "Z" dimension while it's spinning? The right-hand rule would imply that as the disc is spinning some of the weight is distributed to the left. This is the same reason the professor was able to lift the spinning weights. The mass isn't different, just the direction(s) the weight is distributed.

  • Lisa Potter
    Lisa Potter 5 months ago +1

    Easily and clearly explained the weight fluctuations but now the real question : what is gravity that causes the weight in the first place?

  • محمد علي الأشقر

    تحقيق رائع حياك الله

  • therealdebater
    therealdebater 5 months ago +2

    I'd love you to now do an energy analysis of this system. Very often an energy analysis can reveal or clarify many of the weird phenomena of physics. The maths is complicated (for the layman), but the principles are straightforward, so it would be really valuable for a video like this to present the concepts in a more approachable way. A big ask, I appreciate.

  • Duncan Cumming
    Duncan Cumming 5 months ago

    You could do a more extreme version of the same thing with a ball bouncing inside a vertical tube. While the ball is either falling or ascending the entire weight of the ball is zero and does not register on the balance. While it is in process of bouncing there is a large positive spike in weight. The weight loss averaged over time is zero, per Newton's first law. You would need a load cell and an integrator to measure this for a demo.

  • Jani Veble
    Jani Veble 6 months ago +1

    Could you increase 6 grams? By increasing height from which wheel is dropping down and length of the ropes?
    Could we use this in combination with electric motor powering the wheel, so it could be utilised for real life applications?

  • JC MSchott
    JC MSchott 5 months ago +1

    Hello, my friend! Amazing video! Would you please let me know the mas of the set wheel + rod, the radius of the rod and the radius of the disc? I did a simple calculation on the difference read on the scale. Thank you so much for your content!

    • W T
      W T 5 months ago

      I did mine n shared in the comments section. But would like to see others equation.

  • Thomas Walker Lynch
    Thomas Walker Lynch 5 months ago

    Have the spinning mass suspended in the air at the end on axle. Of course it will be processing. Measure the tension on the string tied to the end of the axle to get the weight of the system. (or equivalently put the entire apparatus on a scale as you have done.) Now make the string ever shorter (or longer) and give the end of the axle constant acceleration. What happens to the weight of the system? As a control, repeat the same experiment with the same mass in bulk on the end of the string with nothing spinning. Just a weight on a string that gets pulled up or let down. Do we get the same weight profile? (same measurements on the scale?) This would be Laithwaite's experiment. I have not seen it faithfully reproduced on Clip-Share yet. You are the first to explore the vertical acceleration changing aspect, so you are part way there.

  • Joseph Tutor
    Joseph Tutor 6 months ago

    So, instead of of up and down, can you get it to work in a circle? Essentially, you’d have net inertial propulsion. The weight would increase on one side of the circle pattern, and decrease on the other. The unique feature of this type of propulsion is that the vehicle would continuously get faster even though the device is spinning at a constant rpm. FTL?

  • Roy Moysey
    Roy Moysey 6 months ago

    If you equalize the scale, then remove the gyroscope before spinning up and then placing back on the scale, it should show a reduction in weight.

  • eypandabear
    eypandabear 6 months ago +35

    This is actually a great illustration of Einstein’s equivalence principle. In general relativity, gravity is an inertial pseudo-force. That means: the disc’s weight is actually not gravity acting on its mass, but rather the force with which the scale “accelerates” the disc against its free-fall trajectory.
    So when the disc is allowed (partially) to fall, its weight *must* go down, because it is precisely the force which counteracts that fall.

    • David Mudry
      David Mudry 4 months ago

      @Paul Brooks Yes, accelerating UP gives us weight...therefore if you're not accelerating UP as much anymore, you weigh less.

    • Joshua Cox
      Joshua Cox 6 months ago

      @kindlin Yo go check out this sweet video veritasium made about this topic, completely changed the way I viewed gravity

    • kindlin
      kindlin 6 months ago +1

      @eypandabear All I meant, and what I did in fact say, is that we are being accelerated downwards due to affects of gravity. This is an Einsteinian approach (that space itself is accelerating, and we are going along for the ride). The force we feel upwards can be computed (approximately, I'm sure) with Newton's f=ma, and is due to the ground resisting our acceleration due to gravity. Does any of that sound remiss?

