Experiment 2.3: The Kidd Effect

Sandy Kidd discovered through his experiments with spinning wheels that under certain conditions, the spinning wheels will move inwards. This video is the first visual proof of the effect. For more information, please visit http://relmachine.blogspot.com

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Sandy
• Kidd
• Effect
• Gyroscopic
• propulsion
• relativistic
• machine

[partymanau]

Think I had a car built by this mob

[rollingcube]

whatever is it?

[sorova]

This is just a moment, not a force.

[flowerbower]

@dish125db Of course new things are found all of the time: that is what makes them new. However, things which are contrary to well-established physical laws are rarely found and, when they ARE found, it is by experts. Only experts can identify what is truly new because only they know what is already known. Moreover, anomalies are usually found by using novel equipment which offers a significant leap forward in accuracy. Amateurs don't have that advantage.

[dish125db]

@flowerbower

No we do not know everything about everything, new things are found all the time. Your closed minded, you take it that sence someone tells you that its been tried you dont try cause you have been told that you cant. so with that said, a text book would not help him at all.

[KidGalileo]

Houston....we have a problem!

[flowerbower]

@ocnod PS: the only time that antigravity effects arise in the physics of spinning objects is when one treats them using general relativity. The Lense-Thirring effect (pure theory) predicts that spinning objects may levitate. Unfortunately, practical implementation would involve pumping very dense liquid metals at several thousand Mach. I get very tired of amateurs, who do not even know what IS known, claiming to know better. BTW Einstein briefly believed that gyroscopes should fall slower.

[flowerbower]

@ocnod To be precise: classical mechanics cannot possibly predict antigravity behaviour for the simple reason that the basic equations are predicated on the correctness of Newton's third law. Situations which are not amenable to mathematical analysis can be treated by numerical simulation. All of Kidd's 'results' have simple conventional explanations. There is also the matter of poor scientific standards: for instance, he did not draw attention to apparent INCREASES in weight. That is fraudulent

[ocnod]

@flowerbower

It's simply the statement "There is not a single facet of gyroscope behavior which has not been explored" that says why I replied.

The earth thing wasn't meant to be taken literally.

Things are not always what they seem, and it takes new approaches to old problems we believe are solved to come up with new methods of doing things we believed impossible.

Thinking anyone knows everything about anything is ridiculous is all i'm saying.

[flowerbower]

@ocnod Kidd and others like him are not part of science, they are part of pseudoscience and fraud. Which is the more arrogant: for me to point out that Kidd does not know the theory and has no experimental proof worthy of the name, or for Kidd to claim that he knows more than all of the scientists in the world (pace the occasional loony ones such as Laithwaite and Aspden)?

Tell me, who exactly said that the Earth was square, or flat? And on the basis of what evidence?