January 12, 2017
This is the lagrangian analysis of the Laithwaite experiment in classical dynamics of the eighteenth century enlightenment in physics (Lagrange 1811 – 1815), MT Section 10.10. The initial Laithwaite confiiguration is theta = pi / 2 in Fig (1). The analysis gives the results (15), (16) and (19), which show that the the three Euler angles increase linearly with time. The initial spinning about the 3 axis (coinciding with the Y axis of the lab frame) develops with time into spinning about this axis and also the other two axes of frame (1, 2, 3). The Laithwaite wheel is a symmetric top. So the problem is a symmetric top spinning about one fixed point, which never moves in classical dynamics, so there is no net lift in classical dynamics. However Laithwaite (and replicator video sent over by Horst) is being pulled upwards by the spinning wheel, and feels no weight, so experimentally there is a net upward force. Franklin also demonstrates this in his two gyroscope problem. The gyro force equation is Eq. (24), which is the three dimensional version of the 1689 Leibnitz equation of a planar orbit:”
So Laithwaite is being ‘pulled upwards by the spinning wheel’ is he? He ‘feels no weight’ does he? Experimentally ‘there is a net upward force’ is there? Franklin ‘demonstrates this’ with a static [sic] diagram does he? What a bunch of utter loonies! How then, pray tell, do you explain this?
Now go back to the Laithwaite videos. Can you see how close he keeps his hand to his body, Ron? That is the point of support for the spinning wheel. Laithwaite is of course lying when he says that nobody had noticed ‘the effect’ before. Showing that the weight does not change used to be recommended as a laboratory experiment for students. It should be urgently brought back. Unfortunately, two Japanese twerps – basing their work on the theory of a Russian loony – weighed gyroscopes some 25 years ago and found that the spinning ones were lighter. Needless to say, these ‘careful’ experiments could not be replicated by any reputable laboratories, and the Japanese ‘work’ now looks decidedly louche. So how long will it be before Ron and his gang dig it up? Why was Laithwaite so deceitful? It was because he was a crank from way back. Apologists always claim that his gyroscope antics were a mere aberration in an otherwise stellar career. In fact, he was deeply anti-physics and pushed all sorts of other loony ideas. The media therefore loved him and that led Imperial College to tolerate him because – for good or ill – his public visibility brought in funding and students. Nevertheless, to those ‘in the know’, he was the biggest embarrassment to British science until post-breakdown Ron came onto the scene.