    • eypandabear
      eypandabear 6 months ago +1

      @kindlin What you are describing here with the force “pulling down” is the Newtonian model of gravitation. To be clear, Newtonian physics is perfectly adequate to understand this experiment.
      However, there is a catch: the Newtonian model only works because the property that causes the force (gravitational mass) is exactly equal to that resisting the force (inertial mass). They are indeed exactly equal, which is why we justcall both “mass”, but there is absolutely no reason given for this in Newton’s theory - an unsatisfying “hole” that Newton himself was well aware of.
      In general relativity, the two are equal because gravity itself *is* a result of inertia. There is no force pulling you towards the ground - we just experience a force because we “accelerate” *upwards*, and our inertia is resisting this.
      The reason we do not understand this as “acceleration” is the same reason we do not observe the Earth’s curvature in everyday life. We assume space and time to be “flat”, but it is indeed curved, and therefore force-free objects do not move in a straight line. But the curvature is large in scale and locally very uniform, so we instead just model it as a “force” that acts on everything with mass.

    • SportSport
      SportSport 6 months ago

      Heh, cringe. You will be destroyed by Einstein cultists for this explanation, because mass is Invariant in this "theory." How can something "acting on its mass"... And yes, please determine what is the mass of this disc when it is spinning.

  • FreeBazar
    FreeBazar 5 months ago +3

    Really interesting indeed ! I captured a replication of this experiment by making my own maxwell's wheel at home.

  • Catherine Grimes
    Catherine Grimes 6 months ago +1

    This reminds me of a demonstration that I did many years ago to show that bodies in free fall do not feel a gravitational force. I put a toy furry moose on a mechanical kitchen scale and as I let it fall, the dial went towards zero.

  • in-fidelity
    in-fidelity Month ago +1

    Does it go forever if in vaccuum chambed?

  • DrewishAF
    DrewishAF 6 months ago

    Even at 35 seconds in, I already see the misconception where people think they're more clever than anyone before them. But it's pretty obvious that they've not taken a basic physics class (usually Mechanics) where a simple force diagram shows you where the faulty logic is.
    That said, I always appreciate how various people describe and demonstrate concepts in various ways. If you can make simple systems which demonstrate only 1 or 2 concepts in an intuitive manner, you can almost sneak the trigonometric ratios/distributions without them noticing. Because once people see intermediate mathematics, they tend to get flustered very quickly.

  • Rohan Shrivastava
    Rohan Shrivastava 6 months ago +19

    This concept is similar to hydraulic shock absorbers but in this case its "Gravitational Shock Absorber"

    • Chris Lahey
      Chris Lahey 6 months ago +2

      No, it's a rotational shock absorber

  • Another World Computer Centre

    At around the 7:30 timestamp, when you're holding the disc in your hand, of course the weight of the stand will be lighter because there's no tension on the strings. But when it is spinning, in both the up and down direction, the tension is constant on the strings so the scale reads the combined weight of both the stand and the disc. Something else is causing the combined weight to become lighter. Sorry, didn't read through 1000 comments if there's an answer to this!

  • steve hallam
    steve hallam 6 months ago +1

    Very interesting. In ITF taekwondo skilled practitioners move with a 'sine wave' motion between techniques. There is obviously no spinning involved but the idea is to drop and artificially increase your bodyweight at the point of impact so at least in theory you are punching with the power of a heavier guy.

  • SBF Guy
    SBF Guy 6 months ago +3

    I wonder if weight lifting competitions have rules against spinning weights being used?

  • W T
    W T 5 months ago

    Here is my equation to calculate the delta force (mg-F)/mg =(RW)^2/(4gH), where R is radius, W is angular speed, m is mass of the wheel, F is the force measured by balance, H is distance the wheel travels down till it goes back. The fast the W and R, the larger the difference. Assume F=0 (levitation), (RW)^2/(4gH)=1; so when (RW)^2=4gH, the balance should measure the negative weight of the wheel -mg.

  • Observ45er
    Observ45er 2 months ago

    CORRECTION! The wheel does NOT weigh less when it is spinning!.
    It may be more correct to say that it weighs less when it is "bouncing".
    I have a problem with the interpretation of the Laithwaite demo. Precession does not translate the wheel. It does not lift it.
    Precession causes the axis of rotation to change direction. This is a *ROTATION* about the venter of the wheel. It is not lifting the whole wheel's mass.
    Precession does not cause the gyro to move sideways, nor upward in Laithwaite 's case or Veritasium's case.
    If the vertical spinning gyro had translation, it would slide along the table, but stay vertical. It does not do that. It tips, or rotates at 90 degrees.
    The fact that the handle is offset and long has significance. If you push the handle in the direction of the precession, that lifts the handle, right?.
    However the interpretation that your spinning wheel is always accelerating downward even while moving upward, is a very good catch. It took me a few seconds to realize that. My quick initial feeling was that the weight would go positive on the way up. . .
    This is analogous to only "partway" jumping off a trampoline (or your bouncing ball). On a tramp, you are accelerating downward when your feet are not in contact with the tramp. The ball is when it is not in contact with the floor. The spinning wheel only "partly" leaves the support strings. It is "partially bouncing".
    This would make a wonderful Dean Drive Scam. . . .
    It would be nice to have a real-time force load cell so we can see what happens at the bottom of the wheels travel - the positive spike.
    Also, WHAT HAPPENS to the weight, if the wheel is NOT spinning, but bouncing while being suspended by a *spring,* instead of the winding/unwinding strings?
    Is that equivalent to this "partial bouncing" effect?

  • Jeff Aldrich
    Jeff Aldrich 5 months ago +1

    I would love to see this done in a vacuum chamber. I believe aerodynamic drag is huge

    • fidel catsro
      fidel catsro 5 months ago

      it will bounce up and down much longer in vacuum i tink

  • Charlie Schorr-Kon
    Charlie Schorr-Kon 5 months ago +1

    Really great demonstration! Thanks for creating some awesome content

  • Mr. Fluffy The Pekingese

    Thank you for this video!
    Can you do one explaining the “forever chocolate” where you cut a chocolate bar into 4 pieces and rearrange it and it looks like if there area hasn’t changed? I would love to see what explanation you come up with. Thank you!!!!

    • Ricardo Ramírez R
      Ricardo Ramírez R 6 months ago

      the key is in "looks like", the overall size of the chocolate is not the same, they look similar, but one is smaller than the other. Look to channel 3Blue1Brown to How to lie using visual proofs

  • Kyaw Myasein
    Kyaw Myasein 2 months ago

    Nice setup! What would happen if you were to magnetize the wheel. N-S on each side of the hemisphere! Would that reduce it even more?

  • Glen Hill
    Glen Hill 5 months ago +1

    I am pretty good at physics and caught a lot of this, but some of it went over my head. Still, it was very fascinating. Thanks.
    From the thumbnail, I thought you were going to show whether the scale would register weight of the wheel if it was suspended by magnets. Perhaps do that in a future experiment?

  • Peter Green
    Peter Green 5 months ago

    The spin friction with the air resistance accounts the loss of weight. The spin effect making a gyroscope want to lift upwards on one end of the axle when rotated in relation to the spinning disc only works if the other end of the axle is fixed, otherwise torque would just make the disc flip. There is no loss of weight.

  • Ray of Light 62
    Ray of Light 62 6 months ago +6

    Very interesting experiment, I knew about the force vector changing but I never seen so well exposed.
    The cheap scale with too long sampling rate spoiled it a bit.

  • ʀǟʍǟ ֆʀɨ ӄʀɨֆռǟ

    try adding a spring at the top strap

  • RedRyder
    RedRyder 6 months ago +5

    Amazing demo, thanks! You showed something surprising and new yet again, I keep learning from your vids.

  • TrainWorxStudio
    TrainWorxStudio 5 months ago

    Could gravity and movement of mass be based on enthropy? Maybe mass systems try to loose this energy by bending spacetime to alter their movement paths into each other and neutralize potential differences caused by the big bang initially.

  • Peter Kimemiah
    Peter Kimemiah 5 months ago

    Yes, the scale measures gravitational force, the while is producing centrifugal force generated by gravitational force. In my humble opinion we should use tension scale on the strings holding the string.

  • heisag
    heisag 6 months ago +1

    I used this concept to accelrate a flywheel horizontally, and made an action drive by having it bounce/crash into the interior wall of an vehicle at the end of its stroke , transfering the
    forward momentum of the flywheel into forward motion of a vehicle. It worked since this method of accelrating a flywheel forward seemed to have very little recoil. In fact, i didn't
    notice any recoil, but that might have been due to friction in the wheel bearings (lego). It wasn't very effective though, in terms of energy input and forward motion.
    I used rack and pinion at first, with no rack at the end of the stroke. After that, i used spring loaded strings through the axle. Though, i didn't go as far as motorize it. That
    was half a year ago , and i haven't really looked too much into it. Was suspecting that accelrating a flywheel would reduce it weight, so it was nice to see a video that confirms it.

  • A B
    A B 6 months ago

    The display delay in your scale is approximately 1 second.
    That makes it difficult to determine when the mass appears to be lightest & heaviest during its travel.
    It appears to me that as the wheel approaches the top of its travel, it shows the lightest mass on your scale. As it moves downwards, the wheel appears to be the heaviest on your scale.
    I think you should find some way to automatically measure & plot the vertical position of the wheel & the mass measurement with a more responsive scale. That would help us to see more precisely what is accurately occurring & when it is occurring with respect to the position, acceleration, & rotational speed of the wheel.
    I'm unsure that your conclusion is accurate at this point, tbh.
    It is very interesting, though! Why would the rotational speed & acceleration affect the apparent mass of the system??

  • Sion
    Sion 5 months ago +1

    2:17 Does this mean that rotational energy (or all movement?) can be measured in "negative gravity" (grams) units?
    4:58 I guess not, but why?
    6:13 Ok, so (only?) downwards motions can be expressed as a percentage of free fall, and therefore can be expressed as "negative gravity" units? (eg. an elevator going down?... BUT only(?) when the elevator is ACCELERATING downwards, NOT when it is traveling at constant speed downwards (it's 0% when constant speed)).

  • anisotropicplus
    anisotropicplus 6 months ago +2

    I enjoyed your video. Very interesting. I have made a few gyroscope videos using digital scales and mechanical balances. As you mentioned the refresh rate and the electronics in digital scales can complicate the experiment. It would be interesting to see your demonstration on a mechanical balance like a triple beam balance. Thanks for sharing your video.

    • fidel catsro
      fidel catsro 5 months ago

      he just explained 49percent of UFO anti gravity technology! 🐱👍🏿

  • Gerry K
    Gerry K 2 months ago

    Would it be possible to generate Artificial Gravity onto the centre point of the gyroscope model as the Wheels spin Super Fast in four equal but opposite direction in order to balance the forces ?
    Using the Gyroscope as a Docking Station and the centre as the Ship,This might be a solution to prolonged space travel and the human body adapting to the forces without or fewer negative side effects?

  • Paul Brooks
    Paul Brooks 6 months ago +5

    So the force exerted at the bottom should be a fraction of the mass based on the multiplier of acceleration due to gravity. If it’s moving at half a G of acceleration, the amount of travel time gives the speed in m/s at the bottom. The speed times mass should give its instantaneous maximum force in gm/m/s-gram meters per second.
    I’m not sure how to calculate the fractional weight loss during the rest of its motion period. I think it’s the instantaneous maximum force divided by the travel time. That should give us a constant in gm or possibly gram/meters?

    • JC MSchott
      JC MSchott 5 months ago

      Hey, mate! I did it taking into account the rotational and linear equations of motion. The weight loss read in the scale is a function of the square of the quotient between the rod radius and the disc radius, if I am not mistaken. You may think of the difference in the scale reading as twice the difference in the tension in the strings and there will be some difference as the disc is put in movement.

  • S F
    S F 6 months ago

    If you attached a 100g ball to a 200g frame, and put on a scale, it (system) would weight 300g. Then you zero out the scale so the scale shows 0g. The if the ball falls off the frame, the scale will read -100g the whole time except at the moment the ball bounces of the surface of the scale. So thats where you get the negative weight. The rotating wheel just slows down the process.

  • John Schewe
    John Schewe 6 months ago +27

    Absolutely yes. It's sometimes counterintuitive that force is in the direction of acceleration even if velocity is in the opposite direction, but that's the truth.
    Makes a bit more sense if you think about it as 99% of the weight is passed through the strings instead of focusing on the 1% that is directly affecting the velocity.

    • John Schewe
      John Schewe 6 months ago +1

      ​@Johannes dat Blue Yes, you're right there are 3 forms of energy here. We've got the potential energy which is the height of the object, kinetic energy from falling, and kinetic energy from spinning.
      When it is riding back up the string gravity is slowing it down 1% more than the kinetic rotational energy is transferring back into the string. So both down and up would show negative on the scale.
      But the real question is there an impulse at the very bottom when it is switching directions that is just so fast that the scale can't read it? Or does the force of the spinner on the string always stay less than the weight of the spinner?

    • Johannes dat Blue
      Johannes dat Blue 6 months ago +1

      the mass is falling down and converts a small amount of the potential energy into kinetic (small movement downwards) thats why less force pulls on the upper rod. and when it moves upwards it converts still a small amount into kinetic energy (that gets lost in any resistances like air, "sound", heat) even though it seems like it would pull it downwards like if a human jumps on a libra or pulls itself upwards on this rod - in this cas etha mass would increase/decrease depending on the acceleration but because the flywheel of his machine doesnt generate a force (like we do biochemical) the force could never exeed 0 (positive) because the enegry is convertet into other forms until it comes to a stop.
      is that right and if not can you tell me my mistkae in this thought - i kept the old one just that you can see where i was coming from, if im stil wrong at some point. maybe its easier to correct a mistake then - like the mathteachers that told us to write any little thing on this damn paper xD
      first thoughts so keep that in mind, i got a bit closer now: but still its kinda hard to get the upward movement cause if you thin k about yourself hanging at a pipe and slowly let yourself sink it makes sense that not all of your mass or in this case force gets applied to the pipe, because you let yourself sink - if i understand it right you convert your potential energy in kinetic but most of it stays potential or no. if you rest its potential if you move kinetic... oh fuck
      its late tbh and its not my native language aswell.
      the point thats hard to imagine is if you convert all your potential energy in kinetic, you are free falling - kinda, lets keep it simple. but to explain what happens there is. does the spinning of the shaft count to potential energy or ist it kinetic because its "on the move"

  • Jake S
    Jake S 5 months ago +2

    it would be interesting to see the whole rig on one side of a balancing scale. You'd be able to see the whole thing rise slightly but the jolt at the bottom should put it back to the origjnal position.

  • Sasamuel
    Sasamuel 6 months ago +1

    I've done this trick with myself, I spinner mid-air and went to see my weight, it was at NAN, worked perfectly

  • Gat Huckle
    Gat Huckle 5 months ago

    Any time you hear the words 'potential energy' in physics you know you're in fantasy land. What's the difference between the gyroscope on the scale and the suspended wheel? The strings. The strings are essentially a stretched spring which will continually try to recompress, which will lift the wheel. In effect, giving the wheel less inertia in relation to the scale underneath, which is what a scale measures. Zeroing the scale fixes the unseen lifting the strings are contributing to the set-up in the static state. By spinning the wheel the strings are stretched further resulting in more lift, which shows up as less inertia on the scale. If the shaft of the wheel is spun in loops at the bottom of the strings instead of pulling the strings around the shaft the lifting effect will be much less. Suspend the wheel by two rubber bands with a strength that allows the wheel to go down as far as the strings do and zero that set-up. Then take the wheel back to the top and without spinning it let it drop. As the bands stretch and recompress the scale will also show minus values, though with wider fluctuations because the lifting will be less even than with the strings. There is a much deeper truth you've exposed with this demonstration, but I doubt you can see it. Oh well.

  • Benjamin Brauer
    Benjamin Brauer 5 months ago

    Even if it could, without breaking relativity, how could this "anti-grav" lift anything other than itself?

  • Farmer John
    Farmer John Month ago

    if it is negative 6 why isn't it floating???

  • Craig Carmichael
    Craig Carmichael 6 months ago

    Mind blowing! But I suppose if you bounced a ball on a scale it would read weightless as long as it was in the air, and only register weight as it hit and bounced off the scale. The 'average' reading would be the weight of the ball. The spinning of the disk and flywheel effect only moderate and delay the effects. That would be something like an inductor in electronics where the voltage change (potential height) is resisted giving dV dT. Now, can we get a capacitor to make a tuned circuit?

  • Mad_Like_A_ Hatter
    Mad_Like_A_ Hatter 5 months ago +1

    Would be interesting to see it with tapered metal edges and see the result on the weight as it winds up on different angles

  • TnA Plastic
    TnA Plastic 6 months ago

    Would you mind making some experiments? I've got multiple in mind which all have to do with spinning discs and a scale!
    *I suggest you to create a "Ferro lens" for these and other experiments!*
    Experiment 1: A magnet spinning above a conductive surface!
    (Expected outcome: The induced Eddy-currents will heat the magnet and the metal and no lighter weight being shown on a scale.)
    Experiment 2: A copper-disc spinning above another copper-disc!
    (Expected outcome: Same as above. Eddy currents again, but there might be a "workaround", if you increase the surface via a wave-like pattern, slits and enough air-flow.)
    Experiment 3: A super-conductor disc spinning above a. magnets, b. conductive and c. non-conductive surfaces, as well as d. a second superconductors and e. a carbon-sheet/layer!
    Experiment 4: Different masses/wheels with the same experiment you just did!

  • Aryan Gupta
    Aryan Gupta 6 months ago +17

    This is one of the best channels when it comes to the topics that he discusses. A great plus is the amazing community that come up with engaging discussions in the comments. Glad to be a part of the Action Lab community!

    • Aryan Gupta
      Aryan Gupta 6 months ago

      @Jimi02468 yup!

    • Aryan Gupta
      Aryan Gupta 6 months ago +1

      @shin ronin lmao

    • Jimi02468
      Jimi02468 6 months ago +1

      What I always wonder about is how does he come up with the topics for his videos. But whatever the topic it's always something interesting

    • shin ronin
      shin ronin 6 months ago +2

      Yeah i love it too.
      Its just that sometimes im like: eh? Srs someone didnt know that? Then i notice yeah not everyone is spending their free time on such shit. 💋💋❤️❤️💔💔💗💗💗💗💔💔❤️❤️💋💋

  • MorningStar
    MorningStar 6 months ago +4

    I wonder if this effect contributes to the Chain Fountain physics. Seeing as the chain is technically spinning as it form the loop, and weighs less at that point as a result, this could be the dominant force?

    • Uldis Barbans
      Uldis Barbans 4 months ago

      But chain fountain weighs more, not less, while in operation. Steve Mould had series of videos about the kickback

    • AdrianBoyko
      AdrianBoyko 6 months ago +2

      This is a really interesting question! I don’t think that “spinning” figures into the weight reduction (its just an energy storage mechanism) but the chain in a chain fountain is definitely accelerating downward as it changes direction from flying up to flying down. And, surprise, surprise, it’s the decelerating portion of the chain that rises! I think you may have discovered the REAL reason for chain fountains!

  • frogandspanner
    frogandspanner 6 months ago +2

    I remember watching this effect in 1974 in _"The Jabberwock" Eric Laithwaite 1974 RI Christmas Lectures, Lecture 4_ . We looked at this in Physics tutorials during my degree. It's an example of conservation of angular momentum. The angular momentum of the rotating wheel is changing owing to the rotation of the Earth.

    • frogandspanner
      frogandspanner 5 months ago

      @Roger Phelps Kindly explain.

    • Roger Phelps
      Roger Phelps 5 months ago

      Nothing to do with the rotation of the Earth.

  • Dyllon Geckles
    Dyllon Geckles 4 months ago

    I wonder how that would act if it had rubber bands, or just something elastic in place of the strings

  • Axle Axle.Australian.Patriot

    P.S Addition notes:
    You could exemplify this same effect with an old pendulum clock. Not due to the pendulum but the weights that powered the clock. The weights on strings would have a constant acceleration toward earth until such time as the string completely unwound, then it would resume is natural still weight.

    • Axle Axle.Australian.Patriot
      Axle Axle.Australian.Patriot 2 months ago

      @Barney Laurance The force of gravity is considered as a constant "acceleration" toward the center of the earth. except the ground is pushing back against us with an equal force, so what I mean is the same as what was stated in the video. The clock weight has a "Constant acceleration" toward the earth that is less than 1g.
      While the clock weight (or the wheel) is moving toward the earth with less force being pushed back by the earth it will weigh less.
      Or put simple a falling object weighs less.
      You need to look at some of Einstein descriptions of gravity to see what is meant by gravity and acceleration, but everything on earth has a force of acceleration pushing it toward the center of the earth :)
      P.S. The clock weight does stop between each fall cycle on the catch wheel, but still accelerates in between while it is falling. If you measure the entire average weight of the clock until the weight hit the bottom it would be lighter.

    • Barney Laurance
      Barney Laurance 2 months ago

      No, the weights generally move down at a constant speed, i.e. they have zero acceleration. The clock is designed to work at a constant speed for several days.

  • DethstruXioN ™
    DethstruXioN ™ 6 months ago

    My theory as to why it shows -6 grams, maybe the disk/rod is pulling slightly on the string as it goes down (friction), and when it goes up it'll lose a big of weight from "pushing" off on the strings.
    In other words; a very gentle push and pull reaction that results in a -6 gram weight.

  • colorado841
    colorado841 6 months ago +13

    I wonder if this method could be exploited to move heavy objects across distances with minimal friction do to gravity.

    • colorado841
      colorado841 6 months ago

      @I care No...because then there would be a spike in weight that would last for a long time.

    • I care
      I care 6 months ago

      @colorado841 It would be like you jumping on the scale in a slow motion.

    • colorado841
      colorado841 6 months ago

      I don't think it is like jumping on a scale. As the wheel only moves slowly up or down the string....that type of momentum would only have a slight effect on the weight for a slight amount of time.

    • I care
      I care 6 months ago +1

      You probably can't. It was kind of like when I was jumping on the scale. Most of the time, I would weight zero, but when I was physically touching the scale, my weight goes up a lot. You can totally build a machine that by jumping, you reduce the friction, but the jumping itself probably will cost more energy loss. There aren't many species jumping like kangaroo :)

    • SlyNine
      SlyNine 6 months ago +1

      It wouldn't be efficient, as the total amount of energy consumed would be far greater.

  • IanMlclm
    IanMlclm 6 months ago +5

    Interesting! Can you conduct a more precise experiment with no falling parts? With an aluminium disc rigidly fixed, rotating with no up-down forces, except mg, the period of rotation of the aluminium disc being 1/2 of the time it takes time for aluminium to change polarity and very precise scales? My prediction is that with the conditions mentioned, the Al disc will lose the % of weight equal to the % of Al magnetic features opposed to the "perfect magnet" with no non-magnetic alloys (non-existent). I'm too poor to conduct this kind of experiment, unfortunately. Thank you!

  • colorado841
    colorado841 6 months ago +5

    That explains a lot. I always wondered how fly saucers worked!

    • Carl Hansen
      Carl Hansen 6 months ago

      This has nothing to do with how flying saucers work. Flying saucers are all just a big speculation of what an alien spacecraft might look like.

    • Arjun Ravi
      Arjun Ravi 6 months ago +3


  • Riadh Al Rabeh
    Riadh Al Rabeh 6 months ago

    Einstein will be very happy with your brilliant demonstration of the equivalence principle. But I somehow not very convinced. If acceleration is the reason, then a mass spring should do the same effect as it oscillates up and down.

  • welshpete12
    welshpete12 5 months ago

    I wonder if the weight of the fly wheel was larger would there be a larger weight lose ? If the axel of the flywheel was bigger in diameter. So the speed of the flywheel would be greater , would that make a difference to the lose of weight . Or would it stay the same as shown here?

  • SmashMaster
    SmashMaster 6 months ago

    This is a lot like the classic 'weight of an hourglass' problem, where in both cases the acceleration of the center of mass provides an easy means of understanding the result.

  • Joseph Tutor
    Joseph Tutor 6 months ago

    Wow! My head is spinning! I can’t imagine what this means. I think you finally hit on something phenomenal.

  • Juan Arroyo
    Juan Arroyo 2 months ago

    Two effects> Magnus, and Coriolis. The wheel is crearing an air pressure differential as it rotates. This differential may be producing some kind of LIFT in both directions. Just by spinning, the air currents are turning turbulent around, but directed in the middle. My take.

    JESUCRISTO JESUS 6 months ago

    this is very easy to understand.
    I have known about this for years, and the reason why it goes -w its because of the effect on the string.

  • dorAb2003
    dorAb2003 6 months ago +2

    Awesome episode and really good explanation!

  • rajan jamwal
    rajan jamwal Month ago

    Gravity | Mechanism | Universe | 19th August 2022 | Virtual Wire
    Most of you have heard about this word (Gravity), Sir Issac Newton discovered gravity in the year 1665. Today we all are aware of the fact of what gravity is.
    Even if you ask the sixth-grade kid that what gravity is even he can answer you, it is the force between the two particles of mass M1 and M2 with a distance R from their centre such that force is directly proportional to the product of their mass M1 and M2 and inversely proportional to the square of the distance from their centre. It's an easy mathematical formula anyone can solve. But no one in the class asked how gravity works. Even if they asked they never found the answer for it. Because the professors themselves don’t know.
    According to the theory of Einstein, Energy can neither be created nor be destroyed, It means if one energy is being created then the other is being destroyed in the process to balance the total balance of the system. Let us take an example of a Car; the fuel of a car is being burned so that the car can move. In scientific terms, we have to say that the chemical energy of the fuel is being destroyed for the creation of the mechanical work of the car. Or we can say one energy is being created for the destruction of the other.
    In This way, energy is always conserved or the total energy or the enthalpy of this system always remains the same. But let us take a case of Gravitational energy. Here Gravitational Energy is being created but we don’t know what energy is being destroyed to create that energy or why the two masses get attracted to each other when they are separated by any certain distance. To answer these questions and all the other questions related to gravity this article has been written. Einstein in his theory said that Gravity is the force which is caused by the bending of space, like whenever a mass when exists in space it creates the kind of disturbance in the space due to which the space bends from its regular shape and forms the curve, when the planets move across the space they move in the straight path but the space is itself bend so due to which the planets also move in the elliptical orbit. But why do the planets move, why they are not in one stationary position or how matter can create disturbance in space all these questions are not answered by Einstein's theory.
    So here is one more different theory to explain the working of Gravity, Which can also be called as the Energy space-time theory. To understand the concept of Gravity one has to understand the concept of space and time, how time came into existence or the space came into existence. Matter and space came into existence. There is one thing which we have observed about gravity wherever there is mass there is gravity. No matter how small the size of the mass is or how big its size is the gravity of the body does exist which is proportional to its mass. Today in our present universe we have different planets. We have the sun, we have stars, planets and other celestial bodies and so does their gravitational force. Before understanding the force Of Gravity that how the Gravitational force work it is important for us to understand how the university of our came into existence. So let us move back to a time, the time when there was nothing.
    No matter no energy and no particles existed in this universe. Let us consider that time to be the zero time or can be termed as T0, the starting of this universe. So what exactly happened in that T0 that our universe came into existence or called the Tu the present time of this universe? From here all the things are going to be very complex so please it is my request to all the readers to read it very carefully. We all talk about the starting of this universe or the time T0. But what was before the starting of this universe no one knows and what will be there after the end of this universe that also no one knows. But one thing is for sure time always keep’s on moving. So let us all start from the beginning, initially, there was nothing there was just empty space which moves in all directions towards infinity. This space can be called the infinite space which moves in all directions and is constant and does not go through any change with the movement of time such that the space and time both are infinite and together they are called infinite space-time.
    The world at that point existed in its form of infinite space-time but then at one point of this infinite space-time a blast happened, which can also be called as the Nirvana Point or the centre point of our present universe from where all this construction phase of our universe started. A blast happened, and the moment that blast occurred that time is called T0 the starting time of this universe. Which is Also called the seismic time blast as that blast is not single but is a continuous process. It is called the Seismic time blast because it is something which controls the moment of the time of this universe. Or we can also call the blast which controls all the processes which are taking place in this system. Before this blast occurrence there was no space, no matter, nothing existed in our infinite empty space, But due to this blast the uniform space occurrence took place which can be called the Di-Laptic Space, it is the finite space within the infinite space also called as the Laptic Space.
    The Seismic time waves are the continuous-time waves which are continuously moving throughout our universe and have created the space, the space which follows all the physical laws of this universe. The time waves start from the centre and move in the outward direction to the extreme boundaries of this universe. The time waves emerging from the centre are stronger and as they move in the outward direction their forces get weaker such that the time which is near the centre of this universe moves fast and the time which moves at the extreme boundaries moves slowly. Because as we move away from the centre the radial distance increases for the same time waves. As the space was constructed from the time the space which was uniformly spread from the centre towards the path toward its extreme boundaries, let us consider it as the time in which the formation of space took place, only space no mass or matter or any heavy body. The space was only uniformly present at that moment in time.
    The space is like a viscous fluid medium such that it has an elastic character which can stretch itself. The space of ours and time both are interlinked with each other. Suppose the space which is uniformly spread so that space would be experiencing the same time accordingly. That is what happened at the start of this universe, the space was present there such that it spread like a homogeneous mixture uniformly in all directions. But as the movement of time took place the process of contraction and expansion took place in such a way that most of the space contracted into one singular point which lead to the creation of dense matter. And the space which is surrounded around that matter is the super expanding form of that previous space such that the space itself has expanded to the hundred or the thousand times surrounding that matter. Due to this difference in the density of the space, it creates the gravitational pull on the matter which can also be called the orbital space of the matter and when another particle comes in contact with that orbit it also starts to rotate accordingly.
    It is like suppose earth which is the celestial body is stable in the space or we can say stationary at one point. Earth consists of matter which is the highly concentrated space at one point which is leading to the formation of the matter. So when the space contracts at one point and creates the matter the same space super expands itself in such a way that it creates a very super low dense space medium surrounding it which is also called the gravitational orbit of the earth. Which is constructed in such a way that when any other matter or any other heavenly body moves around suppose our moon, because of the formation of the orbital due to the density difference it will rotate around the surface of the earth. Overall if we have to explain then the mass of the heavenly body is the super compressed form of the space such that when the enormous amount of space compresses at one singular point it leads to the formation of the supermassive structure. And the space around that supermassive structure expands in such a way that it forms a super expanded elastic medium or elastic space. And when any matter which has high density as compared to the space around it moves through that space it experiences the pull through that space which is called as the gravitational force.
    All this occurs because of the time difference. Space and time are correlated with each other time move uniformly in every space. It means that if the space is uniform the time will also move uniformly in that space. But when the space contracts at one point forming the superstructure and expand at the other point to form the space around it then the space is not uniform and the time is also not uniform around it, the time moves slowly in space it moves very slow but the time moves at the faster rate in the heavenly bodies. So due to this time difference between the two identities space and matter creates a void in the matter and due to which it moves towards the other matter and experiences the gravitational force in the orbit

  • Ali Devrim OGUZ
    Ali Devrim OGUZ 6 months ago

    You can use an arduino and a load cell module to easily graph the load.

  • Вячеслав Лайк

    Wow! Very interesting effect and excellent explanation. Thanks a lot! 🙏

  • tim wegman
    tim wegman 5 months ago

    This is much the same principal that a RC car does when you hit a high jump and want to either do flips or keep it level. The new fast rc cars allow you to do back flips by centrifugal force and the weight of the tires this allows for cool tricks.

  • Andre VJ
    Andre VJ 2 months ago

    can you make the same effect with no moving parts. I mean where gravity doesnt effect it like if the device rotates that it doesnt stop working. becuase we can use it in planes to make the planes weigh less and use less fuel. we can try adding somthing inside the wheel and use a electro magnet to keep the potential energy at the same amount. I could be wrong